Virtual reality in paediatrics orthopaedics management: A scoping review
Abstract
Objective Paediatric orthopaedic care requires multifactorial approaches, with treatments potentially evoking anxiety and pain in patients. Distraction techniques like virtual reality (VR) have been adopted in adult care; however, their application to paediatrics remains limited. Given younger patients’ familiarity with digital tools, VR could offer a promising method to improve clinical outcomes. This study aims to identify types of VR-related interventions used in paediatric orthopaedics, and highlight target demographics, pathologies, procedures, and patient outcome measures. Method A scoping review following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses - Statement for Scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR) guidelines were undertaken. Key search terms and medical subheadings (MeSH) were identified through a preliminary search, and a comprehensive search strategy was applied across three databases for literature published from 2010-2025. Two reviewers independently screened titles, extracted, and analysed data. Results From 554 identified studies, 20 met eligibility criteria for extraction. Two distinct themes emerged: VR used during specific procedures (9 studies) and VR applied in rehabilitation (10 studies). Types of VR included augmented reality, immersive reality, and semi-immersive VR. Technologies used ranged from LEAP motion controllers and kinetic sensors to LED or TV projectors, motion controllers, and noise-blocking headphones. Across 20 studies, 5 reported statistically significant improvements with VR interventions compared to control groups, particularly in pain, anxiety, motor function, and rehabilitation outcomes, while another 5 demonstrated mixed effects across measured domains. However, 6 found no statistically significant difference over controls, and 3 reported VR performed equally to control interventions. 7 Studies noted adverse effects like nausea, discomfort, or disengagement, and 9 studies reported on feasibility. Conclusions Given the heterogenous study designs, reporting, and outcomes measured, these findings should act as an early example of the field of VR in paediatric orthopaedics, rather than as an evaluation of intervention effectiveness. Future work should define types of VR and establish a set of standardised outcome metrics to evaluate clinical success, feasibility, and cost effectiveness.
Related
- Comparing the efficacy of virtual reality and flat screen delivery of breath control training for anxiety management
- Toward Immersive Diabetes Education: Understanding User Needs for Virtual Reality-Assisted Self-Management Support in Adults With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus.
- OP–008 Effect of virtual reality and distraction cards during inhalation therapy
- Virtual Reality Simulation in Colonoscopy Training: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Studies Published from 2019 to 2024
- The overall effects of virtual reality interventions on ICU patients : A systematic review and meta-analysis
BibTeX
@article{grover2026virtual,
title = {{Virtual reality in paediatrics orthopaedics management: A scoping review}},
author = {Hiya Grover and Teresa Sobocinska and Paul Karayiannis},
journal = {Digital Health},
year = {2026},
month = nov,
doi = {10.1177/20552076261503679},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1177/20552076261503679},
note = {CC BY},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - Virtual reality in paediatrics orthopaedics management: A scoping review
AU - Hiya Grover
AU - Teresa Sobocinska
AU - Paul Karayiannis
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/11/05
JO - Digital Health
DO - 10.1177/20552076261503679
UR - https://doi.org/10.1177/20552076261503679
AB - Objective Paediatric orthopaedic care requires multifactorial approaches, with treatments potentially evoking anxiety and pain in patients. Distraction techniques like virtual reality (VR) have been adopted in adult care; however, their application to paediatrics remains limited. Given younger patients’ familiarity with digital tools, VR could offer a promising method to improve clinical outcomes. This study aims to identify types of VR-related interventions used in paediatric orthopaedics, and highlight target demographics, pathologies, procedures, and patient outcome measures. Method A scoping review following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses - Statement for Scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR) guidelines were undertaken. Key search terms and medical subheadings (MeSH) were identified through a preliminary search, and a comprehensive search strategy was applied across three databases for literature published from 2010-2025. Two reviewers independently screened titles, extracted, and analysed data. Results From 554 identified studies, 20 met eligibility criteria for extraction. Two distinct themes emerged: VR used during specific procedures (9 studies) and VR applied in rehabilitation (10 studies). Types of VR included augmented reality, immersive reality, and semi-immersive VR. Technologies used ranged from LEAP motion controllers and kinetic sensors to LED or TV projectors, motion controllers, and noise-blocking headphones. Across 20 studies, 5 reported statistically significant improvements with VR interventions compared to control groups, particularly in pain, anxiety, motor function, and rehabilitation outcomes, while another 5 demonstrated mixed effects across measured domains. However, 6 found no statistically significant difference over controls, and 3 reported VR performed equally to control interventions. 7 Studies noted adverse effects like nausea, discomfort, or disengagement, and 9 studies reported on feasibility. Conclusions Given the heterogenous study designs, reporting, and outcomes measured, these findings should act as an early example of the field of VR in paediatric orthopaedics, rather than as an evaluation of intervention effectiveness. Future work should define types of VR and establish a set of standardised outcome metrics to evaluate clinical success, feasibility, and cost effectiveness.
SN - 2055-2076
ER -