Purpose of reviewCommercial availability of virtual reality headsets and software has exponentially grown over the last decade as it has become more sophisticated, less expensive, and portable. Although primarily used by the general public for entertainment, virtual reality has been adopted by periprocedural clinicians to improve patient experiences and treatments. The purpose of this review is to explore recently reported evidence for virtual reality effectiveness for pediatric periprocedural care and discuss considerations for clinical implementation. Recent findingsIn the preprocedure setting, practitioners use virtual reality to introduce children to periprocedural environments, distract attention from preprocedural vascular access, and increase cooperation with anesthesia induction. Intraprocedure, virtual reality decreases sedation requirements, and in some instances, eliminates anesthesia for minor procedures. Virtual reality also augments pain reduction therapies in the acute and extended rehabilitation periods, resulting in faster recovery and improved outcomes. Virtual reality seems to be well treated for pediatric use, given close clinical care and carefully curated content. SummaryGiven the multiple clinical applications of virtual reality to supplement pediatric periprocedural care, practitioners should consider developing clinical programs that reliably provide access to virtual reality. Future research should focus on identification of patient characteristics and types of software that yield optimal patient outcomes.

Perioperative anxiety and distress are common in pediatric patients undergoing general anesthesia and increase the risk for immediate and long‐term postoperative complications. This concise review outlines key research and clinically‐relevant scales that measure pediatric perioperative affect. Strengths and weaknesses of each scale are highlighted. A literature review identified 11 articles with the following inclusion criteria: patients less than or equal to 18 years, perioperative anxiety or distress, and original studies with reliability or validity data. Although robust research‐based assessment tools to measure anxiety have been developed, such as the Modified Yale Preoperative Anxiety Scale, they are too complex and time‐consuming to complete by clinicians also providing anesthesia. Clinically‐based anxiety measurement scales tend to be easier to use, however they require further testing before widespread standard utilization. The HRAD ± scale (Happy, Relaxed, Anxious, Distressed, with a yes/no answer to cooperation) may be a promising observational anxiety scale that is efficient and includes an assessment of compliance. Further studies are needed to refine a clinically‐relevant anxiety assessment tool and appraise interventions that reduce perioperative distress.

No abstract

This qualitative study uses interview data to explore clinician perspectives on the function of multidisciplinary tumor boards beyond clinical decision-making.

No abstract