Efficacy of Virtual Reality vs. Tablet Games for Pain and Anxiety in Children Undergoing Bone Pins Removal: Randomised Clinical Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: To verify the efficacy of virtual reality compared to tablet games for pain and anxiety management in children undergoing percutaneous bone pin and/or suture removal procedures. DESIGN: Randomised clinical trial using two parallel groups: (1) virtual reality or (2) tablet game. METHODS: Three-center, randomised pragmatic clinical trial, using a parallel design with two groups (experimental group: immersive virtual reality; active comparator: tablet games). Children aged 6-17 requiring percutaneous pins and/or sutures were recruited between 2020 and 2022 from three outpatient orthopaedic clinics in paediatric hospitals. Pain was measured with the Numerical Rating Scale and anxiety with the Child Fear Scale before and immediately after the procedure. RESULTS: A total of 188 participants were assigned to either the virtual reality group (96 participants) or the tablet group (92 participants). At the first assessment, there was no noticeable difference between the two groups in terms of pain or anxiety levels. However, further analysis revealed that participants aged 13 and older in the virtual reality group experienced significantly lower anxiety. CONCLUSION: Virtual reality was not more efficacious than games on a tablet for pain and anxiety of children undergoing removal of bone pins or sutures. However, virtual reality demonstrated a benefit in reducing anxiety for teenagers, particularly those aged 13-older. IMPLICATION FOR THE PROFESSIONAL AND/OR PATIENT CARE: Virtual reality games provide an immersive, non-pharmacological alternative of for anxiety management of teenagers during pins and/or sutures removal. IMPACT: This study showed that a virtual reality game may help reduce anxiety during pins and/or sutures removal procedures in patients aged 13 years and older. REPORTING METHOD: We adhered to the CONSORT checklist for reporting results. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: A patient partner reviewed the study design, methods and final manuscript. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03680625.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".