Levit Tal, Grzela Patrick, Lavoie Declan C T, Wang Li, Agarwal Aashna, Couban Rachel J, Shanthanna Harsha
From the Michael G. DeGroote School of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Department of Anesthesia, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Anesth Analg. 2024 Aug 1. doi: 10.1213/ANE.0000000000007051.
Satisfactory management of postoperative pain remains challenging. Nonpharmacological modalities such as virtual and augmented reality (VR/AR) offer potential benefits and are becoming increasingly popular. This systematic review evaluates the effectiveness and safety of VR/AR interventions on postoperative pain and recovery.
MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Web of Science, and CENTRAL databases were searched from inception to July 27, 2023, for randomized controlled trials (RCTs), published in English, evaluating the use of VR/AR interventions for surgical pain relief. Study selection and data extraction were performed by pairs of reviewers independently and in duplicate, and potential risk of bias was determined using the Risk of Bias-version 2 (RoB 2) tool. Our outcomes included pain relief, reduction of anxiety, satisfaction, and adverse effects. Due to substantial heterogeneity, a narrative synthesis without meta-analysis was performed.
We included 35 trials among 2257 citations, categorized as surgery (n = 12), minor procedures (n = 15), and postoperative physiotherapy (n = 8). Surgical group included various surgeries, with 11 using immersive VR predominantly in the postoperative period, and most reporting no differences in pain, but potential for reduced anxiety and sedation requirements. In the minor procedures group, most studies reported decreased pain and anxiety during the procedural performance. Two studies reported increased heart rate, while 2 others reported better hemodynamic stability. Home-based AR physiotherapy achieved (n = 6) similar pain and functional outcomes after knee replacement, with 1 large study (n = 306) reporting reduction of mean costs by $2745 for provision of 12 weeks physiotherapy. There were some concerns around potential bias for most studies, as the nature of interventions make it challenging to blind assessors and participants. No important adverse effects were noted using VR/AR technology.
Evidence from RCTs indicates that the use of immersive VR during minor procedures may reduce procedural pain, decrease anxiety, and improve satisfaction. However, small studies, inconsistent effect, and variation in the application of interventions are important limitations. Evidence to support the application of AR/VR for major surgeries is limited and needs to be further investigated. Use of home-based physiotherapy with AR likely has economic advantages, and facilitates virtual care for appropriate patients who can access and use the technology safely.
术后疼痛的满意管理仍然具有挑战性。虚拟和增强现实(VR/AR)等非药物方法具有潜在益处,且越来越受欢迎。本系统评价评估了VR/AR干预对术后疼痛和恢复的有效性及安全性。
检索MEDLINE、Embase、CINAHL、Web of Science和CENTRAL数据库,检索时间从建库至2023年7月27日,查找以英文发表的评估VR/AR干预用于手术疼痛缓解的随机对照试验(RCT)。由两名 reviewers 独立且重复地进行研究选择和数据提取,并使用偏倚风险-第2版(RoB 2)工具确定潜在的偏倚风险。我们的结局包括疼痛缓解、焦虑减轻、满意度和不良反应。由于存在大量异质性,进行了无荟萃分析的叙述性综合分析。
我们在2257篇引文中纳入了35项试验,分为手术(n = 12)、小手术(n = 15)和术后物理治疗(n = 8)。手术组包括各种手术,其中11项主要在术后使用沉浸式VR,大多数报告疼痛无差异,但焦虑和镇静需求可能降低。在小手术组中,大多数研究报告在手术过程中疼痛和焦虑减轻。两项研究报告心率增加,另外两项研究报告血流动力学稳定性更好。基于家庭的AR物理治疗在膝关节置换术后取得了(n = 6)相似的疼痛和功能结局,一项大型研究(n = 306)报告提供12周物理治疗平均成本降低2745美元。由于干预的性质使得对评估者和参与者进行盲法评估具有挑战性,大多数研究存在一些潜在偏倚问题。使用VR/AR技术未发现重要不良反应。
RCT的证据表明,在小手术中使用沉浸式VR可能减轻手术疼痛、降低焦虑并提高满意度。然而,研究规模小、效果不一致以及干预应用的差异是重要局限性。支持在大手术中应用AR/VR的证据有限,需要进一步研究。使用基于家庭的AR物理治疗可能具有经济优势,并有助于为能够安全访问和使用该技术的合适患者提供虚拟护理。