Abstract
Sedation protocols during spinal anesthesia often involve sedative drugs associated with complications. We investigated whether virtual reality (VR) distraction could be applied during endoscopic urologic surgery under spinal anesthesia and yield better satisfaction than pharmacologic sedation. VR distraction without sedative was compared with pharmacologic sedation using repeat doses of midazolam 1–2 mg every 30 min during urologic surgery under spinal anesthesia. We compared the satisfaction of patients, surgeons, and anesthesiologists, as rated on a 5-point prespecified verbal rating scale. Two surgeons and two anesthesiologists rated the scale and an overall score was reported after discussion. Thirty-seven patients were randomized to a VR group (n = 18) or a sedation group (n = 19). The anesthesiologist’s satisfaction score was significantly higher in the VR group than in the sedation group (median (interquartile range) 5 (5–5) vs. 4 (4–5), p = 0.005). The likelihood of both patients and anesthesiologists being extremely satisfied was significantly higher in the VR group than in the sedation group. Agreement between the scores for surgeons and those for anesthesiologists was very good (kappa = 0.874 and 0.944, respectively). The incidence of apnea was significantly lower in the VR group than in the sedation group (n = 1, 5.6% vs. n = 7, 36.8%, p = 0.042). The present findings suggest that VR distraction is better than drug sedation with midazolam in terms of patient’s and anesthesiologist’s satisfaction and avoiding the respiratory side effects of midazolam during endoscopic urologic surgery under spinal anesthesia.
Highlights
Virtual reality (VR) technology has been investigated for its clinical applications [1,2]
No patient in the virtual reality (VR) group asked to stop watching the VR program and no rescue medication was administered in either study group
The incidence of optimal patient, anesthesia and surgical conditions was significantly0.042 higher in the VR group than in the sedation group (n = 17, 94.4% in VR group vs. n = 13, 68.4% in the sedation group, p = 0.043, risk difference 0.17 (−0.08 to 0.42))
Summary
Virtual reality (VR) technology has been investigated for its clinical applications [1,2]. Studies have investigated the educational use of VR for simulation-based training [3,4,5,6,7]. VR has been evaluated as a non-pharmacological means of mitigating acute procedural pain and has been demonstrated to be effective for the attenuation of pain perception, anxiety, and general discomfort in both adults and children [1,8,9,10,11]. VR may distract patients from noisy, scary, and uncomfortable environments during surgery under spinal or regional anesthesia. A recent pilot study investigated whether immersive VR therapy can be used as an adjunctive nonpharmacolgic sedating strategy in patients who receive drug sedation with propofol [12] and found no significant difference in the propofol requirement between the groups, J.
Published Version (Free)
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have