Virtual reality simulation in reducing discomfort and pain during intrauterine device insertion: a randomized controlled trial.

Sander Dumont, Ann-Sophie Page, Kobe Dewilde, Jolien Ceusters, Ben Van Calster, Wouter Froyman, Dirk Timmerman
{"title":"Virtual reality simulation in reducing discomfort and pain during intrauterine device insertion: a randomized controlled trial.","authors":"Sander Dumont, Ann-Sophie Page, Kobe Dewilde, Jolien Ceusters, Ben Van Calster, Wouter Froyman, Dirk Timmerman","doi":"10.1016/j.contraception.2025.110939","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>This study aimed to assess the patient-reported overall experience when using virtual reality (VR) simulation during intrauterine device (IUD) insertion (primary), the impact of VR in reducing pain, on patient satisfaction, and to assess the difficulty and success of the procedure utilizing VR (secondary).</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>This was a single-center randomized controlled trial in a Belgian tertiary teaching hospital. Two hundred participants, requesting a levonorgestrel-releasing IUD, were 1:1 computer randomized in either the VR group, where participants wore VR goggles, or in the standard-of-care group. The primary outcome is the patient's overall experience assessed by means of a Visual Analog Scale (VAS; 0-100 mm, continuous, higher is better). A Numeric Pain Rating Scale (0-100, continuous, higher is more pain) was used to address pain during insertion.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In the VR group, 95 participants were included (five were excluded due to failed previous IUD extraction), and in the standard-of-care group, 100 participants were included. There is no evidence for differences in general patient experience (median VAS 72 [intervention] vs 70 [control]; odds ratio [OR] 1.22, 95% CI 0.92-1.61) or pain (median Numeric Pain Rating Scale 50 [intervention] vs 45 [control]; OR 1.04, 95% CI 0.79-1.37) between groups. After 6 weeks, VR-patients reported no evidence for improved general experience (median VAS 70 [intervention] vs 74 [control]; OR 1.09, 95% CI 0.83-1.43) and were less likely to repeat the procedure or recommend it compared to the control group (OR 2.03, 95% CI 1.17-3.56).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>VR simulation does not conclusively alter the overall experience or reduce pain, therefore not reducing discomfort during IUD insertion in this randomized controlled trial.</p><p><strong>Implications: </strong>Although VR has already been successfully used in the management of acute pain or during procedures, this study cannot demonstrate improved patient-reported outcomes during the insertion of a levonorgestrel-containing IUD.</p>","PeriodicalId":93955,"journal":{"name":"Contraception","volume":" ","pages":"110939"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Contraception","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.contraception.2025.110939","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: This study aimed to assess the patient-reported overall experience when using virtual reality (VR) simulation during intrauterine device (IUD) insertion (primary), the impact of VR in reducing pain, on patient satisfaction, and to assess the difficulty and success of the procedure utilizing VR (secondary).

Study design: This was a single-center randomized controlled trial in a Belgian tertiary teaching hospital. Two hundred participants, requesting a levonorgestrel-releasing IUD, were 1:1 computer randomized in either the VR group, where participants wore VR goggles, or in the standard-of-care group. The primary outcome is the patient's overall experience assessed by means of a Visual Analog Scale (VAS; 0-100 mm, continuous, higher is better). A Numeric Pain Rating Scale (0-100, continuous, higher is more pain) was used to address pain during insertion.

Results: In the VR group, 95 participants were included (five were excluded due to failed previous IUD extraction), and in the standard-of-care group, 100 participants were included. There is no evidence for differences in general patient experience (median VAS 72 [intervention] vs 70 [control]; odds ratio [OR] 1.22, 95% CI 0.92-1.61) or pain (median Numeric Pain Rating Scale 50 [intervention] vs 45 [control]; OR 1.04, 95% CI 0.79-1.37) between groups. After 6 weeks, VR-patients reported no evidence for improved general experience (median VAS 70 [intervention] vs 74 [control]; OR 1.09, 95% CI 0.83-1.43) and were less likely to repeat the procedure or recommend it compared to the control group (OR 2.03, 95% CI 1.17-3.56).

Conclusions: VR simulation does not conclusively alter the overall experience or reduce pain, therefore not reducing discomfort during IUD insertion in this randomized controlled trial.

Implications: Although VR has already been successfully used in the management of acute pain or during procedures, this study cannot demonstrate improved patient-reported outcomes during the insertion of a levonorgestrel-containing IUD.

虚拟现实模拟在减少宫内节育器插入时的不适和疼痛:一项随机对照试验。
目的:评估患者报告的在子宫内节育器(IUD)插入过程中使用虚拟现实(VR)模拟的总体体验(主要),VR在减轻疼痛方面的影响,对患者满意度的影响,以及评估使用VR的过程的难度和成功(次要)。研究设计:在比利时某三级教学医院进行单中心随机对照试验。200名要求使用左炔诺孕酮释放宫内节育器的参与者被1:1的计算机随机分为VR组(参与者戴着VR护目镜)和标准护理组。主要结果是通过视觉模拟量表(VAS)评估患者的整体体验(0-100mm,连续,越高越好)。使用数字疼痛评定量表(NPRS)(0-100,连续,越高越痛)来解决插入过程中的疼痛。结果:在VR组中,95名参与者(5名因先前宫内节育器取出失败而被排除在外),在标准护理100名参与者中。没有证据表明一般患者体验有差异(干预组VAS中位数为72,对照组为70;优势比[OR] 1.22, 95%可信区间[CI] 0.92-1.61)或疼痛(干预组中位NPRS为50,对照组为45;OR 1.04, 95%CI 0.79-1.37)。6周后,vr患者报告没有改善一般体验的证据(VAS中值70[干预]vs. 74[对照组];OR 1.09, 95%CI 0.83-1.43),与对照组相比,重复手术或推荐手术的可能性更小(OR 2.03, 95%CI 1.17-3.56)。结论:在这项随机对照试验中,VR模拟并不能决定性地改变整体体验或减轻疼痛,因此不能减少宫内节育器插入过程中的不适。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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