Background COVID-19 has created an extraordinary global health crisis. However, with limited understanding of the effects of COVID-19 during pregnancy, clinicians and patients are forced to make uninformed decisions. Objectives To systematically evaluate the literature and report the maternal and neonatal outcomes associated with COVID-19.

Some of the patients' and carers' perspectives have not been previously reported in the stroke literature, including a desire for individualized treatment, the consideration of wider, non-physical needs and the carers' sense of burden. In addition, the study revealed how staff, carers and patients viewed each other and the service and demonstrated the concordance of their perceptions. However, staff showed little insight into the users' need for information and negative experiences of care. In contrast with previous research, lack of emotional care, poor continuity of care and lack of staff knowledge and skills were not identified as problems.

Background Virtual reality is increasingly being utilized by clinicians to facilitate analgesia and anxiolysis within an inpatient setting. There is however, a lack of a clinically relevant review to guide its use for this purpose. Objective To systematically review the current evidence for the efficacy of virtual reality as an analgesic in the management of acute pain and anxiolysis in an inpatient setting. Methods A comprehensive search was conducted up to and including January 2019 on PubMed, Ovid Medline, EMBASE, and Cochrane Database of Systematic reviews according to PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. Search terms included virtual reality, vr, and pain. Primary articles with a focus on acute pain in the clinical setting were considered for the review. Primary outcome measures included degree of analgesia afforded by virtual reality therapy, degree of anxiolysis afforded by virtual reality therapy, effect of virtual reality on physiological parameters, side effects precipitated by virtual reality, virtual reality content type, and type of equipment utilized. Results Eighteen studies were deemed eligible for inclusion in this systematic review; 67% (12/18) of studies demonstrated significant reductions in pain with the utilization of virtual reality; 44% (8/18) of studies assessed the effects of virtual reality on procedural anxiety, with 50% (4/8) of these demonstrating significant reductions; 28% (5/18) of studies screened for side effects with incidence rates of 0.5% to 8%; 39% (7/18) of studies evaluated the effects of virtual reality on autonomic arousal as a biomarker of pain, with 29% (2/7) demonstrating significant changes; 100% (18/18) of studies utilized a head mounted display to deliver virtual reality therapy, with 50% being in active form (participants interacting with the environment) and 50% being in passive form (participants observing the content only). Conclusions Available evidence suggests that virtual reality therapy can be applied to facilitate analgesia for acute pain in a variety of inpatient settings. Its effects, however, are likely to vary by patient population and indication. This highlights the need for individualized pilot testing of virtual reality therapy’s effects for each specific clinical use case rather than generalizing its use for the broad indication of facilitating analgesia. In addition, virtual reality therapy has the added potential of concurrently providing procedural anxiolysis, thereby improving patient experience and cooperation, while being associated with a low incidence of side effects (nausea, vomiting, eye strain, and dizziness). Furthermore, findings indicated a head mounted display should be utilized to deliver virtual reality therapy in a clinical setting with a slight preference for active over passive virtual reality for analgesia. There, however, appears to be insufficient evidence to substantiate the effect of virtual reality on autonomic arousal, and this should be considered at best to be for investigational uses, at present.

Pain following laparoscopic surgery remains a neglected healthcare issue. Virtual reality-mediated therapy’s (VRT) analgesic potential could address this. However, its effect in this setting remains unexplored. We aimed to establish the feasibility and safety of VRT as an adjunct analgesic following gynaecological laparoscopy and explore differences between active distraction and passive meditation content. 35 women were enrolled into an open crossover pilot and randomised to either intervention group 1 (active then passive content) or intervention group 2 (passive then active content) following surgery. VRT was administered in two 10-min segments with a 10-min washout period in between. Pain scores, opioid requirements and side effects were recorded before and after each segment whilst questionnaires evaluated acceptability. We observed a significant reduction in pain over time for the entire study population (F = 8.63, p < 0.0005) but no differences between intervention groups, in contrast to many studies demonstrating an increase in pain during this time. During segment one, intervention group 1 (n = 18) were administered significantly less opioid than intervention group 2 (n = 17) [0.0 (0.0–7.5) vs. 3.0(0.0–10.0), p = 0.04]. Intervention group 1 rated the VRT experience significantly higher than intervention group 2 (7.97 vs. 6.62. p = 0.017). 97.1% (n = 34) would recommend VRT to a friend and use it as the standard-of-care in future procedures. These results demonstrate that post-operative VRT is feasible and safe. However, adequately powered studies are needed to appropriately determine its efficacy.