JMIR Publications

ABSTRACT

Background:

Virtual reality (VR) has demonstrated efficacy for distraction from pain-related thoughts and exposure to feared movements. Little empirical VR research has focused on chronic pain management.

Objective:

Examine the feasibility of VR as an adjunctive intervention for Veterans with chronic pain. We designed a hierarchy ranging from low intensity pain distraction to high intensity movement-based exposure for this purpose. VR applications (APPs) were mapped onto the hierarchy.

Methods:

Sixteen Veterans receiving inpatient chronic pain rehabilitation participated in daily VR sessions over a 3-week period. Trajectories across the distraction-to-exposure hierarchy and Veteran-reported intensity ratings were described and evaluated over time. Minimum clinically important differences (MCID), pre-post effect sizes, and 95% confidence intervals were examined for fear of movement: Fear of Daily Activities Questionnaire (FDAQ), Pain Outcomes Questionnaire-VA (POQ-VA; fear scale). This approach was applied to secondary outcomes: POQ-VA (pain intensity, interference, negative affect), Pain Catastrophizing Scale, and Patient-Specific Functioning Scale (PSFS). Session attendance, completion, and VR experiences were described.

Results:

Most Veterans (71.43%) completed the distraction-to-exposure hierarchy. Only three trajectories emerged more than once. Due to high completion rates, Veterans that completed the hierarchy could self-select non-hierarchy APPs. Veterans rated all hierarchy levels (low, medium, high) near medium intensity. Self-selected activities were rated as high intensity. For kinesiophobia, six Veterans (37.5%) exceeded the MCID on the FDAQ and a small effect size improvement was observed (Cohen’s d= -.35). The confidence interval (95% CI= -.71, .01) indicated the possibility of a null effect. The POQ-VA fear scale yielded no effect (Cohen’s d= .06; 95% CI= -.47, .59). For secondary outcomes, Veterans exceeding MCID were calculated with complete data: pain intensity (N=1/15; 6.67%), pain catastrophizing (N=5/14; 35.71%), and patient-specific functioning (N=10/15; 66.67%). Effect sizes were large for patient-specific functioning (Cohen’s d= 1.14; 95% CI= .50, 1.78), medium for mobility interference (Cohen’s d= -.56; 95% CI= -.96, -.16), and small for pain intensity (Cohen’s d= -.40; 95% CI= -.69, -.12) and catastrophizing (Cohen’s d= -.41; 95% CI= -.79, -.02). No effects were observed for interference in daily activities (Cohen’s d= .10; 95% CI= -.27, .47) and negative affect (Cohen’s d= .07; 95% CI= -.26, .40). Veterans attended 85.22% of VR sessions and completed 94.90% of sessions attended. Twenty-minute sessions were rated as too short. No significant adverse events were reported. Conclusion: Findings support the feasibility of VR as an adjunct for Veterans with chronic pain. However, the hierarchy will require modification as evidenced by homogeneous intensity ratings. Veteran-selected activities presented the highest intensity ratings, largest outcome effect size (PSFS), and MCID. This highlights the important role of utilizing Veteran stakeholders in hierarchy modification, design of VR interventions, and outcome selection.