Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 15, 2025
The use of Biofeedback in Clinical Virtual Reality: The INTREPID Project
Published on: November 12, 2009
3-Dimensional Virtual Reality Versus 2-Dimensional Video for Distraction During the Induction of Anesthesia in
Sarah Samnakay1,2, Britta S von Ungern-Sternberg1,2,3,4, Daisy Evans1,2,3,5
1From the Perioperative Medicine Team, Perioperative Care Program, Telethon Kids Institute, Perth, Western Australia, Australia.
Background:
Preoperative anxiety is common in children. It can contribute to negative experiences with anesthetic induction and may cause adverse physiological and psychological effects. Virtual reality (VR) and electronic tablet devices are 2 audiovisual distraction tools that may help to reduce anxiety and enhance the preoperative experience. This study aimed to compare the use of an immersive 3-dimensional (3D) VR to 2-dimensional (2D) video on anxiety in children during induction of general anesthesia.
Methods:
Two hundred children (4-13 years) undergoing elective or emergency surgery under general anesthesia were enrolled in this randomized, controlled trial. Participants were randomized to use either the 3D VR goggles (intervention) or 2D video tablet (control) during anesthetic induction. Anxiety, the primary outcome, was measured using the modified Yale Preoperative Anxiety Scale Short Form (mYPAS-SF) at 2 time points: in the preoperative holding area before randomization (T1) and during induction of general anesthesia (T2). The primary outcome was analyzed using a linear regression model, including demographic and other covariates, to investigate any differences in anxiety scores. Secondary outcomes included evaluating compliance during the anesthetic induction (Induction Compliance Checklist), emergence of delirium (Cornell Assessment of Pediatric Delirium), perceived usefulness of the device, and child satisfaction.
Results:
Participant characteristics were similar between the 3D VR (n = 98) and 2D video (n = 90) groups, with a mean (±standard deviation) age 8. 8 ± 2.8 years. The median (lower quartile, upper quartile) mYPAS-SF scores for the 3D VR group at the preoperative holding area were 22.9 (22.9, 35.4), then 29.2 (24.0, 41.7) during induction. For the 2D Video group, the scores were 27.1 (22.9, 35.4) and then 30.2 (22.9, 41.1). No significant difference was observed in the increase in mYPAS-SF scores between groups ( P = .672). Children in the 3D VR group were less likely to be rated as having a perfect induction ( P = .039). There was no evidence of a difference between the groups in emergence delirium. Both devices were rated highly for usefulness and patient satisfaction. Children preferred VR, while anesthesiologists and parents felt the 2D was more useful.
Conclusions:
This randomized controlled trial demonstrated that preoperative anxiety was equally low and induction compliance high with both 3D VR and 2D video distraction in children with parental presence during anesthetic induction.
