Decreasing pediatric pain and agitation during botulinum toxin injections for spasticity with virtual reality: Lessons learned from clinical use

Safety of virtual reality use in children: a systematic review

The study aimed to systematically review available literature regarding the safety of virtual reality (VR) use via head-mounted display in children under 14 years of age. The study was a systematic review including all study designs. A search was conducted in January 2023 in PubMed and EMBASE using key terms referring to 'virtual reality', 'paediatrics' and 'safety'.  Following title and abstract and full-text screening, data were extracted and a narrative synthesis undertaken. Twenty-six studies met criteria for inclusion in the final review.  Limited data suggest that VR may cause mild cybersickness symptoms (not severe enough to cause participants to discontinue use of VR) and that for children with existing amblyopia using VR may result in double vision, which resolves on cessation of VR exposure.  Two randomised control trials did not report differences in adverse events between the intervention (VR use) and control groups. Reporting of safety data was poor; only two studies used a validated measure, and in the remaining studies, it was often unclear how adverse events were defined (if at all), how they were categorised in terms of severity and how they were recorded.     Conclusion: There is limited evidence regarding any potential harms from short exposure to VR in children under 14 years under supervision. Additional research is required to understand increases in cybersickness during and after VR exposure, and the impact of repeated exposure.  Adverse events need to be accurately and routinely recorded to determine any hitherto unknown safety concerns for children < 14 years using VR. What is Known: • Virtual reality (VR) is increasingly being applied in paediatrics, with benefits in terms of anxiety reduction, improved pain management associated with procedures, as an adjunct to physiotherapy and supporting treatments in autistic spectrum disorder.. • Safety guidance in relation to VR use, particularly in younger children, is limited. What is New: • A systematic review of available literature regarding the safety of VR use via head-mounted display in children under 14 years of age demonstrated limited evidence regarding any potential harms from short exposure to VR.. • Studies rarely report safety data and adverse side effects are poorly defined, measured and/or reported. • The lack of a validated measure for evaluating VR-associated symptoms in children compounds the challenging ethical issues of undertaking research into the effects of VR on younger children.

Virtual Reality for Decreasing Procedural Pain during Botulinum Toxin Injection Related to Spasticity Treatment in Adults: A Pilot Study

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Botulinum toxin injections are commonly used for the treatment of spasticity. However, injection procedures are associated with pain and procedural anxiety. While pharmacological approaches are commonly used to reduce these, innovative technology might be considered as a potential non-pharmacological alternative. Given this context, immersive virtual reality (VR) has shown effectiveness in the management of procedural pain. Our retrospective pilot study aimed to assess the potential added value of virtual reality in the management of pain and anxiety during intramuscular injections of botulinum toxin.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Seventeen adult patients receiving botulinum toxin injections were included. A numerical rating scale was used to assess pain and anxiety during the injection procedure. The patients reported the pain experienced during previous injections without VR before injection and the pain experienced in the current procedure with VR after the end of the procedure. The level of satisfaction of VR experience, whether or not they agreed to reuse VR for the subsequent toxin botulinum injection, and whether or not they would recommend VR to other patients were assessed.

RESULTS

The use of virtual reality led to a decrease of 1.8 pain-related points compared to the procedure without technology. No significant improvement in the level of anxiety was reported. Patients were very satisfied with their VR experiences (7.9 out of 10), and many would agree to reuse VR in their next injection procedure (88%) and to recommend the use of VR in other patients (100%).

CONCLUSION

VR was useful for managing procedural pain related to botulinum toxin injection in adults, with a high level of satisfaction reported by the patients. VR should be considered as a valuable alternative to pharmacological approaches to manage procedural pain during botulinum toxin injection in adults.

Use of immersive virtual reality for stress reduction during botulinum toxin injection for spasticity (RVTOX): a study protocol of a randomised control trial

INTRODUCTION

Botulinum toxin injection is a common way to help reduce spasticity in the body caused by central neurological damage such as cerebral stroke, multiple sclerosis or traumatic brain injury. The pain felt during the injection causes most patients to experience significant stress for further injections, the level of which is variable between patients.Immersive virtual reality is a digital technique that simulates the three-dimensional spatial and sound environment around a person said to be immersed in this virtualised world. The effectiveness of virtual reality comes from the intensity of this multisensory immersion, known as the feeling of presence (ie, subjective experience of being in one place or one environment, even when you are physically in another one).Only one research article in paediatrics has shown that immersive reality technique has a positive impact on the level of pain and agitation suffered during botulinum toxin injections. The purpose of this study is therefore to evaluate with sufficient assurance the following research hypothesis: virtual reality can help adults cope with the stress and pain of botulinum toxin treatment injection.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The research hypothesis will be tested using a randomised stepped-wedge method versus a non-invasive technique (headset with virtual reality session) to its control (headset with no image nor audio).The design leads to considering the injection as a statistical unit as all participants will undergo the standard condition, the control technique and virtual reality technique.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Patients will be fully and fairly informed in terms of their understanding of the objectives and constraints of the study and the possible risks involved. They will also be entitled to refuse the study and/or withdraw, and this refusal will have no impact on their follow-up as part of their pathology. Dissemination of the results of this study will be through peer-reviewed publications, and national and international conferences.Ethics were approved by the Comité de Protection des Personnes Nord-Ouest in January 2022.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT05364203.

Biofeedback assisted relaxation training and distraction therapy for pain in children undergoing botulinum neurotoxin A injections: A crossover randomized controlled trial

AIM

To compare biofeedback assisted relaxation training (BART) with distraction therapy for pain during botulinum neurotoxin A (BoNT-A) treatment.

METHOD

This was a crossover randomized controlled trial. Eligible participants were 7 years and older with neurological conditions. Participants were randomized to receive BART or distraction during their first BoNT-A treatment, followed by the alternative intervention in their subsequent BoNT-A treatment. BART was delivered via BrightHearts, an interactive heart-rate-responsive application. Outcomes were pain (Faces Pain Scale - Revised), fear (Children's Fear Scale), and anxiety (numerical rating scale, State-Trait Anxiety Inventory). Demographics, paired t-tests, and linear mixed models were used to compare outcomes.

RESULTS

Thirty-eight participants (mean [SD] age 13 years 5 months [3 years 4 months], 20 males, 34 with cerebral palsy) completed both interventions. There were non-significant differences in overall pain (mean difference - 0.05, 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.91 to 0.80, p = 0.902) and worst pain (mean difference 0.37, 95% CI -0.39 to 1.13, p = 0.334) when using BART and distraction therapy. There were non-significant differences in fear and anxiety between interventions. Younger age, heightened pre-procedural state anxiety, and Gross Motor Function Classification System levels III and IV were associated with poorer outcomes (p < 0.05). Participants who received BART before distraction therapy reported lower pain and anxiety scores during both BoNT-A treatments (p < 0.05).

INTERPRETATION

Children reported similar pain when using BART and distraction therapy. Those who used BART before distraction therapy reported lower pain and anxiety during both treatments.

WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS

Children reported similar pain (overall; worst) when using biofeedback assisted relaxation training (BART) and distraction therapy. Children who used BART before distraction therapy reported lower pain and anxiety over both botulinum neurotoxin A treatments. Younger age, pre-procedural state anxiety, and Gross Motor Function Classification System levels III and IV predicted a worse pain experience. Distraction therapy and BART were acceptable non-pharmacological interventions for procedural pain management.

Virtual Reality during Intrathecal Pump Refills in Children: A Case Series

Virtual reality has proven to be an effective approach to decrease pain in acute settings, both in adults and children. The aim of this study is to evaluate whether virtual reality (VR) could reduce pain during an intrathecal pump refill procedure in children receiving intrathecal drug delivery, compared to a standard refill procedure. This is a three-arm crossover randomized controlled trial, evaluating the effect of VR on pain in children with cerebral palsy undergoing an intrathecal pump refill compared to a standard refill and a refill with distraction (watching a video). Pain was evaluated using the Wong–Baker Faces Scale. Secondary outcomes were procedural pain, fear, state anxiety, the incidence of adverse events and satisfaction. Six children participated in this study, whereby all children underwent the three conditions. Five children indicated an equal of lower pain score during VR, compared to a standard refill. This finding of an equal or lower pain intensity score for the VR condition compared to the control condition was also revealed by the ratings of the parents, physician and the researcher. The influence of VR on anxiety and fear seem to be in line with the influence of watching a video. In terms of satisfaction, all children and parents agreed with the statement that they would like to use VR again for a next refill. Due to the lack of adverse events, the high degree of satisfaction of children with VR and the decreased pain levels after a refill with VR, physicians may aim to explore the implementation of VR during intrathecal pump refill procedures in children in a daily clinical routine care setting.

The Effectiveness of Virtual Reality in Managing Acute Pain and Anxiety for Medical Inpatients: Systematic Review

Background

Virtual reality is increasingly being utilized by clinicians to facilitate analgesia and anxiolysis within an inpatient setting. There is however, a lack of a clinically relevant review to guide its use for this purpose.

Objective

To systematically review the current evidence for the efficacy of virtual reality as an analgesic in the management of acute pain and anxiolysis in an inpatient setting.

Methods

A comprehensive search was conducted up to and including January 2019 on PubMed, Ovid Medline, EMBASE, and Cochrane Database of Systematic reviews according to PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. Search terms included virtual reality, vr, and pain. Primary articles with a focus on acute pain in the clinical setting were considered for the review. Primary outcome measures included degree of analgesia afforded by virtual reality therapy, degree of anxiolysis afforded by virtual reality therapy, effect of virtual reality on physiological parameters, side effects precipitated by virtual reality, virtual reality content type, and type of equipment utilized.

Results

Eighteen studies were deemed eligible for inclusion in this systematic review; 67% (12/18) of studies demonstrated significant reductions in pain with the utilization of virtual reality; 44% (8/18) of studies assessed the effects of virtual reality on procedural anxiety, with 50% (4/8) of these demonstrating significant reductions; 28% (5/18) of studies screened for side effects with incidence rates of 0.5% to 8%; 39% (7/18) of studies evaluated the effects of virtual reality on autonomic arousal as a biomarker of pain, with 29% (2/7) demonstrating significant changes; 100% (18/18) of studies utilized a head mounted display to deliver virtual reality therapy, with 50% being in active form (participants interacting with the environment) and 50% being in passive form (participants observing the content only).

Conclusions

Available evidence suggests that virtual reality therapy can be applied to facilitate analgesia for acute pain in a variety of inpatient settings. Its effects, however, are likely to vary by patient population and indication. This highlights the need for individualized pilot testing of virtual reality therapy’s effects for each specific clinical use case rather than generalizing its use for the broad indication of facilitating analgesia. In addition, virtual reality therapy has the added potential of concurrently providing procedural anxiolysis, thereby improving patient experience and cooperation, while being associated with a low incidence of side effects (nausea, vomiting, eye strain, and dizziness). Furthermore, findings indicated a head mounted display should be utilized to deliver virtual reality therapy in a clinical setting with a slight preference for active over passive virtual reality for analgesia. There, however, appears to be insufficient evidence to substantiate the effect of virtual reality on autonomic arousal, and this should be considered at best to be for investigational uses, at present.

Virtual Reality as Distraction Analgesia for Office-Based Procedures: A Randomized Crossover-Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to explore the use of immersive and interactive virtual reality (VR) for analgesia, anxiety reduction, and overall satisfaction in patients undergoing outpatient postoperative debridements.

STUDY DESIGN

Randomized crossover-controlled trial.

SETTING

Academic outpatient clinic.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

Adult patients who had functional endoscopic sinus surgery and skull base surgery and were undergoing office-based postoperative nasal endoscopy and debridement were recruited and followed for 2 consecutive office visits. Participants were randomized to receive either the control or experimental analgesia for the first postoperative visit (PO1) and crossed over into the opposite treatment arm during the second postoperative visit (PO2). Outcomes included procedural pain, anxiety and satisfaction scores, procedural time, and reflexive head movements per minute (RHM).

RESULTS

Eighty-two participants were recruited. At PO1, 39 received standard analgesia, and 43 received an immersive VR experience. At PO1, the VR group experienced significantly less anxiety (P = .043) and fewer RHM (P = .00016) than the control group. At PO2, the VR group experienced significantly fewer RHM (P = .0002). At PO2, patients who received the experimental treatment after initially receiving the control treatment had significantly decreased pain, anxiety, and RHM. This effect was not seen in the second group. Overall, 69.51% of patients felt that the VR treatment was better; 19.51% thought that it was the same; and 9.76% found it to be worse.

CONCLUSION

VR technology holds promise as a nonpharmacologic analgesic and anxiolytic intervention for otolaryngology office-based procedures. Further study of VR use in other procedures is warranted.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

1, randomized controlled trial.

Digital Technology Distraction for Acute Pain in Children: A Meta-analysis

CONTEXT

Digital distraction is being integrated into pediatric pain care, but its efficacy is currently unknown.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the effect of digital technology distraction on pain and distress in children experiencing acutely painful conditions or procedures.

DATA SOURCES

Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, PsycINFO, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Xplore, Ei Compendex, Web of Science, and gray literature sources.

STUDY SELECTION

Quantitative studies of digital technology distraction for acutely painful conditions or procedures in children.

DATA EXTRACTION

Performed by 1 reviewer with verification. Outcomes were child pain and distress.

RESULTS

There were 106 studies (n = 7820) that reported on digital technology distractors (eg, virtual reality and video games) used during common procedures (eg, venipuncture, dental, and burn treatments). No studies reported on painful conditions. For painful procedures, digital distraction resulted in a modest but clinically important reduction in self-reported pain (standardized mean difference [SMD] -0.48; 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.66 to -0.29; 46 randomized controlled trials [RCTs]; n = 3200), observer-reported pain (SMD -0.68; 95% CI -0.91 to -0.45; 17 RCTs; n = 1199), behavioral pain (SMD -0.57; 95% CI -0.94 to -0.19; 19 RCTs; n = 1173), self-reported distress (SMD -0.49; 95% CI -0.70 to -0.27; 19 RCTs; n = 1818), observer-reported distress (SMD -0.47; 95% CI -0.77 to -0.17; 10 RCTs; n = 826), and behavioral distress (SMD -0.35; 95% CI -0.59 to -0.12; 17 RCTs; n = 1264) compared with usual care.

LIMITATIONS

Few studies directly compared different distractors or provided subgroup data to inform applicability.

CONCLUSIONS

Digital distraction provides modest pain and distress reduction for children undergoing painful procedures; its superiority over nondigital distractors is not established. Context, preferences, and availability should inform the choice of distractor.

Design Strategies for Virtual Reality Interventions for Managing Pain and Anxiety in Children and Adolescents: Scoping Review

Background

Virtual reality (VR) technology has been explored in the health sector as a novel tool for supporting treatment side effects, including managing pain and anxiety. VR has recently become more available with the launch of low-cost devices and apps.

Objective

This study aimed to provide an updated review of the research into VR use for pain and anxiety in pediatric patients undergoing medical procedures. Specifically, we wanted to gain an understanding of the techniques and goals used in selecting or designing VR apps in this context.

Methods

We performed a scoping review. To identify relevant studies, we searched three electronic databases. Two authors screened the titles and abstracts for relevance and eligibility criteria.

Results

Overall, 1386 articles published between 2013 and 2018 were identified. In total 18 articles were included in the review, with 7 reporting significant reduction in pediatric pain or anxiety, 3 testing but finding no significant impact of the VR apps employed, and the rest not conducting any test of significance. We identified 9 articles that were based on VR apps specifically designed and tailored for pediatric patients. The findings were analyzed to develop a holistic model and describe the product, experience, and intervention aspects that need to be considered in designing such medical VR apps.

Conclusions

VR has been demonstrated to be a viable choice for managing pain and anxiety in a range of medical treatments. However, commercial products lack diversity and meaningful design strategies are limited beyond distraction techniques. We propose future VR interventions to explore skill-building goals in apps characterized by dynamic feedback to the patient and experiential and product qualities that enable them to be an active participant in managing their own care. To achieve this, design must be part of the development.