When used as an add-on to regional anesthesia, virtual reality (VR) has been reported to provide anxiety-reducing benefits and sedation-sparing effects. However, its impact on patient satisfaction is still a matter of controversy. We investigated the feasibility and benefits of implementing intraoperative VR distraction in a French University Hospital (Hôpital Saint-Antoine, AP-HP). This monocentric observational before–after study included 100 patients who underwent ambulatory upper limb surgery under peripheral nerve block in January 2019, 50 before and 50 after implementation of an intraoperative VR distraction protocol. Primary outcome was patient self-rated satisfaction score evaluated right after surgery. Secondary outcomes included 2-month patient-reported satisfaction score, perioperative self-rated anxiety and intraoperative hemodynamic changes. Compared to former standard care, VR distraction was associated with significantly higher postoperative satisfaction scores (10 [IQR 9; 10] vs. 9 [8; 10], p < 0.001) still reported two months after surgery (10 [10;10] vs. 10 [8.5;10], p = 0.06). Patient median intraoperative anxiety score was lower in the VR group, compared to Standard Care group (0 [0; 2] vs. 3 [0.25; 7], p < 0.001), and occurrence of intraoperative hemodynamic changes was also lessened in the VR group (2% vs. 16%, 0R = 0.11[95% CI 0.002–0.87], p = 0.031). The present findings suggest that VR distraction program in the operating room could effectively improve patient satisfaction with anxiety-reduction and hemodynamic benefits.
Purpose
To evaluate the heterogeneity in the definition of delirium in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) included in meta-analyses of delirium in intensive care units (ICUs) and to explore whether intervention effect depends on the definition used.
Methods
We searched PubMed for meta-analyses including RCTs evaluating prevention or treatment strategies of delirium in ICU. The definition of delirium was collected from RCTs and classified as validated (DSM criteria, CAM-ICU, ICDSC, NEECHAM, DRS-R98) or non-validated (non-validated scales, set of symptoms, physician appreciation or not reported). We conducted a meta-epidemiological analysis to compare intervention effects between trials using or not a validated definition by a two-step method as primary analysis and a multilevel model as secondary analysis. A ratio of odds ratios (ROR) < 1 indicated larger intervention effects in trials using a non-validated definition.
Results
Of 149 RCTs (41 meta-analyses), 109 (73.1%) used a validated definition and 40 (26.8%) did not (including 31 [20.8%] not reporting the definition). The primary analysis of 7 meta-analyses (30 RCTs) found no significant difference in intervention effects between trials using a validated definition and the others (ROR = 0.54, 95% CI 0.27–1.08), whereas the secondary multilevel analysis including 12 meta-analyses (67 RCTs) found significantly larger effects for trials using a non-validated versus a validated definition (ROR = 0.36, 95% CI 0.21–0.62).
Conclusion
The definition of delirium was heterogeneous across RCTs, with one-fifth not reporting how they evaluated delirium. We did not find a significant association with intervention effect in the primary analysis. The secondary analysis including more studies revealed significantly larger intervention effects in trials using a non-validated versus a validated definition.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.