Objective The current study explored whether immersive virtual reality continues to reduce pain (via distraction) during more than one wound care session per patient. Patients: Thirty six patients aged 8 to 57 years (mean age of 27.7 years), with an average of 8.4% total body surface area burned (range .25 to 25.5 TBSA) received bandage changes, and wound cleaning. Methods Each patient received one baseline wound cleaning/debridement session with no-VR (control condition) followed by one or more (up to seven) subsequent wound care sessions during VR. After each wound care session (one session per day), worst pain intensity was measured using a Visual Analogue Thermometer (VAT), the dependent variable. Using a within subjects design, worst pain intensity VAT during wound care with no-VR (baseline, Day 0) was compared to pain during wound care while using immersive virtual reality (up to seven days of wound care during VR). Results Compared to pain during no-VR Baseline (Day 0), pain ratings during wound debridement were statistically lower when patients were in virtual reality on Days 1, 2 and 3, and although not significant beyond day 3, the pattern of results from Days 4, 5, and 6 are consistent with the notion that VR continues to reduce pain when used repeatedly. Conclusions Results from the present study suggest that VR continues to be effective when used for three (or possibly more) treatments during severe burn wound debridement.

Changing daily wound dressings provokes a substantial amount of pain in patients with severe burn wounds. Pharmacological analgesics alone often are inadequate to solve this problem. This study explored whether immersive virtual reality (VR) can reduce the procedural pain and anxiety during an entire wound care session and compared VR to the effects of standard care and other distraction methods. Nineteen inpatients ages 8 to 65 years (mean, 30 years) with a mean TBSA of 7.1% (range, 0.5-21.5%) were studied using a within-subject design. Within 1 week of admission, standard care (no distraction), VR, or another self-chosen distraction method was administered during the wound dressing change. Each patient received the normal analgesic regimen. Pain was measured with visual analog thermometer scores, and anxiety was measured with the state-version of the Spielberger State Trait Anxiety Inventory. After comparing different distraction methods, only VR and television showed significant pain reductions during wound dressing changes. The effects of VR were superior, but not statistical significant, to that of television. Thirteen of 19 patients reported clinically meaningful (33% or greater) reductions in pain during VR distraction. No side effects were reported. No correlations were found between the reduction in pain ratings and patient variables like age, sex, duration of hospital stay, or percentage of (deep) burns. There was no significant reduction of anxiety ratings.

Itching remains a significant problem over a 2-year period. Individuals having undergone surgical procedures and experiencing early post-traumatic distress are more likely to suffer from long-term and persistent itching. Implications regarding practice and research are discussed.

Pain measurement is a prerequisite for individualized pain management and research into pain interventions. There is a need for reliable and valid pain measures for young children with burns. The aim of this study was to investigate whether the pain observation scale for young children (POCIS), the COMFORT behaviour scale (COMFORT-B) and the nurse observational visual analogue scale (VAS obs) are reliable, valid and clinically useful instruments to measure pain in children with burns aged 0-5years. Participating trained nurses (N=102) rated pain of 154 children during hospitalization. Two trained nurses simultaneously assessed pain at fixed intervals by using the previous mentioned measures. Cronbach's alpha for POCIS was .87 for background and .89 for procedural pain. Intraclass Correlation Coefficients (ICCs) were .75 for background and .81 for procedural pain. COMFORT-B observations yielded Cronbach's alpha of .77 for background and .86 for procedural pain and ICCs of .83 for background and .82 for procedural pain. The VAS obs resulted in ICCs of .55 for background and .60 for procedural pain. Correlation coefficient between POCIS and COMFORT-B was .79 (p<.01), Standardized response mean was 1.04 for both POCIS and COMFORT-B. Background pain measured with POCIS and COMFORT-B was lower than procedural pain (p<.001). Nurses found POCIS easier and quicker to use, but COMFORT-B was found to indicate pain more accurately. Both POCIS and COMFORT-B are reliable, valid and practical scales for pain measurement in young children with burns and can be used in practice and research. The VAS obs was found to be unreliable.