Exploring the perceptions of former ICU patients and clinical staff on barriers and facilitators to the implementation of virtual reality exposure therapy: A qualitative study.

Abstract

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. This study aimed to explore the perceived barriers and facilitators for the implementation of VR exposure therapy for intensive care patients and clinical staff. 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. 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. 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. 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.