S929 Assessment of Virtual Reality on Pain and Anxiety at an Infusion Clinic Setting in Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Pilot Acceptability Study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Introduction: Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD) is a chronic relapsing and remitting inflammatory condition of the bowel lumen. While abdominal pain is most severe when acute inflammation is present, many patients with IBD in endoscopic remission continue to have abdominal pain. Psychological conditions like anxiety may exacerbate symptoms and cause more frequent flares, leading to increased hospitalizations. Non-pharmacological methods such as virtual reality (VR) have been shown to decrease pain and anxiety in inpatient settings. While there has been support of VR in IBD patients in an clinic setting, no studies have assessed the use of VR in IBD patients at infusion centers, an important aspect of IBD management. If VR can improve both pain and anxiety, then it may lead to improved health outcomes. Methods: This is a prospective, single-center, paired-sample study of adult patients with IBD, where pain and anxiety were measured before and after their regular infusion clinic appointment, with the use of VR on their following infusion appointment. At the end of the study, there was an assessment of the feasibility of VR for future encounters. Anxiety was measured using the Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI), and pain was measured using the Short-Form McGill Pain Questionnaire (SF-MPQ). The VR headset included immersive options such as guided meditations and deep sea diving, and prohibited content that would cause potential distress. Paired sample t-tests were utilized to compare any differences in pain or anxiety during their infusion therapy, with and without use of virtual reality. Results: In this pilot study, we report data of 14 adult patients with IBD (57% Crohn’s Disease, 43% Ulcerative Colitis). Mean age was 42.07 years. Demographic, BAI, SF-MPQ, and VR feasibility data are shown in Table (Table). Conclusion: While preliminary analyses show VR had no significant change in BAI (t = -0.244, p-value = 0.405) and SF-MPQ (t = -0.336, p-value = 0.371), participants reported positive experiences with VR. Patients rated their experience an average of 7.79 on a scale of 1 to 9. 71% of patients reported they would like to use VR during future appointments. These finding support the acceptability of VR in an infusion clinic setting, and provide a framework for further assessment of pain and anxiety in future larger randomized control trials. Table 1. - VR IBD Group Data Age Mean 42.07 years Sex • Male • Female 8 (57%)6 (43%) IBD Type • Crohn’s Disease • Ulcerative Colitis 8 (57%)6 (43%) Infusion Medication • Infliximab • Vedolizumab 7 (50%)7 (50%) Percent of Time with VR During Infusion • Total • Infliximab • Vedolizumab Mean: 74%Mean: 50%Mean: 98% Chronic Opioid Use 2 (14%) Pharmacologic Therapy for Anxiety 4 (29%) Nonprescription Therapy for Anxiety/Pain 5 (36%) Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI) t = -0.244, p-value = 0.405 Short Form McGill Pain Questionnaire (SF-MPQ) t = -0.336, p-value = 0.371 Would Like to Use VR During Future Appointments 10 (71%) Rate Your Experience1 (Dislike) to 5 (Indifferent) to 9 (Enjoyed) Mean: 7.79 Infusion Experience Felt Faster with VR 12 (86%) Forgot was in Infusion Clinic with VR 3 (21%)
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,005 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».