Comparative Effects of Isokinetic Training and Virtual Reality Training on Sports Performances in University Football Players with Chronic Low Back Pain-Randomized Controlled Study

Immersive and Nonimmersive Virtual Reality-Assisted Active Training in Chronic Musculoskeletal Pain: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Virtual reality (VR) in different immersive conditions has been increasingly used as a nonpharmacological method for managing chronic musculoskeletal pain.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to assess the effectiveness of VR-assisted active training versus conventional exercise or physiotherapy in chronic musculoskeletal pain and to analyze the effects of immersive versus nonimmersive VR on pain outcomes.

METHODS

This systematic review of randomized control trials (RCTs) searched PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases from inception to June 9, 2024. RCTs comparing adults with chronic musculoskeletal pain receiving VR-assisted training were included. The primary outcome was pain intensity; secondary outcomes included functional disability and kinesiophobia. Available data were pooled in a meta-analysis. Studies were graded using the Cochrane Risk-of-Bias Tool version 2.

RESULTS

In total, 28 RCTs including 1114 participants with some concerns for a high risk of bias were identified, and 25 RCTs were included in the meta-analysis. In low back pain, short-term outcomes measured post intervention showed that nonimmersive VR is effective in reducing pain (standardized mean difference [SMD] -1.79, 95% CI -2.72 to -0.87; P<.001), improving disability (SMD -0.44, 95% CI -0.72 to -0.16; P=.002), and kinesiophobia (SMD -2.94, 95% CI -5.20 to -0.68; P=.01). Intermediate-term outcomes measured at 6 months also showed that nonimmersive VR is effective in reducing pain (SMD -8.15, 95% CI -15.29 to -1.01; P=.03), and kinesiophobia (SMD -4.28, 95% CI -8.12 to -0.44; P=.03) compared to conventional active training. For neck pain, immersive VR reduced pain intensity (SMD -0.55, 95% CI -1.02 to -0.08; P=.02) but not disability and kinesiophobia in the short term. No statistical significances were detected for knee pain or other pain regions at all time points. In addition, 2 (8%) studies had a high risk of bias.

CONCLUSIONS

Both nonimmersive and immersive VR-assisted active training is effective in reducing back and neck pain symptoms. Our study findings suggest that VR is effective in alleviating chronic musculoskeletal pain.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42022302912; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=302912.

The Role of Virtual Reality in the Management of Football Injuries

Injuries represent a serious concern for football players, with a significant loss in terms of sport participation and long periods of rehabilitation. According to the 2019/20 UEFA Élite Club Injury Report, the average incidence of injuries during training is 2.8 per 1000 h of training, with an average absence from training of 20 days. In addition, injured athletes are 4 to 7 times more likely to relapse than uninjured athletes. High workloads and reduced recovery periods represent two of the most important modifiable risk factors. In this context, prevention and an adequate rehabilitation protocol are vital in managing injuries, reducing their incidence, and improving the return to competition. In recent years, technological development has provided new tools in rehabilitation, and Virtual reality (VR) has shown interesting results in treating neurologic and orthopedic pathologies. Virtual Reality (VR) technology finds application in the sports industry as a tool to examine athletes' technical movements. The primary objective is to detect the biomechanical risk factors associated with anterior cruciate ligament injury. Additionally, VR can be used to train athletes in field-specific techniques and create safe and controlled therapeutic environments for post-injury recovery. Moreover, VR offers a customizable approach to treatment based on individual player data. It can be employed for both prevention and rehabilitation, tailoring the rehabilitation and training protocols according to the athletes' specific needs.

Virtual Reality-Based Training in Chronic Low Back Pain: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

Low back pain is one of the most prevalent pain conditions worldwide. Virtual reality-based training has been used for low back pain as a new treatment strategy. Present evidence indicated that the effectiveness of virtual reality-based training for people with chronic low back pain is inconclusive.

OBJECTIVE

This study conducted a meta-analysis to evaluate the immediate- and short-term effects of virtual reality-based training on pain, pain-related fear, and disability in people with chronic low back pain.

METHODS

We searched the PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, PEDro, CENTRAL, and CINAHL databases from inception until January 2024. Only randomized controlled trials assessing the effects of virtual reality-based training on individuals with chronic low back pain were selected. The outcomes were focused on pain, pain-related fear measured by the Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia, and disability measured by the Oswestry Disability Index. The immediate term was defined as the immediate period after intervention, and the short term was defined as 3 to 6 months after intervention. The Cochrane Risk of Bias tool and the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach were used to evaluate the quality of the methodology and evidence, respectively.

RESULTS

In total, 20 randomized controlled trials involving 1059 patients were eligible for analysis. Virtual reality-based training showed significant improvements in pain (mean difference [MD] -1.43; 95% CI -1.86 to -1.00; I2=95%; P<.001), pain-related fear using the Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia (MD -5.46; 95% CI -9.40 to 1.52; I2=90%; P=.007), and disability using the Oswestry Disability Index (MD -11.50; 95% CI -20.00 to -3.01; I2=95%; P=.008) in individuals with chronic low back pain immediately after interventions. However, there were no significant differences observed in pain (P=.16), pain-related fear (P=.10), and disability (P=.43) in the short term.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings indicated that virtual reality-based training can be used effectively for individuals with chronic low back pain in the immediate term, especially to reduce pain, alleviate pain-related fear, and improve disability. However, the short-term benefits need more high-quality trials to be demonstrated.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42021292633; http://tinyurl.com/25mydxpz.

Virtual Reality Therapy for the Management of Chronic Spinal Pain: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

The effectiveness of virtual reality (VR) therapy in adults with chronic spinal pain (CSP) is unclear.

OBJECTIVE

This study was conducted to compare the effectiveness of VR therapy and other therapies in adults with CSP, especially patients with inflammation-related pain.

METHODS

PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Embase, and CINAHL databases were searched up to November 11, 2023. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing adults with CSP receiving VR therapy with those receiving other therapies were included. The trial registration platform as well as the reference lists of included studies and previous systematic reviews and meta-analyses were manually searched. Two independent reviewers performed study selection, data extraction, risk-of-bias assessment, and evaluation of the quality of the evidence. The weighted mean difference (WMD) was used as the effect size used to synthesize the outcome measure.

RESULTS

In total, 16 RCTs involving 800 participants were included in this meta-analysis. The pooled data from 15 (94%) RCTs including 776 (97%) participants showed that VR therapy was superior in improving pain intensity (WMD=-1.63, 95% CI -2.11 to -1.16, P<.001, I2=90%) and reducing inflammatory markers, including C-reactive protein (WMD=-0.89, 95% CI -1.07 to -0.70, P<.001, I2=0%), tumor necrosis factor-alpha (WMD=-6.60, 95% CI -8.56 to -4.64, P<.001, I2=98%), and interleukin-6 (WMD=-2.76, 95% CI -2.98 to -2.53, P<.001, I2=0%). However, no significant differences were found in terms of the spinal range of motion (ROM), disability level, or fear of movement. In addition, 10 (63%) of the included RCTs had a high risk of bias.

CONCLUSIONS

VR therapy may be an effective and safe intervention for reducing symptoms in patients with CSP, as it is shown to exert significant analgesic effects and beneficial improvements in inflammatory factor levels. However, this approach may not have significant effects on the spinal ROM, disability level, or fear of movement. Notably, the quality of the evidence from the RCTs included in this study ranged from moderate to low. Therefore, we recommend that readers interpret the results of this study with caution.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42022382331; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=382331.

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

BACKGROUND

Chronic low back ache (CLBA) is a common condition that is conventionally managed with physical therapy and analgesics. Recently, virtual reality-based interventions have been tried out in the management of CLBA. Their effectiveness, however has not been established. This meta-analysis aims to find out if the application of VR will lead to better pain relief, as compared to conventional techniques in adults with CLBA.

METHODS

The literature search was carried out in three online databases for potential randomized controlled trials that compared VR-based interventions with conventional treatment in CLBA. Data on outcome parameters were recorded. Meta-analysis was carried out with the help of appropriate software.

RESULTS

Seven studies having data on 507 subjects were included in the meta-analysis. Their mean ages were 48.4 years. There were 252 subjects in the VR group and 255 in the control group. VR-based interventions were found to have a statistically significant improvement in the pain intensity compared with conventional techniques (p - 0.005).

CONCLUSION

VR-based interventions are effective in the management of CLBA in the short term. Further research with longer follow-up is required to evaluate if these improvements are persistent in the long term.

Global Scientific Trends in Virtual Reality for Pain Treatment From 2000 to 2022: Bibliometric Analysis

Background

Virtual reality (VR) is a computer simulation technique that has been increasingly applied in pain management over the past 2 decades.

Objective

In this study, we used bibliometrics to explore the literature on VR and pain control, with the aim of identifying research progress and predicting future research hot spots.

Methods

We extracted literature on VR and pain control published between 2000 and 2022 from the Web of Science Core Collections and conducted bibliometric analyses. We analyzed the publication and citation trends in the past 2 decades, as well as publication and citation analyses of different countries, institutions, journals, and authors. For references, we conducted cocitation and burst analyses. For keywords, we conducted co-occurrence, clustering, timeline view, and citation burst analyses.

Results

Based on 1176 publications, we found that there was a continuous increase in publication and citation volumes, especially in the last 5 years. The United States was the most representative country, and the University of Washington was the most representative institution, with both having the most publications and citations. The most popular journal in this field was Burns, and Hoffman HG was the most productive author, leading many studies on patients with burn pain. The reference with the most citation burst was a study on the verification of new hardware in pain control. The keywords with the highest citation bursts related to various situations of pain such as "burn pain," "wound care," "low back pain," and "phantom limb."

Conclusions

VR has been applied in various clinical situations for pain management, among which burns and pediatric surgery have achieved satisfactory results. We infer that VR will be extended to more clinical pain situations in the future, such as pain control in wound care, low back pain, and phantom limb pain. New research hot spots will include the development of software and hardware to improve the immersive experience of VR for pain control. However, our work was based solely on English literature from the Web of Science database. For future studies, we recommend that researchers explore literature from multiple databases to enhance the scope of their research.

Virtual training, real effects: a narrative review on sports performance enhancement through interventions in virtual reality

The present article reports a narrative review of intervention (i.e., training) studies using Virtual Reality (VR) in sports contexts. It provides a qualitative overview and narrative summary of such studies to clarify the potential benefits of VR technology for sports performance enhancement, to extract the main characteristics of the existing studies, and to inform and guide future research. Our literature search and review eventually resulted in 12 intervention studies with a pre vs. post design focused on different sports, including target and precision sports (archery, bowling, curling, darts, golf), bat/racquet and ball sports (baseball, table tennis), goal sports (football/soccer, basketball), martial arts (karate), and sport-unspecific processes such as bodily sensations and balancing. The samples investigated in the primary studies included novice, amateur, and expert athletes (total aggregated sample size N = 493). Many studies found statistically significant effects in relevant target skills following interventions in VR, often outperforming training effects in passive or active control conditions (e.g., using conventional training protocols). Therefore, interventions in VR (or extended reality) have the potential to elicit real effects in sports performance enhancement through training of motor and psychological skills and capabilities in athletes, including perception-action skills, strategic, tactical and decision-making, responding to unexpected events, and enhancing psychological resilience and mental performance under pressure. The neurocognitive mechanisms (e.g., visual search behavior, imagery), methodological aspects (e.g., adaptive training difficulty), and the issues of real-world transfer and generalizability via which these potential sports-performance-related improvements may occur are discussed. Finally, limitations of the present review, the included studies, the current state of the field in general as well as an outlook and future perspectives for research designs and directions are taken into consideration.

Isokinetic trunk training on pain, disability, and strength in non-specific low back pain patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Low back pain is one of the leading causes of disability globally, with a high economic and social burden. A decrease or imbalance in trunk strength has been associated with the occurrence of low back pain and its severity. Trunk strength training is helpful in the treatment of Non-specific low back pain (NSLBP) patients. However, we do not know the effects of trunk isokinetic training (IKT) on pain intensity, disability, and trunk strength.

OBJECTIVE

This systematic review aimed to determine the effects of trunk IKT in NSLBP patients on pain intensity, disability, and trunk flexor and extensor isokinetic strength.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, CENTRAL, and PEDro, from January 2001 until March 2021 and updated to November 2022. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that investigated the effect of IKT in adult participants with NSLBP on pain intensity, disability, or isokinetic trunk strength were included. Mean difference (MD) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) were calculated for pain. Bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias (RoB) tool and evidence certainty via Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE).

RESULTS

Among 1750 retrieved articles, eight were included in this review. Meta-analysis comparing IKT (trunk isokinetic training, n= 134) with control groups (conventional exercises, n= 133) revealed that IKT decreases pain intensity (MD -1.50 (95% CI: -2.60; -0.39)) immediately post-intervention, and one month (MD -1.97 (95% CI: -2.92; -1.03)) and at six months follow-up (MD -2.48 (95% CI: -2.77; -2.19)), although with a very low to low quality according to the GRADE rating. Besides, IKT decreases disability and increases isokinetic trunk strength, but with scant evidence.

CONCLUSIONS

Trunk IKT could be a novel clinical tool for pain management in patients with NSLBP, although evidence is scarce. In addition, few RCTs exist for IKT on disability or trunk isokinetic strength in patients with NSLBP. Therefore, further research on this topic is needed.

Effects of Virtual Reality Exercises versus Isokinetic Exercises in comparison with Conventional Exercises on the Imaging Findings and Inflammatory Biomarker Changes in Soccer Players with Non-Specific Low Back Pain: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Chronic non-specific low back pain (CNLBP) is the most common musculoskeletal problem. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of advanced physiotherapeutic exercise programs on imaging findings and inflammatory biomarkers in soccer players with CNLBP. In total, 60 CNLBP participants were divided into virtual reality exercise (VRE; n = 20), isokinetic exercise (IKE; n = 20), and conventional exercise (n = 20) groups. Pain intensity, imaging findings (muscle cross-sectional area (CSA) and muscle thickness), and changes in inflammatory biomarkers (CRP, TNF-α, IL-2, IL-4, and IL-6) were measured at baseline and after four weeks. After four weeks of intervention, there was a significant improvement (p = 0.001) in pain intensity for the VRE vs. IKE (0.7; CI 95% 0.38 to 1.07) and VRE vs. conventional (3.0 CI 95% 2.68 to 3.31) groups. The IKE group showed a greater number of significant changes in muscle CSA and muscle thickness than the other two groups (p < 0.001). Moreover, the VRE group showed significant improvement in inflammatory biomarker measures compared with the other two groups (p < 0.001). In CNLBP, virtual and isokinetic exercises had equal effects on reducing pain intensity. Isokinetic exercise is beneficial in increasing the muscle CSA and thickness, and virtual exercises are helpful for attenuating the inflammation process in soccer players with CNLBP.

Use and efficacy of virtual, augmented, or mixed reality technology for chronic pain: a systematic review

Aim: Characterize use and efficacy/effectiveness of virtual, augmented, or mixed reality (VR/AR/MR) technology as non-pharmacological therapy for chronic pain. Methods: Systematic search of 12 databases to identify empirical studies, of individuals who experience chronic pain or illness involving chronic pain, published between 1990 and 2021. JBI Critical Appraisal Checklists assessed study bias and a narrative synthesis was provided. Results: 46 studies, investigating a total of 1456 participants and including 19 randomized controlled trials (RCT), were reviewed. VR/AR/MR was associated with improved pain-related outcomes in 78% of the RCTs. Conclusion: While most studies showed effects immediately or up to one month post treatment, RCTs are needed to further evaluate VR/AR/MR, establish long-term benefits, and assess accessibility, especially among individuals who experience pain management disparities.

Virtual Reality in the Management of Chronic Low Back Pain: A Scoping Review

Virtual reality (VR) is a burgeoning treatment option for chronic pain. Its use has been heterogenous in the literature. This scoping review assesses the current literature for the use of VR in the treatment of chronic low back pain (CLBP). The following themes were identified by the analysis: safety and feasibility of VR, quality of life associated with VR treatment for CLBP, efficacy of VR to treat CLBP, and efficacy of VR to treat functional changes associated with CLBP. Gaps were identified after analysis of the extant literature. Although the nascent research uncovered in this scoping review found good evidence for safety and tolerability of VR, more studies of safety, acceptance, and satisfaction are recommended including focused studies of spinal pain risks specific to use of VR. Overall, the methodological quality of studies reviewed in this scoping review was poor and outcomes were limited to short-term posttreatment outcomes.

The Analgesic Effects of Virtual Reality for People with Chronic Pain: A Scoping Review

OBJECTIVE

Although virtual reality is shown to have short-term analgesic effects in acute pain settings, its long-term efficacy in chronic pain conditions has not been established. This scoping review aims to provide a summary of virtual reality approaches explored in chronic primary and secondary pain conditions as defined by the International Association for the Study of Pain.

METHODS

A systematic literature search in Ovid PubMed and Ovid Embase was conducted between January 5 and January 10, 2021, with the use of the Arksey and O'Malley six-step scoping review criteria. Articles were searched via search terms and keywords relating to International Classification of Diseases-defined primary and secondary chronic pain conditions, virtual reality, virtual illusion, distraction, and effects on levels of pain.

RESULTS

Of the 2,118 articles located, 44 were included, which covered a range of primary and secondary chronic pain conditions and used a variety of different computer screen and headset protocols, including gaming, mindfulness, exercise, relaxation, and proprioceptive skills.

CONCLUSIONS

Studies show virtual reality to be an effective analgesic intervention for people with chronic pain. Given user satisfaction, a lack of side effects such as cybersickness, and relief of comorbid symptoms, virtual reality has potential as a worthwhile adjunct to chronic pain management programs, thus enabling patients to take control of their symptoms.

Virtual Reality in the Treatment of Adults with Chronic Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials

Virtual reality (VR) can present advantages in the treatment of chronic low back pain. The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to analyze the effectiveness of VR in chronic low back pain. This review was designed according to PRISMA and registered in PROSPERO (CRD42020222129). Four databases (PubMed, Cinahl, Scopus, Web of Science) were searched up to August 2021. Inclusion criteria were defined following PICOS recommendations. Methodological quality was assessed with the Downs and Black scale and the risk of bias with the Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment Tool. Fourteen studies were included in the systematic review and eleven in the meta-analysis. Significant differences were found in favor of VR compared to no VR in pain intensity postintervention (11 trials; n = 569; SMD = −1.92; 95% CI = −2.73, −1.11; p < 0.00001) and followup (4 trials; n = 240; SDM = −6.34; 95% CI = −9.12, −3.56; p < 0.00001); and kinesiophobia postintervention (3 trials; n = 192; MD = −8.96; 95% CI = −17.52, −0.40; p = 0.04) and followup (2 trials; n = 149; MD = −12.04; 95% CI = −20.58, −3.49; p = 0.006). No significant differences were found in disability. In conclusion, VR can significantly reduce pain intensity and kinesiophobia in patients with chronic low back pain after the intervention and at followup. However, high heterogeneity exists and can influence the consistency of the results.

Exercise therapy for chronic low back pain

BACKGROUND

Low back pain has been the leading cause of disability globally for at least the past three decades and results in enormous direct healthcare and lost productivity costs.

OBJECTIVES

The primary objective of this systematic review is to assess the impact of exercise treatment on pain and functional limitations in adults with chronic non-specific low back pain compared to no treatment, usual care, placebo and other conservative treatments.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL (which includes the Cochrane Back and Neck trials register), MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, PEDro, SPORTDiscus, and trials registries (ClinicalTrials.gov and World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform), and conducted citation searching of relevant systematic reviews to identify additional studies. The review includes data for trials identified in searches up to 27 April 2018. All eligible trials have been identified through searches to 7 December 2020, but have not yet been extracted; these trials will be integrated in the next update.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials that assessed exercise treatment compared to no treatment, usual care, placebo or other conservative treatment on the outcomes of pain or functional limitations for a population of adult participants with chronic non-specific low back pain of more than 12 weeks' duration.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors screened and assessed studies independently, with consensus. We extracted outcome data using electronic databases; pain and functional limitations outcomes were re-scaled to 0 to 100 points for meta-analyses where 0 is no pain or functional limitations. We assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane risk of bias (RoB) tool and used GRADE to evaluate the overall certainty of the evidence. When required, we contacted study authors to obtain missing data. To interpret meta-analysis results, we considered a 15-point difference in pain and a 10-point difference in functional limitations outcomes to be clinically important for the primary comparison of exercise versus no treatment, usual care or placebo.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 249 trials of exercise treatment, including studies conducted in Europe (122 studies), Asia (38 studies), North America (33 studies), and the Middle East (24 studies). Sixty-one per cent of studies (151 trials) examined the effectiveness of two or more different types of exercise treatment, and 57% (142 trials) compared exercise treatment to a non-exercise comparison treatment. Study participants had a mean age of 43.7 years and, on average, 59% of study populations were female. Most of the trials were judged to be at risk of bias, including 79% at risk of performance bias due to difficulty blinding exercise treatments. We found moderate-certainty evidence that exercise treatment is more effective for treatment of chronic low back pain compared to no treatment, usual care or placebo comparisons for pain outcomes at earliest follow-up (MD -15.2, 95% CI -18.3 to -12.2), a clinically important difference. Certainty of evidence was downgraded mainly due to heterogeneity. For the same comparison, there was moderate-certainty evidence for functional limitations outcomes (MD -6.8 (95% CI -8.3 to -5.3); this finding did not meet our prespecified threshold for minimal clinically important difference. Certainty of evidence was downgraded mainly due to some evidence of publication bias.  Compared to all other investigated conservative treatments, exercise treatment was found to have improved pain (MD -9.1, 95% CI -12.6 to -5.6) and functional limitations outcomes (MD -4.1, 95% CI -6.0 to -2.2). These effects did not meet our prespecified threshold for clinically important difference. Subgroup analysis of pain outcomes suggested that exercise treatment is probably more effective than education alone (MD -12.2, 95% CI -19.4 to -5.0) or non-exercise physical therapy (MD -10.4, 95% CI -15.2 to -5.6), but with no differences observed for manual therapy (MD 1.0, 95% CI -3.1 to 5.1). In studies that reported adverse effects (86 studies), one or more adverse effects were reported in 37 of 112 exercise groups (33%) and 12 of 42 comparison groups (29%). Twelve included studies reported measuring adverse effects in a systematic way, with a median of 0.14 (IQR 0.01 to 0.57) per participant in the exercise groups (mostly minor harms, e.g. muscle soreness), and 0.12 (IQR 0.02 to 0.32) in comparison groups.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found moderate-certainty evidence that exercise is probably effective for treatment of chronic low back pain compared to no treatment, usual care or placebo for pain. The observed treatment effect for the exercise compared to no treatment, usual care or placebo comparisons is small for functional limitations, not meeting our threshold for minimal clinically important difference. We also found exercise to have improved pain (low-certainty evidence) and functional limitations outcomes (moderate-certainty evidence) compared to other conservative treatments; however, these effects were small and not clinically important when considering all comparisons together. Subgroup analysis suggested that exercise treatment is probably more effective than advice or education alone, or electrotherapy, but with no differences observed for manual therapy treatments.

The Use of Virtual Reality in Back Pain Rehabilitation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

This systematic review aimed to synthesize the existing evidence of extended reality (XR) on pain and motor function outcomes in patients with back pain. Following the Cochrane guidelines, relevant articles of any language were selected by 2 independent reviewers from CINAHL, Cochrane, Embase, Medline and Web of Knowledge databases. Of 2,050 unique citations, 24 articles were included in our review. These studies included a total of 900 back pain patients. Despite broader XR search, all interventions were virtual reality (VR) based and involved physical exercises (n = 17, 71%), hippotherapy (n = 4, 17%), motor imagery (n = 1, 4%), distraction (n = 1, 4%), and cognitive-behavior therapy (n = 1, 4%). Sixteen controlled studies were included in a meta-analysis which suggested that VR provides a significant improvement in terms of back pain intensity over control interventions (Mean Difference: -0.67; 95% CI: -1.12 to -0.23; I² = 85%). Almost all included studies presented high risk of bias, highlighting the need to improve methodology in the examination of VR interventions. While the specific set of studies showed high heterogeneity across several methodological factors, a tentative conclusion could be drawn that VR was effective improving back pain intensity and tends to have a positive effect on improving other pain outcomes and motion function. PERSPECTIVE: Extended reality technologies have appeared as interesting nonpharmacological options for the treatment of back pain, with the potential to minimise the need for opioid medications. Our systematic review summarised existing applications of extended reality for back pain and proposed a few recommendations to direct further studies in the field.

An 8-Week Self-Administered At-Home Behavioral Skills-Based Virtual Reality Program for Chronic Low Back Pain: Double-Blind, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Trial Conducted During COVID-19

BACKGROUND

Chronic low back pain is the most prevalent chronic pain condition worldwide and access to behavioral pain treatment is limited. Virtual reality (VR) is an immersive technology that may provide effective behavioral therapeutics for chronic pain.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to conduct a double-blind, parallel-arm, single-cohort, remote, randomized placebo-controlled trial for a self-administered behavioral skills-based VR program in community-based individuals with self-reported chronic low back pain during the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

A national online convenience sample of individuals with self-reported nonmalignant low back pain with duration of 6 months or more and with average pain intensity of 4 or more/10 was enrolled and randomized 1:1 to 1 of 2 daily (56-day) VR programs: (1) EaseVRx (immersive pain relief skills VR program); or (2) Sham VR (2D nature content delivered in a VR headset). Objective device use data and self-reported data were collected. The primary outcomes were the between-group effect of EaseVRx versus Sham VR across time points, and the between-within interaction effect representing the change in average pain intensity and pain-related interference with activity, stress, mood, and sleep over time (baseline to end-of-treatment at day 56). Secondary outcomes were global impression of change and change in physical function, sleep disturbance, pain self-efficacy, pain catastrophizing, pain acceptance, pain medication use, and user satisfaction. Analytic methods included intention-to-treat and a mixed-model framework.

RESULTS

The study sample was 179 adults (female: 76.5%, 137/179; Caucasian: 90.5%, 162/179; at least some college education: 91.1%, 163/179; mean age: 51.5 years [SD 13.1]; average pain intensity: 5/10 [SD 1.2]; back pain duration ≥5 years: 67%, 120/179). No group differences were found for any baseline variable or treatment engagement. User satisfaction ratings were higher for EaseVRx versus Sham VR (P<.001). For the between-groups factor, EaseVRx was superior to Sham VR for all primary outcomes (highest P value=.009), and between-groups Cohen d effect sizes ranged from 0.40 to 0.49, indicating superiority was moderately clinically meaningful. For EaseVRx, large pre-post effect sizes ranged from 1.17 to 1.3 and met moderate to substantial clinical importance for reduced pain intensity and pain-related interference with activity, mood, and stress. Between-group comparisons for Physical Function and Sleep Disturbance showed superiority for the EaseVRx group versus the Sham VR group (P=.022 and .013, respectively). Pain catastrophizing, pain self-efficacy, pain acceptance, prescription opioid use (morphine milligram equivalent) did not reach statistical significance for either group. Use of over-the-counter analgesic use was reduced for EaseVRx (P<.01) but not for Sham VR.

CONCLUSIONS

EaseVRx had high user satisfaction and superior and clinically meaningful symptom reduction for average pain intensity and pain-related interference with activity, mood, and stress compared to sham VR. Additional research is needed to determine durability of treatment effects and to characterize mechanisms of treatment effects. Home-based VR may expand access to effective and on-demand nonpharmacologic treatment for chronic low back pain.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04415177; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04415177.

INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID)

RR2-10.2196/25291.

Short-Term Psychological and Hormonal Effects of Virtual Reality Training on Chronic Low Back Pain in Soccer Players

OBJECTIVE

To find the short-term psychological and hormonal effects of virtual reality training on chronic low back pain in American soccer players.

DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS

The 3-block random sampling method was used on 54 university American soccer players with chronic low back pain, and they were allocated into 3 groups: virtual reality training (VRT; n = 18), combined physical rehabilitation (n = 18), and control (n = 18) groups at University Hospital. They underwent different balance training exercises for 4 weeks. The participants and the therapist who is assessing the outcomes were blinded. Psychological (pain intensity and kinesiophobia) and hormonal (glucose, insulin, Homeostatic Model Assessment of Insulin Resistance, growth hormone, prolactin, adrenocorticotropic hormone, and cortisol) values were measured at baseline, after 4 weeks, and after 6 months.

RESULTS

The baseline demographic, psychological, and hormonal data between the VRT, combined physical rehabilitation, and control groups show no statistical difference (P ≥ .05). Four weeks following training, the VRT group shows more significant changes in pain intensity and kinesiophobia than the combined physical rehabilitation and control groups (P < .001), and the improvement was noted in the 6-month follow-up. All the hormonal variables (glucose, insulin, growth hormone, prolactin, adrenocorticotropic hormone, and cortisol) show significant changes at 4-week training (P < .001), except for the Homeostatic Model Assessment of Insulin Resistance (P = .075) between the 3 groups. At 6-month follow-up glucose, prolactin, adrenocorticotropic hormone, and cortisol show more significant difference in the VRT group than the other 2 groups (P < .001). At the same time, insulin (P = .694), Homeostatic Model Assessment of Insulin Resistance (P = .272), and growth hormone (P = .145) failed to show significant changes between the groups.

CONCLUSION

Training through virtual reality is an effective treatment program when compared with conventional exercise training programs from a psychological and hormonal analysis perspective in American soccer players with chronic low back pain.