Search

Purpose: Non-pharmacologic adjuncts to opioid analgesics for burn wound debridement enhance safety and cost effectiveness in care. The current study explored the feasibility of using a custom portable water-friendly immersive VR hardware during burn debridement in adults, and tested whether interactive VR would reduce pain more effectively than nature stimuli viewed in the same VR goggles., Methods: Forty-eight patients with severe burn injuries (44 adults and 4 children) had their burn injuries debrided and dressed in a wet wound care environment on Study Day 1, and 13 also participated in Study Day 2., Intervention: The study used a within-subject design to test two hypotheses (one hypothesis per study day) with the condition order randomized. On Study Day 1, each individual (n = 44 participants) spent 5 min of wound care in an interactive immersive VR environment designed for burn care, and 5 min looking at still nature photos and sounds of nature in the same VR goggles. On Study Day 2 (n = 12 adult participants and one adolescent from Day 1), each participant spent 5 min of burn wound care with no distraction and 5 min of wound care in VR, using a new water-friendly VR system. On both days, during a post-wound care assessment, participants rated and compared the pain they had experienced in each condition. OUTCOME MEASURES ON STUDY DAYS 1 AND 2: Worst pain during burn wound care was the primary dependent variable. Secondary measures were ratings of time spent thinking about pain during wound care, pain unpleasantness, and positive affect during wound care., Results: On Study Day 1, no significant differences in worst pain ratings during wound care were found between the computer-generated world (Mean = 71.06, SD = 26.86) vs. Nature pictures conditions (Mean = 68.19, SD = 29.26; t < 1, NS). On secondary measures, positive affect (fun) was higher, and realism was lower during computer-generated VR. No significant differences in pain unpleasantness or "presence in VR" between the two conditions were found, however. VR VS. NO VR. (STUDY DAY 2): Participants reported significantly less worst pain when distracted with adjunctive computer generated VR than during standard wound care without distraction (Mean = 54.23, SD = 26.13 vs 63.85, SD = 31.50, t(11) = 1.91, p < .05, SD = 17.38). In addition, on Study Day 2, "time spent thinking about pain during wound care" was significantly less during the VR condition, and positive affect was significantly greater during VR, compared to the No VR condition., Conclusion: The current study is innovative in that it is the first to show the feasibility of using a custom portable water-friendly immersive VR hardware during burn debridement in adults. However, contrary to predictions, interactive VR did not reduce pain more effectively than nature stimuli viewed in the same VR goggles., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Ltd and International Society of Burns Injuries. All rights reserved.)

This randomized, controlled trial tested the impact that hypnosis delivered through immersive virtual reality technology on background pain, anxiety, opioid use, and hospital length of stay in a sample of patients hospitalized for trauma. Participants were randomly assigned to receive either virtual-reality-induced hypnosis, virtual reality for distraction, or usual care during the course of their hospitalization. Mean number of treatment sessions was 3. A total of 153 patients participated in the study. Results indicated no significant differences between the experimental and control conditions on any outcome measures. This study used an early version of virtual reality technology to induce hypnosis and highlighted several important lessons about the challenges of implementation of this technology and how to improve its use in clinical settings.

Pain from burn injuries is among the most excruciating encountered in clinical practice. Pharmacological methods often fail to achieve acceptable level of analgesia in these patients, especially during burn wound dressing and debridement. Virtual reality (VR) distraction is a promising analgesic technique that progressed significantly in the last decade with development of commercially available, low-cost, high-resolution, wide field-of-view, standalone VR devices that can be used in many clinical scenarios. VR has demonstrated clinical benefit as an adjunctive analgesic during burn wound dressing and other painful medical procedures. The technique has proven useful also in preparing patients for magnetic resonance imaging scans, particularly in claustrophobic patients. Modulation of pain-related brain activity at cortical and subcortical levels by VR, and its correlation with subjective improvement in various laboratory and clinical pain experiences has been demonstrated using multiple functional brain imaging studies including functional magnetic resonance imaging and brain perfusion single photon emission computed tomography.

Objective: We conducted a randomized controlled study to determine the effects of virtual reality (VR) distraction on pain and range of motion (ROM) in patients hospitalized for burn care during active physical therapy exercises., Method: Thirty-nine participants aged 15 to 66 (M = 36) years with significant burn injuries (mean burn size = 14% TBSA) participated. Under therapist supervision, using a within-subjects design, participants performed unassisted active ROM exercises both with and without VR distraction in a randomized order. Therapists provided participants with instructions but did not physically assist with stretches. Maximum active ROM was measured using a goniometer. A 0-100 Graphic Rating Scale (GRS) was used to assess the cognitive, affective, and sensory components of pain. A GRS rating of the amount of "fun" during stretching served as a measure of positive experience., Results: Participants reported lower mean GRS ratings during VR, relative to No VR, for worst pain, pain unpleasantness, and time spent thinking about pain. They also reported having a more positive experience during VR than during No VR. However, patients did not show greater ROM during VR., Conclusion: Immersive VR reduced pain during ROM exercises that were under the control of the patient. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2018 APA, all rights reserved).

This pilot study explored the feasibility of using ketamine to increase hypnotizability scores. Ketamine, classified as a dissociative hallucinogen, is used clinically as an anesthetic in high doses and as a treatment for chronic pain and depression in lower doses. Low-dose ketamine can contribute to dissociation and heightened perceptions and feelings of detachment, arguably hypnotic-like states. The authors predicted that a low dose of ketamine in healthy volunteers who scored in the low hypnotizable range on the Stanford Clinical Hypnotizability Scale would (a) cause an increase in subjective ratings of dissociation and (b) lead to an increase in hypnotizability. The findings were in the predicted direction, warranting further investigation into the use of this agent to increase hypnotizability. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This case report describes the use of hypnotic analgesia induced through immersive three-dimensional computer-generated virtual reality, better known as virtual reality hypnosis (VRH)0 in the treatment of a patient with ongoing pain associated with gluteal hidradenitis. The patient participated in the study for two consecutive days while hospitalized at a regional trauma centre. At pretreatment, she reported severe pain intensity and unpleasantness as welt as high levels of anxiety and nervousness. She was then administered two sessions of virtual reality hypnotic treatment for decreased pain and anxiety. The patient's ratings of 'time spent thinking about pain', pain intensity, 'unpleasantness of pain', and anxiety decreased from before to after each daily VRH session, as well as from Day One to Day Two.The findings indicate that VRH may benefit individuals with severe, ongoing pain from a chronic condition, and that a controlled clinical trial examining its efficacy is warranted. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The pain associated with burn injuries is intense, unremitting and often exacerbated by anxiety, depression and other complicating patient factors. On top of this, modern burn care involves the repetitive performance — often on a daily basis for weeks to months — of painful and anxiety-provoking procedures that create additional treatment-related pain, such as wound care, dressing changes and rehabilitation activities. Pain management in burn patients is primarily achieved by potent pharmacologic techniques, including distraction or hypnosis. Immersive virtual reality provides a particularly intense form of cognitive distraction or hypnosis. Immersive virtual reality provides a particularly intense form of cognitive distraction during such brief, painful procedures, and has undergone preliminary study by several research groups treating burn patients over the past decade. Initial reports from these groups are consistent in suggesting that immersive virtual reality is logistically feasible, safe and effective in ameliorating the pain and anxiety experienced in various settings of post-burn pain. Furthermore, the technique appears applicable to a wide age range of patients and may be particularly well-adapted for use in children, one of the most challenging populations of burn victims to treat. However, confirmation and extension of these results in larger numbers of patients in various types of burn-related pain is necessary to more clearly define the specific benefits and limitations of virtual reality analgesia in the burn care setting. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Immersive Virtual Reality (VR) distraction can be used in addition to traditional opioids to reduce procedural pain. The current study explored whether a High-Tech-VR helmet (ie, a 60-degree field-of-view head-mounted display) reduces pain more effectively than a Low-Tech-VR helmet (a 35-degree field-of-view head-mounted display). Using a double-blind between-groups design, 77 healthy volunteers (no patients) aged 18-23 were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 groups. Each subject received a brief baseline thermal pain stimulus, and the same stimulus again minutes later while in SnowWorld using a Low-Tech-VR helmet (Group 1), using a High-Tech-VR helmet (Group 2), or receiving no distraction (Group 3, control group). Each participant provided subjective 0-10 ratings of cognitive, sensory, and affective components of pain, and amount of fun during the pain stimulus. Compared to the Low-Tech-VR helmet group, subjects in the High-Tech-VR helmet group reported 34% more reduction in worst pain (P < .05), 46% more reduction in pain unpleasantness (P = .001), 29% more reduction in “time spent thinking about pain” (P < .05), and 32% more fun during the pain stimulus in VR (P < .05). Only 29% of participants in the Low-Tech helmet group, as opposed to 65% of participants in the High-Tech-VR helmet group, showed a clinically significant reduction in pain intensity during virtual reality. These results highlight the importance of using an appropriately designed VR helmet to achieve effective VR analgesia (see www.vrpain.com). Perspective: Pain during medical procedures (eg, burn wound care) is often excessive. Adjunctive virtual reality distraction can substantially reduce procedural pain. The results of the present study show that a higher quality VR helmet was more effective at reducing pain than a lower quality VR helmet. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Excessive pain during medical procedures performed in unanesthetized patients is frequently reported, but can be reduced with virtual reality (VR) distraction. Increasing the person''s illusion of going into the virtual world may increase how effectively VR distracts pain. Healthy volunteers aged 18–20 years participated in a double-blind between-groups design. Each subject received a brief baseline thermal pain stimulus, and the same stimulus again minutes later with either a Low Tech or a High Tech VR distraction. Each subject provided subjective 0–10 ratings of cognitive, sensory and affective components of pain, and rated their illusion of going inside the virtual world. Subjects in the High Tech VR group reported a stronger illusion of going into the virtual world (VR presence) than subjects in the Low Tech VR group, (4.2 vs. 2.5, respectively, P=0.009) and more pain reduction (reduction of worst pain is 3.1 for High Tech VR vs. 0.7 for Low Tech VR, P<0.001). Across groups, the amount of pain reduction was positively and significantly correlated with VR presence levels reported by subjects (r=0.48 for ‘worst pain’, P<0.005). [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Recent research suggests that entering an immersive virtual environment can serve as a powerful nonpharmacologic analgesic for severe burn pain. The present case study describes an attempt to use water-friendly virtual reality (VR) technology with a burn patient undergoing wound care in a hydrotherapy tub. The patient was a 40-year-old male with 19% total body surface area deep flame/flash burns to his legs, neck, back, and buttocks. The virtual reality treatment decreased the patient's sensory and affective pain ratings and decreased the amount of time spent thinking about his pain during wound care. We believe that VR analgesia works by drawing attention away from the wound care, leaving less attention available to process incoming pain signals. The water-friendly VR helmet dramatically increases the number of patients with severe burns that could potentially be treated with VR (see http://www.vrpain.com). © 2003 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Clin Psychol/In Session. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A custom display was built into the MR radiofrequency headcoil to project high-resolution, wide field-of-view stereographic images. Advanced stimulus presentation technologies such as the one described could potentially contribute to a better understanding of the relation between what people are thinking or experiencing, and their associated patterns of brain activity (www.vrpain.com). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study explored the novel use of immersive virtual environments as a nonpharmacologic pain control technique and whether it works for both men and women. Fourteen female and 8 male students underwent pain induced via a blood pressure cuff ischemia lasting 10 min or less. Pain ratings increased significantly every 2 min during the no distraction phase (0 to 8 min) and dropped dramatically during the last 2 min period when participants were in the virtual environment (a 59% drop for women and a 41% drop for men). Five visual analog pain scores for each treatment condition served as the primary dependent variables. All 22 participants reported a drop in pain in the virtual environment, and the magnitude of pain reduction from the virtual environment was large (a 52% drop) and statistically significant. This is the first study to show immersive virtual environment distraction is also effective for women. The results show that virtual environments can function as a strong nonpharmacologic pain reduction technique, showing the same pattern of results obtained from recent clinical studies using virtual environments with burn patients during physical therapy. Practical applications of virtual environment pain reduction, and the value of a multidisciplinary approach to studying pain are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Scientific evidence for the viability of hypnosis as a treatment for pain has flourished over the past two decades (Rainville, Duncan, Price, Carrier and Bushnell, 1997; Montgomery, DuHamel and Redd, 2000; Lang and Rosen, 2002; Patterson and Jensen, 2003). However its widespread use has been limited by factors such as the advanced expertise, time and effort required by clinicians to provide hypnosis, and the cognitive effort required by patients to engage in hypnosis. The theory in developing virtual reality hypnosis was to apply three-dimensional, immersive, virtual reality technology to guide the patient through the same steps used when hypnosis is induced through an interpersonal process. Virtual reality replaces many of the stimuli that the patients have to struggle to imagine via verbal cueing from the therapist. The purpose of this paper is to explore how virtual reality may be useful in delivering hypnosis, and to summarize the scientific literature to date. We will also explore various theoretical and methodological issues that can guide future research. In spite of the encouraging scientific and clinical findings, hypnosis for analgesia is not universally used in medical centres. One reason for the slow acceptance is the extensive provider training required in order for hypnosis to be an effective pain management modality. Training in hypnosis is not commonly offered in medical schools or even psychology graduate curricula. Another reason is that hypnosis requires far more time and effort to administer than an analgesic pill or injection. Hypnosis requires training, skill and patience to deliver in medical centres that are often fast-paced and highly demanding of clinician time. Finally, the attention and cognitive effort required for hypnosis may be more than patients in an acute care setting, who may be under the influence of opiates and benzodiazepines, are able to impart. It is a challenge to make hypnosis a standard part of care in this environment. Over the past 25 years, researchers have been investigating ways to make hypnosis more standardized and accessible. There have been a handful of studies that have looked at the efficacy of using audiotapes to provide the hypnotic intervention (Johnson and Wiese, 1979; Hart, 1980; Block, Ghoneim, Sum Ping and Ali, 1991; Enqvist, Bjorklund, Engman and Jakobsson, 1997; Eberhart, Doring, Holzrichter, Roscher and Seeling, 1998; Perugini, Kirsch, Allen, et al., 1998; Forbes, MacAuley, Chiotakakou-Faliakou, 2000; Ghoneim, Block, Sarasin, Davis and Marchman, 2000). These studies have yielded mixed results. Generally, we can conclude that audio-taped hypnosis is more effective than no treatment at all, but less effective than the presence of a live hypnotherapist. Grant and Nash (1995) were the first to use computer-assisted hypnosis as a behavioural measure to assess hypnotizability. They used a digitized voice that guided subjects through a procedure and tailored software according to the subject's unique responses and reactions. However, it utilized conventional two-dimensional screen technology that required patients to focus their attention on a computer screen, making them vulnerable to any type of distraction that might enter the environment. Further, the two-dimensional technology did not present compelling visual stimuli for capturing the user's attention. Copyright © 2009 British Society of Experimental & Clinical Hypnosis. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: This randomized, controlled, within-subjects (crossover design) study examined the effects of immersive virtual reality as an adjunctive analgesic technique for hospitalized pediatric burn inpatients undergoing painful physical therapy. Fifty-four subjects (6–19 years old) performed range-of-motion exercises under a therapist''s direction for 1–5 days. During each session, subjects spent equivalent time in both the virtual reality and the control conditions (treatment order randomized and counterbalanced). Graphic rating scale scores assessing the sensory, affective, and cognitive components of pain were obtained for each treatment condition. Secondary outcomes assessed subjects’ perception of the virtual reality experience and maximum range-of-motion. Results showed that on study day one, subjects reported significant decreases (27–44%) in pain ratings during virtual reality. They also reported improved affect (“fun”) during virtual reality. The analgesia and affect improvements were maintained with repeated virtual reality use over multiple therapy sessions. Maximum range-of-motion was not different between treatment conditions, but was significantly greater after the second treatment condition (regardless of treatment order). These results suggest that immersive virtual reality is an effective nonpharmacologic, adjunctive pain reduction technique in the pediatric burn population undergoing painful rehabilitation therapy. The magnitude of the analgesic effect is clinically meaningful and is maintained with repeated use. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]