ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Virtual reality (VR) as a digital technology has developed rapidly, becoming more realistic, portable, sensory and easier to navigate. Although studies have found VR to be effective for many clinical applications, patients and clinicians have described several barriers to the successful implementation of this technology. To remove barriers for implementation of VR in health care, a greater understanding is needed of how VR can integrate into clinical environments, particularly complex settings such as an intensive care unit. AIM: This study aimed to explore the perceived barriers and facilitators for the implementation of VR exposure therapy for intensive care patients and clinical staff. STUDY DESIGN: A qualitative study using an Interpretative Description approach was undertaken. Semi-structured focus groups were conducted with 13 participants: nine patients and four health care professionals. Focus groups explored barriers and facilitators of using virtual reality (VR) exposure therapy in intensive care. Thematic analysis was employed to produce codes and themes. RESULTS: In total, eight themes describing the perceived barriers and facilitators to implementing VR exposure therapy were identified. Four themes related to the perceived barriers of implementing VR exposure therapy in intensive care were identified: psychological, sensory, environmental and staff competency and confidence. There were a further four themes related to the perceived facilitators to the implementation of VR exposure therapy: staff training, patient capacity, orientation to technology and support during the intervention. CONCLUSIONS: This study identified novel barriers and facilitators that could be expected when implementing VR exposure therapy for patients' post-intensive care unit stay. The findings suggest that psychological barriers of fear and apprehension were expected to provoke patient avoidance of exposure therapy. Perceived barriers for staff focused on preparedness to deliver the VR exposure therapy and a lack of technological competence. Both patients and staff stated that a comprehensive induction, orientation and training could facilitate VR exposure therapy, improving engagement. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: This study has identified that with appropriate staff training, resources, and integration into current patient care pathways, VR exposure therapy may be a valuable intervention to support patient recovery following critical illness. Prior to undertaking VR exposure therapy, patients often need reassurance that side-effects can be managed, and that they can easily control their virtual exposure experience.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: A wide range of reviews have demonstrated the effectiveness and tolerability of Virtual Reality (VR) in a range of clinical areas and subpopulations. However, no previous review has explored the current maturity, acceptability, tolerability, and effectiveness of VR with intensive care patients. AIMS: To identify the range of uses of VR for intensive care patients, classify their current phase of development, effectiveness, acceptability, and tolerability. METHODS: A scoping review was conducted. A multi-database search was undertaken (inception to January 2021). Any type of study which examined the use of VR with the target application population of intensive care patients were included. Screening, data extraction, and assessment of quality were undertaken by a single reviewer. A meta-analysis and a descriptive synthesis were undertaken. RESULTS: Six hundred and forty-seven records were identified, after duplicate removal and screening 21 studies were included (weak quality). The majority of studies for relaxation, delirium, and Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) were at the early stages of assessing acceptability, tolerability, and initial clinical efficacy. Virtual Reality for relaxation and delirium were well-tolerated with completion rates of target treatment of 73.6%, (95% CI:51.1%-96%, I2 = 98.52%) 52.7% (95% CI:52.7%-100%, I2 = 96.8%). The majority of reasons for non-completion were due to external clinical factors. There were some potential benefits demonstrated for the use of VR for relaxation, delirium, and sleep. CONCLUSION: Virtual Reality for intensive care is a new domain of research with the majority of areas of application being in the early stages of development. There is great potential for the use of VR in this clinical environment. Further robust assessment of effectiveness is required before any clinical recommendations can be made. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: Virtual reality for ICU patients is in its infancy and is not at a stage where it should be used as routine practice. However, there is early evidence to suggest that virtual reality interventions have good acceptability and tolerability in intensive care patients for relaxation, delirium, and improving sleep.
