Coulibaly Iklo, Cardelli Laura Sofia, Duflos Claire, Moulis Lionel, Mandoorah Bara, Nicoleau Jean, Placide Leslie, Massin François, Pasquié Jean-Luc, Granier Mathieu
Cardiology Department, CHU Montpellier, 34090 Montpellier, France.
Cardiology Department, Ospedale Maggiore, 40133 Bologna, Italy.
J Clin Med. 2022 Jul 5;11(13):3913. doi: 10.3390/jcm11133913.
Aims: Virtual reality hypnosis (VRH) has been used successfully in various clinical settings to decrease anxiety and the sensation of pain. We aimed to investigate the feasibility and safety of VRH in patients undergoing electrophysiology and pacing procedures under conscious sedation. Methods: During a two-month period, VRH support was proposed and accepted by 25 patients undergoing electrophysiological procedures. Data were compared with a control group (n = 61) enrolled during the following three-month period. Both groups underwent the measurement of the duration of intervention, the consumption of analgesics and hypnotics, and their pain and comfort using a validated visual analogue scale (VAS 0−10). Results: The baseline characteristics were comparable in both groups, including age. There were no differences in procedure duration (46 (±29) vs. 56 (±32) min, p = 0.18) or in hypnotic/antalgic consumption (midazolam 1.95 (±1.44) vs. 2.00 (±1.22) mg, p = 0.83; sufentanyl 3.78 (±2.87) vs. 3.58 (±2.48) μg, p = 0.9) between the control and VRH groups. In a multivariate analysis, the use of VRH was independently associated with lower comfort during the procedure assessed by postoperative visual analogue scale (OR 15.00 [95% CI 4.77−47.16], p < 0.01). There was no influence of VRH use on pain or drug consumption. Conclusions: In our experience, compared with VRH, human care is preferable during procedures in electrophysiology lab to improve the comfort of the patient. VRH has no influence on pain or drug consumption.
虚拟现实催眠(VRH)已成功应用于各种临床环境中,以减轻焦虑和疼痛感。我们旨在研究VRH在清醒镇静下接受电生理和起搏手术的患者中的可行性和安全性。方法:在两个月的时间里,25例接受电生理手术的患者接受并使用了VRH支持。将数据与在接下来三个月内纳入的对照组(n = 61)进行比较。两组均使用经过验证的视觉模拟量表(VAS 0-10)测量干预持续时间、镇痛药和催眠药的消耗量以及他们的疼痛和舒适度。结果:两组的基线特征具有可比性,包括年龄。对照组和VRH组在手术持续时间(46(±29)分钟对56(±32)分钟,p = 0.18)或催眠/镇痛药物消耗量(咪达唑仑1.95(±1.44)毫克对2.00(±1.22)毫克,p = 0.83;舒芬太尼3.78(±2.87)微克对3.58(±2.48)微克,p = 0.9)方面没有差异。在多变量分析中,使用VRH与术后视觉模拟量表评估的手术过程中较低的舒适度独立相关(OR 15.00 [95% CI 年4.77-47.16],p < 0.01)。VRH的使用对疼痛或药物消耗没有影响。结论:根据我们的经验,与VRH相比,在电生理实验室进行手术时,人工护理更有利于提高患者的舒适度。VRH对疼痛或药物消耗没有影响。