ArticlePatient related outcome measures2026
Patients' experiences with using virtual reality for comfort during source isolation: a qualitative feasibility study.
Article in Patient related outcome measures, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Source-isolated patients endure feelings of loneliness, discomfort, and imprisonment with sensory deprivation and loss of autonomy. Supporting self-comforting strategies can increase comfort and autonomy and promote participation in recovery. We aim to explore whether and how source-isolated patients use virtual reality (VR) for self-comfort. Methods: A qualitative interview study, including a cohort of source-isolated patients. Patients received an VR intervention encompassing applications for relaxation and distraction and physical exercise during a maximum of 5 days. Patients were instructed using VR at least once a day for 20-30 minutes. Semi-structured face-to-face interviews were conducted after the intervention period or before discharge. Predefined topics were self-comforting strategies and patients overall experiences. Coding was guided by predefined topics, complemented with inductive coding of patients' overall experiences. Results: Twenty patients were eligible, of whom two were excluded and eight declined participation. Ten patients, median (range) age of 56 (40-88) years, used VR for two to five days during a median isolation time of seven days. Beside the predefined self-comforting strategies two additional main topics emerged: "influencing factors on VR use" and "added value of VR". VR was perceived to enhance positive thinking, mental distraction, active involvement, adaptation to limitations, and physical exercise. Soft- and hardware characteristics, access to the VR headset, patient characteristics, and ward environment may influence the perceived usability of VR. Perceived benefits of VR included promoting physical activity and providing an 'escape' from the hospital environment. Conclusion: VR has the potential to support patients' comfort during hospitalization and may offer opportunities for greater autonomy by enabling patients to actively manage own physical and psychological comfort.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.