Virtual reality is effective in the management of chronic low back ache in adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Extended Reality Analgesia Evidence Reviews Often Lack Sufficient Intervention Detail

Background

Evidence synthesis projects such as systematic reviews and meta-analyses are defined by the focal research question addressed through assemblage and analysis of all relevant literature. In complex intervention domains such as medical extended reality (MXR), there are a plethora of intervention factors that could be included in research questions, which define study inclusion criteria and, in turn, shape the generalizability of results. This article quantifies how recently published evidence syntheses of MXR interventions for pain management characterize the primary studies they assess.

Method

Inclusion criteria for analysis consisted of English-language scoping reviews, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses, published in 2021-2023, that evaluated MXR-based interventions for pain management in any setting. We employed quantitative content analysis to assess characterization of intervention features.

Results

Of the 61 synthesis publications that met inclusion criteria, 29 (48%) included only minimal description of MXR intervention content, 14 (23%) included substantial content descriptions, and the remainder did not describe intervention content within synthesized studies. Hardware details were reported for 15 (25%) of publications in a minimal way, 28 (46%) in a substantial way, and not reported in 18 (30%) of syntheses. Among the 39 papers that included a meta-analysis, 10 (25%) explicitly evaluated the role of intervention features in intervention efficacy.

Conclusion

Findings suggest considerable variability in the characterization of intervention elements (content and hardware), which can limit accurate conclusions about the generalizability of synthesis findings. Accordingly, we make recommendations to guide future evidence syntheses in the MXR domain.

Pre-Operative Planning of a DCR Surgery Using Virtual Reality

PURPOSE

To assess a novel Virtual Reality (VR) tool designed to enhance understanding of the nasal anatomy in patients eligible for DCR surgery.

METHODS

Preoperative Computed Tomography (CT) scans of the orbit were obtained and loaded as DICOM (Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine) files onto the D2P software (3D Systems Inc. Littleton, CO) for tissue segmentation and 3D model preparation. Segmentation was performed on several anatomical structures, including the skull, lacrimal sac, nasal septum, inferior and middle turbinate. The resulting 3D model was visualized using a VR headset. After completing the segmentation procedure, ten cases were evaluated by a panel of six surgeons, including both senior and resident physicians from ENT and oculoplastic specialties.

RESULTS

The dataset under examination comprised images from 10 preoperative CT scans of the orbits of patients eligible for Endo-DCR. When evaluating the CT using the VR tool, in 73.3% of the cases ENT surgeons were right about the side of pathology, while only 43.3% ophthalmologists were right (chi-square, p = .018). In 72.8% of the cases ENT surgeons were evaluated right that there is a septum deviation, while only in 47.2% of the cases the ophthalmologists were right (chi-square, p = .094).When evaluating the CT using the VR tool, in 60% of the cases consultants were right about the pathology, while 57.7% of the residents were right (chi-square, p = .853). In 81.7% of the cases consultants were evaluated right that there is a septum deviation, while only in 58.3% of the cases the ophthalmologists were right (chi-square, p = .198).

DISCUSSION

ENT surgeons, as well as consultants, interpreted the CT better than the ophthalmologists and residents. Surprisingly, the VR system did not help them to interpret the CT better. Further, more extensive studies should be done to build a VR system that assists in the correct interpretation of the preoperative CT before DCR surgery as well as during DCR surgery.

Age and Sex Differences of Virtual Reality Pain Alleviation Therapeutic During Pediatric Burn Care: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Virtual reality (VR) effectively alleviates pain for pediatric patients during many medical procedures, such as venipuncture and burn care. In our previously published randomized clinical trial among 90 pediatric burn patients, participants in the active VR group had significantly lower scores for overall pain compared with participants in the standard care control and for worst pain compared with participants in the passive VR and control group. However, whether VR differs by a patient's age or sex remains unresolved. Thus, we reanalyzed our data by comparing the active and passive VR participants to evaluate how age and sex affect VR pain alleviation during dressing care for pediatric burns. In total, 90 patients aged 6-17 years (inclusive) with burn injuries were recruited from an outpatient burn clinic of an American Burn Association-verified pediatric burn center. Before randomization, VR helpfulness and need expectations were assessed on a visual analog scale (0-100). Participants were randomly assigned to active VR, passive VR, or control for one dressing change. Immediately following the dressing change, active and passive VR participants self-reported pain and the time spent thinking about pain and rated the VR features on the degree of realism, pleasure/fun, and perceived engagement level. Path analyses assessed how these VR features were interrelated and how they affected self-reported pain by age and sex. Patients aged 6-9 years reported higher mean expectations of VR helpfulness and need (mean = 73.6 and 94.5, respectively) than 10-12-year-olds (mean = 55.7 and 84.2, respectively) and 13-17-year-olds (mean = 68.6 and 77.4, respectively). The path analysis indicated VR engagement and fun were significantly correlated (p-value < 0.05). VR engagement significantly negatively impacted overall pain scores (coefficient = -0.45, -0.41; p-value < 0.05) and significantly positively impacted time thinking of pain (coefficient = 0.38, 0.32; p-value < 0.05). Younger patients had the highest expectations of VR helpfulness and need. VR game realism, fun, and engagement features were not statistically different between age groups and sexes. VR engagement and thinking of pain during burn dressing significantly positively affected self-reported pain (p-value < 0.05), suggesting an analgesic mechanism beyond distraction alone. Younger patients benefited more from VR than older patients.