Cargando…

The effectiveness of virtual reality based interventions for symptoms of anxiety and depression: A meta-analysis

We report a meta-analysis of virtual reality (VR) interventions for anxiety and depression outcomes, as well as treatment attrition. We included randomized controlled trials comparing VR interventions, alone or in combination, to control conditions or other active psychological interventions. Effect...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Fodor, Liviu A., Coteț, Carmen D., Cuijpers, Pim, Szamoskozi, Ștefan, David, Daniel, Cristea, Ioana A.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Nature Publishing Group UK 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6037699/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29985400
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-28113-6
_version_ 1783338363038728192
author Fodor, Liviu A.
Coteț, Carmen D.
Cuijpers, Pim
Szamoskozi, Ștefan
David, Daniel
Cristea, Ioana A.
author_facet Fodor, Liviu A.
Coteț, Carmen D.
Cuijpers, Pim
Szamoskozi, Ștefan
David, Daniel
Cristea, Ioana A.
author_sort Fodor, Liviu A.
collection PubMed
description We report a meta-analysis of virtual reality (VR) interventions for anxiety and depression outcomes, as well as treatment attrition. We included randomized controlled trials comparing VR interventions, alone or in combination, to control conditions or other active psychological interventions. Effects sizes (Hedges’ g) for anxiety and depression outcomes, as post-test and follow-up, were pooled with a random-effects model. Drop-outs were compared using odds ratio (OR) with a Mantel-Haenszel model. We included 39 trials (52 comparisons). Trial risk of bias was unclear for most domains, and high for incomplete outcome data. VR-based therapies were more effective than control at post-test for anxiety, g = 0.79, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.02, and depression, g = 0.73, 95% CI 0.25 to 1.21, but not for treatment attrition, OR = 1.34, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.89. Heterogeneity was high and there was consistent evidence of small study effects. There were no significant differences between VR-based and other active interventions. VR interventions outperformed control conditions for anxiety and depression but did not improve treatment drop-out. High heterogeneity, potential publication bias, predominant use of waitlist controls, and high or uncertain risk of bias of most trials question the reliability of these effects.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6037699
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher Nature Publishing Group UK
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-60376992018-07-12 The effectiveness of virtual reality based interventions for symptoms of anxiety and depression: A meta-analysis Fodor, Liviu A. Coteț, Carmen D. Cuijpers, Pim Szamoskozi, Ștefan David, Daniel Cristea, Ioana A. Sci Rep Article We report a meta-analysis of virtual reality (VR) interventions for anxiety and depression outcomes, as well as treatment attrition. We included randomized controlled trials comparing VR interventions, alone or in combination, to control conditions or other active psychological interventions. Effects sizes (Hedges’ g) for anxiety and depression outcomes, as post-test and follow-up, were pooled with a random-effects model. Drop-outs were compared using odds ratio (OR) with a Mantel-Haenszel model. We included 39 trials (52 comparisons). Trial risk of bias was unclear for most domains, and high for incomplete outcome data. VR-based therapies were more effective than control at post-test for anxiety, g = 0.79, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.02, and depression, g = 0.73, 95% CI 0.25 to 1.21, but not for treatment attrition, OR = 1.34, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.89. Heterogeneity was high and there was consistent evidence of small study effects. There were no significant differences between VR-based and other active interventions. VR interventions outperformed control conditions for anxiety and depression but did not improve treatment drop-out. High heterogeneity, potential publication bias, predominant use of waitlist controls, and high or uncertain risk of bias of most trials question the reliability of these effects. Nature Publishing Group UK 2018-07-09 /pmc/articles/PMC6037699/ /pubmed/29985400 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-28113-6 Text en © The Author(s) 2018 Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
spellingShingle Article
Fodor, Liviu A.
Coteț, Carmen D.
Cuijpers, Pim
Szamoskozi, Ștefan
David, Daniel
Cristea, Ioana A.
The effectiveness of virtual reality based interventions for symptoms of anxiety and depression: A meta-analysis
title The effectiveness of virtual reality based interventions for symptoms of anxiety and depression: A meta-analysis
title_full The effectiveness of virtual reality based interventions for symptoms of anxiety and depression: A meta-analysis
title_fullStr The effectiveness of virtual reality based interventions for symptoms of anxiety and depression: A meta-analysis
title_full_unstemmed The effectiveness of virtual reality based interventions for symptoms of anxiety and depression: A meta-analysis
title_short The effectiveness of virtual reality based interventions for symptoms of anxiety and depression: A meta-analysis
title_sort effectiveness of virtual reality based interventions for symptoms of anxiety and depression: a meta-analysis
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6037699/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29985400
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-28113-6
work_keys_str_mv AT fodorliviua theeffectivenessofvirtualrealitybasedinterventionsforsymptomsofanxietyanddepressionametaanalysis
AT cotetcarmend theeffectivenessofvirtualrealitybasedinterventionsforsymptomsofanxietyanddepressionametaanalysis
AT cuijperspim theeffectivenessofvirtualrealitybasedinterventionsforsymptomsofanxietyanddepressionametaanalysis
AT szamoskozistefan theeffectivenessofvirtualrealitybasedinterventionsforsymptomsofanxietyanddepressionametaanalysis
AT daviddaniel theeffectivenessofvirtualrealitybasedinterventionsforsymptomsofanxietyanddepressionametaanalysis
AT cristeaioanaa theeffectivenessofvirtualrealitybasedinterventionsforsymptomsofanxietyanddepressionametaanalysis
AT fodorliviua effectivenessofvirtualrealitybasedinterventionsforsymptomsofanxietyanddepressionametaanalysis
AT cotetcarmend effectivenessofvirtualrealitybasedinterventionsforsymptomsofanxietyanddepressionametaanalysis
AT cuijperspim effectivenessofvirtualrealitybasedinterventionsforsymptomsofanxietyanddepressionametaanalysis
AT szamoskozistefan effectivenessofvirtualrealitybasedinterventionsforsymptomsofanxietyanddepressionametaanalysis
AT daviddaniel effectivenessofvirtualrealitybasedinterventionsforsymptomsofanxietyanddepressionametaanalysis
AT cristeaioanaa effectivenessofvirtualrealitybasedinterventionsforsymptomsofanxietyanddepressionametaanalysis