Emma Perenic, Emilie Grember, Sébastien Bassard, Nicolas Koutlidis
{"title":"Impact of virtual reality on pain management in transrectal MRI-guided prostate biopsy.","authors":"Emma Perenic, Emilie Grember, Sébastien Bassard, Nicolas Koutlidis","doi":"10.3389/fpain.2023.1156463","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The beneficial effect of virtual reality (VR) on pain management in the context of transrectal MRI-guided prostate biopsy is not well established. However, it remains unclear whether an adjunctive of VR also improves pain management. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of VR as adjunctive in pain management in transrectal MRI-guided prostate biopsy (PB).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We retrospectively evaluated the pain intensity incidence in the 153 patients with PB indication (of which 102 were naïve of PB) who were admitted to our hospital since the acquisition of the Healthy Mind virtual reality headset on 19 January 2021.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Baseline characteristics of patients who received local anesthesia with 1% lidocaine periprostatic nerve block (PPNB) (Group SOC, <i>N</i> = 78) and patients who received VR associated with PPNB (Group VR, <i>N</i> = 75) were largely similar. One PB with general anesthesia was excluded. The mean pain score at day zero was respectively 3.4 (±2.5) and 2.9 (±2.3) for SOC and VR (<i>p</i> = 0.203). However, the mean pain score at day zero was significantly lower in naïve PB patients with VR [2.7 (±2.0)] than in naïve PB patients with SOC [3.8 (±2.5), <i>p</i> = 0.012] when patients were stratified in PB status. Similar results were found on day 3 for the analysis including naïve-PB patients with SOC vs. with VR [0.4 (±2.5) vs. 0.2 (±2.0); <i>p</i> = 0.023)].</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The pain intensity was significantly lower in naïve PB patients with VR than in naïve PB patients with SOC. There were no side effects from VR and tolerability was excellent.</p>","PeriodicalId":73097,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland)","volume":"4 ","pages":"1156463"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10580802/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fpain.2023.1156463","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: The beneficial effect of virtual reality (VR) on pain management in the context of transrectal MRI-guided prostate biopsy is not well established. However, it remains unclear whether an adjunctive of VR also improves pain management. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of VR as adjunctive in pain management in transrectal MRI-guided prostate biopsy (PB).
Methods: We retrospectively evaluated the pain intensity incidence in the 153 patients with PB indication (of which 102 were naïve of PB) who were admitted to our hospital since the acquisition of the Healthy Mind virtual reality headset on 19 January 2021.
Results: Baseline characteristics of patients who received local anesthesia with 1% lidocaine periprostatic nerve block (PPNB) (Group SOC, N = 78) and patients who received VR associated with PPNB (Group VR, N = 75) were largely similar. One PB with general anesthesia was excluded. The mean pain score at day zero was respectively 3.4 (±2.5) and 2.9 (±2.3) for SOC and VR (p = 0.203). However, the mean pain score at day zero was significantly lower in naïve PB patients with VR [2.7 (±2.0)] than in naïve PB patients with SOC [3.8 (±2.5), p = 0.012] when patients were stratified in PB status. Similar results were found on day 3 for the analysis including naïve-PB patients with SOC vs. with VR [0.4 (±2.5) vs. 0.2 (±2.0); p = 0.023)].
Conclusions: The pain intensity was significantly lower in naïve PB patients with VR than in naïve PB patients with SOC. There were no side effects from VR and tolerability was excellent.