Objective: To summarize evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on the effectiveness of virtual reality technology (VRT), as used by patients, for reducing pain during outpatient hysteroscopy. Data Sources: Electronic databases and clinical registers were searched until June 21, 2023. The review protocol was registered in PROSPERO before the data extraction (CRD42023434340).Methods of Study Selection: We included RCTs of patients receiving VRT compared with controls receiving routine care during outpatient hysteroscopy. Tabulation, Integration, andResults: The primary outcome was average pain during hysteroscopy. Pooled results were expressed as mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence interval (CI). Sources of heterogeneity were investigated through sensitivity and subgroups analysis. Five RCTs were included (435 participants). The comparison between the intervention and control groups showed a borderline difference in perceived pain during hysteroscopy (MD -0.88, 95% CI -1.77 to 0.01). Subgroup analysis based on the type of VRT (active or passive) indicated that active VRT potentially reduced the perception of pain (MD -1.42, 95% CI -2.21 to -0.62), whereas passive VRT had no effect (MD -0.06, 95% CI -1.15 to 1.03).Conclusion: Patients' use of active VRT may be associated with a reduction in pain during outpatient hysteroscopy (evidence Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation 2/4). Future research should focus on conducting methodologically robust studies with larger sample sizes and more homogeneous populations. Journal of Minimally Invasive Gynecology (2023) 30, 866-876. (c) 2023 AAGL. All rights reserved.

Patients' Use of Virtual Reality Technology for Pain Reduction during Outpatient Hysteroscopy: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Favilli, Alessandro;
2023

Abstract

Objective: To summarize evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on the effectiveness of virtual reality technology (VRT), as used by patients, for reducing pain during outpatient hysteroscopy. Data Sources: Electronic databases and clinical registers were searched until June 21, 2023. The review protocol was registered in PROSPERO before the data extraction (CRD42023434340).Methods of Study Selection: We included RCTs of patients receiving VRT compared with controls receiving routine care during outpatient hysteroscopy. Tabulation, Integration, andResults: The primary outcome was average pain during hysteroscopy. Pooled results were expressed as mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence interval (CI). Sources of heterogeneity were investigated through sensitivity and subgroups analysis. Five RCTs were included (435 participants). The comparison between the intervention and control groups showed a borderline difference in perceived pain during hysteroscopy (MD -0.88, 95% CI -1.77 to 0.01). Subgroup analysis based on the type of VRT (active or passive) indicated that active VRT potentially reduced the perception of pain (MD -1.42, 95% CI -2.21 to -0.62), whereas passive VRT had no effect (MD -0.06, 95% CI -1.15 to 1.03).Conclusion: Patients' use of active VRT may be associated with a reduction in pain during outpatient hysteroscopy (evidence Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation 2/4). Future research should focus on conducting methodologically robust studies with larger sample sizes and more homogeneous populations. Journal of Minimally Invasive Gynecology (2023) 30, 866-876. (c) 2023 AAGL. All rights reserved.
2023
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11391/1566125
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 0
  • Scopus 0
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 0
social impact