Virtual parental presence with coaching for reducing preoperative anxiety in children: a feasibility and pilot randomized controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Preoperative anxiety in children causes negative postoperative outcomes. Parental presence at induction is a non-pharmacological strategy for relieving anxiety; nevertheless, it is not always possible or effective, namely when parents are overly anxious. Parental presence via video has been demonstrated to be useful in other contexts (divorce, criminal court). This study reports the feasibility of a randomized controlled trial to investigate the effect of video parental presence and parental coaching at induction on preoperative anxiety. METHODS: The study was a randomized, 2 × 2 factorial design trial examining parental presence (virtual vs. physical) and coaching (provided vs. not provided). Feasibility was assessed by enrollment rate, attrition rate, compliance, and staff satisfaction with virtual method with the NASA-Task Load Index (NASA-TLX) and System Usability Scale (SUS). For the children's anxiety and postoperative outcomes, the modified Yale Preoperative Anxiety Scale (mYPAS) and Post-Hospitalization Behavioral Questionnaire (PHBQ) were used. Parental anxiety was evaluated with the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI) questionnaire. RESULTS: A total of 41 parent/patient dyads were recruited. The enrollment rate was 32.2%, the attrition rate 25.5%. Compliance was 87.8% for parents and 85% for staff. The SUS was 67.5/100 and 63.5/100 and NASA-TLX was 29.2 (21.5-36.8) and 27.6 (8.2-3.7) for the anesthesiologists and induction nurses, respectively. No statistically significant difference was found in mYPAS, PHBQ and STAI. CONCLUSION: A randomized controlled trial to explore virtual parental presence effect on preoperative anxiety is feasible. Further studies are needed to investigate its role and the role of parent coaching in reducing preoperative anxiety.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".