Equity implications of extended reality technologies for health and procedural anxiety: a systematic review and implementation-focused framework.

IF 4.7 2区 医学 Q1 COMPUTER SCIENCE, INFORMATION SYSTEMS
Tom Arthur, Sophie Robinson, Samuel Vine, Lauren Asare, G J Melendez-Torres
{"title":"Equity implications of extended reality technologies for health and procedural anxiety: a systematic review and implementation-focused framework.","authors":"Tom Arthur, Sophie Robinson, Samuel Vine, Lauren Asare, G J Melendez-Torres","doi":"10.1093/jamia/ocaf047","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Extended reality (XR) applications are gaining support as a method of reducing anxieties about medical treatments and conditions; however, their impacts on health service inequalities remain underresearched. We therefore undertook a synthesis of evidence relating to the equity implications of these types of interventions.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Searches of MEDLINE, Embase, APA PsycINFO, and Epistemonikos were conducted in May 2023 to identify reviews of patient-directed XR interventions for health and procedural anxiety. Equity-relevant data were extracted from records (n = 56) that met these criteria, and from individual trials (n = 63) evaluated within 5 priority reviews. Analyses deductively categorized data into salient situation- and technology-related mechanisms, which were then developed into a novel implementation-focused framework.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Analyses highlighted various mechanisms that impact on the availability, accessibility, and/or acceptability of services aiming to reduce patient health and procedural anxieties. On one hand, results showed that XR solutions offer unique opportunities for addressing health inequities, especially those concerning transport, cost, or mobility barriers. At the same time, however, these interventions can accelerate areas of inequity or even engender additional disparities.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Our \"double jeopardy, common impact\" framework outlines unique pathways through which XR could help address health disparities, but also accelerate or even generate inequity across different systems, communities, and individuals. This framework can be used to guide prospective interventions and assessments.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Despite growing positive assertions about XR's capabilities for managing patient anxieties, we emphasize the need for taking a cautious, inclusive approach to implementation in future programs.</p>","PeriodicalId":50016,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jamia/ocaf047","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, INFORMATION SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: Extended reality (XR) applications are gaining support as a method of reducing anxieties about medical treatments and conditions; however, their impacts on health service inequalities remain underresearched. We therefore undertook a synthesis of evidence relating to the equity implications of these types of interventions.

Materials and methods: Searches of MEDLINE, Embase, APA PsycINFO, and Epistemonikos were conducted in May 2023 to identify reviews of patient-directed XR interventions for health and procedural anxiety. Equity-relevant data were extracted from records (n = 56) that met these criteria, and from individual trials (n = 63) evaluated within 5 priority reviews. Analyses deductively categorized data into salient situation- and technology-related mechanisms, which were then developed into a novel implementation-focused framework.

Results: Analyses highlighted various mechanisms that impact on the availability, accessibility, and/or acceptability of services aiming to reduce patient health and procedural anxieties. On one hand, results showed that XR solutions offer unique opportunities for addressing health inequities, especially those concerning transport, cost, or mobility barriers. At the same time, however, these interventions can accelerate areas of inequity or even engender additional disparities.

Discussion: Our "double jeopardy, common impact" framework outlines unique pathways through which XR could help address health disparities, but also accelerate or even generate inequity across different systems, communities, and individuals. This framework can be used to guide prospective interventions and assessments.

Conclusion: Despite growing positive assertions about XR's capabilities for managing patient anxieties, we emphasize the need for taking a cautious, inclusive approach to implementation in future programs.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association
Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association 医学-计算机:跨学科应用
CiteScore
14.50
自引率
7.80%
发文量
230
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: JAMIA is AMIA''s premier peer-reviewed journal for biomedical and health informatics. Covering the full spectrum of activities in the field, JAMIA includes informatics articles in the areas of clinical care, clinical research, translational science, implementation science, imaging, education, consumer health, public health, and policy. JAMIA''s articles describe innovative informatics research and systems that help to advance biomedical science and to promote health. Case reports, perspectives and reviews also help readers stay connected with the most important informatics developments in implementation, policy and education.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信