Using Virtual Reality to Improve Outcomes Related to Quality of Life Among Older Adults With Serious Illnesses: Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials (Preprint)
Authors: Maheta Bhagvat , Kraft Alexandra , Interrante Nickolas , Fereydooni Soraya , Bailenson Jeremy , Beams Brian , Keny ​​Christina , Osborne Thomas , Giannitrapani Karleen , Lorenz Karl 
Published: February 2025

BACKGROUND

Virtual reality (VR) has promise as an innovative nonpharmacologic treatment for improving a patient’s quality of life. VR can be used as an adjunct or treatment for many acute and chronic conditions, including serious illnesses.

OBJECTIVE

This systematic review aims to assess the current state of the literature of randomized controlled trials that use VR in patients with serious illnesses. Two secondary aims include assessing intervention components associated with improved quality of life and functional outcomes among older adults, as well as evaluating how well the randomized controlled trials adhere to consensus standards for VR research.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Embase, and CINAHL for randomized controlled studies published at any time. We screened and accepted studies that reported outcomes related to patients’ quality of life, provided an immersive VR intervention, and included patients with serious illness. We narratively summarized key attributes of publications that shed light on study efficacy, generalizability, replicability, and clinical utility. All studies were assessed for study quality with the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool and for concordance with 8 recent consensus standards for VR research.

RESULTS

From the 12,621 articles searched in May 2024, a total of 24 (0.19%) studies met the inclusion criteria, and of these, 88% (21/24) reported an improvement in at least 1 patient quality of life outcome and 67% (16/24) had a high risk of bias. In 7 (n=24, 29%) studies, VR was used to provide distraction therapy to reduce pain. In total, 5 (n=24, 21%) studies included training, supervision, and assistance in VR use, which demonstrated improvements in patient quality of life–related outcomes. Of 24 studies, 9 (38%) included patients with stroke, 9 (38%) included patients with cancer, 4 (17%) included patients with cardiovascular disease, 1 (4%) included patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and 1 (4%) included patients who reported pain in hospital. In all 9 studies that included patients with stroke, the main purpose of VR was to improve mobility and strength; these studies had higher frequency and longer durations of VR use, ranging from 2 to 9 weeks, as compared to a VR use duration of <2 weeks for studies aiming to reduce pain or anxiety. Regarding consensus standards for VR research, 29% (7/24) of the studies adhered to all 8 criteria, and all studies (24/24, 100%) adhered to ≥5 criteria.

CONCLUSIONS

Nascent evidence suggests VR’s potential in mitigating pain, anxiety, and depression and improving mobility among persons with serious illnesses. Most studies did not provide detailed information about unassisted or assisted use, suggesting that VR for older adults is currently most appropriate for observed settings with assistance available.

CLINICALTRIAL

PROSPERO CRD42022346178; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=346178