Clinical observations during virtual reality therapy for specific phobias

Neuroscience of Virtual Reality: From Virtual Exposure to Embodied Medicine

Is virtual reality (VR) already a reality in behavioral health? To answer this question, a meta-review was conducted to assess the meta-analyses and systematic and narrative reviews published in this field in the last twenty-two months. Twenty-five different articles demonstrated the clinical potential of this technology in both the diagnosis and the treatment of mental health disorders: VR compares favorably to existing treatments in anxiety disorders, eating and weight disorders, and pain management, with long-term effects that generalize to the real world. But why is VR so effective? Here, the following answer is suggested: VR shares with the brain the same basic mechanism: embodied simulations. According to neuroscience, to regulate and control the body in the world effectively, the brain creates an embodied simulation of the body in the world used to represent and predict actions, concepts, and emotions. VR works in a similar way: the VR experience tries to predict the sensory consequences of an individual's movements, providing to him/her the same scene he/she will see in the real world. To achieve this, the VR system, like the brain, maintains a model (simulation) of the body and the space around it. If the presence in the body is the outcome of different embodied simulations, concepts are embodied simulations, and VR is an embodied technology, this suggests a new clinical approach discussed in this article: the possibility of altering the experience of the body and facilitating cognitive modeling/change by designing targeted virtual environments able to simulate both the external and the internal world/body.

Virtual reality treatment of posttraumatic stress disorder due to motor vehicle accident

Posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is a complex, multifaceted disorder encompassing behavioral, emotional, cognitive, and physiological factors. Although PTSD was only codified in 1980, there has been an increasing interest in this area of research. Unfortunately, relatively little attention has been given to the psychological treatment of motor vehicle accident survivors, which is remarkable because vehicular collisions are deemed the number one cause of PTSD. As the emotional consequences of vehicular collisions prevail, so does the need for more effective treatments. Randomized controlled clinical trials have identified exposure-based therapies as being the most efficacious for extinguishing fears. One type of exposure-based treatment, called virtual reality exposure therapy (VRET), provides a safe, controlled, and effective therapeutic alternative that is not dependent on real-life props, situations, or even a person's imagination capabilities. This modality, while relatively new, has been implemented successfully in the treatment of a variety of anxiety disorders and may offer a particularly beneficial and intermediary step for the treatment of collision-related PTSD. In particular, VRET combined with physiological monitoring and feedback provides a unique opportunity for individuals to objectively recognize both anxiety and relaxation; learn how to manage their anxiety during difficult, albeit simulated, driving conditions; and then transfer these skills onto real-life roadways.

Virtual reality exposure therapy in the treatment of driving phobia

A growing number of researches has appeared on virtual reality exposure therapy (VRET) to treat anxiety disorders. The purpose of this article was to review some evidences that support the VRET efficacy to treat driving phobia. The studies were identified through computerized search (PubMed/Medline, Web of Science, and Scielo databases) from 1984 to 2007. Some findings are promising. Anxiety/avoidance ratings declined from pre to post-treatment. VRET may be used as a first step in the treatment of driving phobia, as long as it may facilitate the in vivo exposure, thus reducing risks and high costs of such exposure. Notwithstanding, more randomized/controlled clinical trials are required to prove its efficacy.

The treatment of fear of flying: a controlled study of imaginal and virtual reality graded exposure therapy

The goal of this study was to determine if virtual reality graded exposure therapy (VRGET) was equally efficacious, more efficacious, or less efficacious, than imaginal exposure therapy in the treatment of fear of flying. Thirty participants (Age = 39.8 +/- 9.7) with confirmed DSM-IV diagnosis of specific phobia fear of flying were randomly assigned to one of three groups: VRGET with no physiological feedback (VRGETno), VRGET with physiological feedback (VRGETpm), or systematic desensitization with imaginal exposure therapy (IET). Eight sessions were conducted once a week. During each session, physiology was measured to give an objective measurement of improvement over the course of exposure therapy. In addition, self-report questionnaires, subjective ratings of anxiety (SUDs), and behavioral observations (included here as flying behavior before beginning treatment and at a three-month posttreatment followup) were included. In the analysis of results, the Chi-square test of behavioral observations based on a three-month posttreatment followup revealed a statistically significant difference in flying behavior between the groups [chi(2) (4) = 19.41, p < 0.001]. Only one participant (10%) who received IET, eight of the ten participants (80%) who received VRGETno, and ten out of the ten participants (100%) who received VRGETpm reported an ability to fly without medication or alcohol at three-month followup. Although this study included small sample sizes for the three groups, the results showed VRGET was more effective than IET in the treatment of flying. It also suggests that physiological feedback may add to the efficacy of VR treatment.

Analysis of physiological response to two virtual environments: driving and flying simulation

As virtual reality technology continues to attract significant attention in clinical psychology, especially in the treatment of phobias, physiological monitoring is increasingly considered as an objective measurement tool for studying participants. There are few studies, however, of the normal physiological response to virtual environments or reactions to different virtual environments. The goal of this study is to analyze nonphobic participants' physiological reactions to two virtual environments: driving and flying. Eleven nonphobic participants were exposed to each virtual environment for 15 min. Heart rate, skin resistance, and skin temperature were measured during physiological monitoring, and the Presence and Simulator Sickness Questionnaire scores were obtained after each exposure. This study found that skin resistance and heart rate variability can be used to show arousal of participants exposed to the virtual environment experience and that such measures generally returned to normal over time. The data suggest that skin resistance and heart rate can be used as objective measures in monitoring the reaction of non-phobic participants to virtual environments. We also noted that heart rate variability could be useful for assessing the emotional states of participants.

Physiological monitoring as an objective tool in virtual reality therapy

The goals of this study were twofold: (1) to investigate nonphobics' and phobics' physiological response in virtual environments, and (2) to analyze the trend of phobics' physiology during virtual reality (VR) treatment. As a measure of physiology, heart rate, skin resistance, and skin temperature were acquired. The data for two groups of participants were analyzed: 22 nonphobic participants (mean = 32 +/- 9.4 years) and 36 subjects with fear of flying (mean = 40 +/- 12.1 years) who met the DSM-IV criteria for fear of flying. As a result, skin resistance showed significant differences between nonphobics and phobics, T(56) = 2.978 and p < 0.01, respectively. The physiological response of 33 phobic participants, who were able to fly without medicine after VR treatment, showed a gradual trend toward the nonphobics' physiological responses as therapy sessions progressed. In this study, physiological monitoring, in particular skin resistance, appeared to be useful both in understanding the physiological state of phobic individuals and in evaluating the results of treatment in VR psychotherapy.