Does virtual reality in the preoperative setting for colorectal cancer surgery improve patient understanding? A randomized pilot study.

colorectal cancer patient education virtual reality

Journal

ANZ journal of surgery

ISSN: 1445-2197

Titre abrégé: ANZ J Surg

Pays: Australia

ID NLM: 101086634

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
Mar 2024

Historique:

revised: 29 10 2023

received: 27 04 2023

accepted: 08 11 2023

pubmed: 23 11 2023

medline: 23 11 2023

entrez: 23 11 2023

Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Virtual reality (VR) enhanced radiology could help improve communication with colorectal cancer patients and therefore increase understanding in the perioperative setting. The objective of this pilot trial is to assess the feasibility of conducting a randomized control trial in terms of recruitment, use and acceptability of the VR technology and validity of data collection methods. A prospective, single-centre randomized control trial was conducted at St John of God Midland Hospital in Western Australia from November to December 2021. After standard informed consent with their surgeon, elective patients planned for resection of colorectal cancer were randomized to either 'standard consent' (shown computed tomography (CT) images only) or 'VR consent' (shown CT images and immersive VR models). Nine patients were recruited (four control; five intervention). There was a trend towards improved patient reported understanding without reaching statistical significance. Most patients preferred the use of VR as compared to CT as an educational tool during the consent process (P = 0.03). There were no adverse effects. VR was well tolerated and patients enjoyed using the technology. Its use in an outpatient clinic setting for elective colorectal cancer surgery is feasible. Improvement in patient understanding using VR compared to standard consent processes in colorectal surgery should be tested in a statistically powered, high quality study design.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND

METHODS METHODS

A prospective, single-centre randomized control trial was conducted at St John of God Midland Hospital in Western Australia from November to December 2021. After standard informed consent with their surgeon, elective patients planned for resection of colorectal cancer were randomized to either 'standard consent' (shown computed tomography (CT) images only) or 'VR consent' (shown CT images and immersive VR models).

RESULTS RESULTS

Nine patients were recruited (four control; five intervention). There was a trend towards improved patient reported understanding without reaching statistical significance. Most patients preferred the use of VR as compared to CT as an educational tool during the consent process (P = 0.03). There were no adverse effects.

CONCLUSION CONCLUSIONS

VR was well tolerated and patients enjoyed using the technology. Its use in an outpatient clinic setting for elective colorectal cancer surgery is feasible. Improvement in patient understanding using VR compared to standard consent processes in colorectal surgery should be tested in a statistically powered, high quality study design.

Identifiants

DOI: 10.1111/ans.18787 PMID: 37994285

pubmed: 37994285

doi: 10.1111/ans.18787

doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

Pagination

391-396

Informations de copyright

Références

Kreps GL. Promoting patient comprehension of relevant health information. Isr. J. Health Policy Res. 2018; 7: 56.

Falagas ME, Korbila IP, Giannopoulou KP, Kondilis BK, Peppas G. Informed consent: how much and what do patients understand? Am. J. Surg. 2009; 198: 420-435.

Bossema ER, Marijnen CAM, Baas-Thijssen MCM, van de Velde CJH, Stiggelbout AM. Evaluation of the treatment tradeoff method in rectal cancer patients: is surgery preference related to outcome utilities? Med. Decis. Making 2008; 28: 888-898.

Solomon MJ, Pager CK, Keshava A et al. What do patients want? Patient preferences and surrogate decision making in the treatment of colorectal cancer. Dis. Colon Rectum 2003; 46: 1351-1357.

Hack TF, Degner LF, Watson P, Sinha L. Do patients benefit from participating in medical decision making? Longitudinal follow-up of women with breast cancer. Psychooncology 2006; 15: 9-19.

Cohn E, Larson E. Improving participant comprehension in the informed consent process. J. Nurs. Scholarsh. 2007; 39: 273-280.

What is virtual reality? [Cited 13 Dec 2021.] Available from URL: https://www.vrs.org.uk/virtual-reality/what-is-virtual-reality.html.

Shepherd T, Trinder M, Theophilus M. Does virtual reality in the perioperative setting for patient education improve understanding? A scoping review. Surg. Pract. Sci. 2022; 10: 100101.

Hota S, Parascandola S, Graham A et al. Patient education in colorectal surgery through virtual reality. Dis. Colon Rectum. 2020; 63: E220.

Eldridge SMCC, Campbell MJ, Bond CM et al. CONSORT 2010 statement: extension to randomised pilot and feasibility trials. BMJ 2016; 355: i5239.

Pandrangi V, Gaston B, Appelbaum NP, Albuquerque FC, Levy MM, Larson R. Application of virtual reality in patient education. J. Am. Coll. Surg. 2018; 227: E246.

Harris PATR, Thielke R, Payne J, Gonzalez N, Conde JG. Research electronic data capture (REDCap) - a metadata-driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support. J. Biomed. Inform. 2009; 42: 377-381.

Tavakol M, Dennick R. Making sense of Cronbach's alpha. Int. J. Med. Educ. 2011; 2: 53-55.

Wang SL, Lim SH, Aloweni FBA. Virtual reality interventions and the outcome measures of adult patients in acute care settings undergoing surgical procedures: an integrative review. J. Adv. Nurs. 2021; 78: 645-665.

Sharples S, Cobb S, Moody A, Wilson JR. Virtual reality induced symptoms and effects (VRISE): comparison of head mounted display (HMD), desktop and projection display systems. Displays 2008; 29: 58-69.

Kouijzer MMTE, Kip H, Bouman YHA, Kelders SM. Implementation of virtual reality in healthcare: a scoping review on the implementation process of virtual reality in various healthcare settings. Implement. Sci. Commun. 2023; 4: 67.

Weech S, Kenny S, Barnett-Cowan M. Presence and cybersickness in virtual reality are negatively related: a review. Review. Front. Psychol. 2019; 10: 10.

Perin A, Galbiati TF, Ayadi R et al. Informed consent through 3D virtual reality: a randomized clinical trial. Acta Neurochir. 2021; 163: 301-308.

Borello A, Ferrarese A, Passera R et al. Use of a simplified consent form to facilitate patient understanding of informed consent for laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Open Med. (Wars). 2016; 11: 564-573.

Rubin A, Bellamy J. Practitioner's Guide to Using Research for Evidence-Based Practice. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, 2012.