This page is alzhub.org's plain-English summary of a published study, not the paper itself. It is generated from the record we hold for this study, sourced and linked below — check the original for the full text and methods.

45/100

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 45 out of 100. End-of-life care

Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies

Plain-language summary

Objectives To explore acceptability, tolerability, and subjective experience of virtual reality (VR) as therapeutic recreation for hospice patients living with dementia (hPLWD). Design Descriptive study setting. Community hospice agency participants A convenience sample of n = 25 hPLWD cared for by a local hospice agency. Intervention Participants viewed a beach scene using VR headset for ≤30 minutes. Measurements Tolerability was measured with Pain Assessment IN Advanced Dementia (PAINAD)scores at baseline, every 5 minutes during VR use, and 5 minutes after headset removal. Additionally, follow-up phone calls to caregivers several hours after the intervention were performed to inquire regarding any noted adverse effect after the intervention. The subjective experience was measured with qualitative semistructured interviews with the hPLWD regarding enjoyment for the VR. Descriptive statistics were performed on all collected data. Results The VR was stopped early in 2 of the participants due to a ≥2-point increase in PAINAD score. Baseline behavioral and psychological symptoms of dementia (BPSD) were reported to have worsened in 2 (8%) of the participants at follow-up. There was no significant difference between dementia type and usage time or dementia severity and usage time. Of the 25 participants, 14 (56%) reported enjoying VR and 12 (48%) would do it again. Conclusion Virtual reality use was generally safe and enjoyable in hPLWD. Virtual reality can provide meaningful activity and enhance quality of life for hPLWD at the end of life. In the future, VR may be a useful intervention for BPSD in hPLWD.

Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris

APA 7th

Ferguson, C., Shade, M. Y., Blaskewicz Boron, J., Lyden, E., & Manley, N. A. (2020). Virtual Reality for Therapeutic Recreation in Dementia Hospice Care: A Feasibility Study. The American journal of hospice & palliative care. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049909120901525

Vancouver

Ferguson C, Shade MY, Blaskewicz Boron J, Lyden E, Manley NA. Virtual Reality for Therapeutic Recreation in Dementia Hospice Care: A Feasibility Study. The American journal of hospice & palliative care. 2020. doi:10.1177/1049909120901525. PMID: 31975609.

BibTeX

@article{ferguson2020-31975609,
  author  = {Ferguson, C. and Shade, M. Y. and Blaskewicz Boron, J. and Lyden, E. and Manley, N. A.},
  title   = {{Virtual Reality for Therapeutic Recreation in Dementia Hospice Care: A Feasibility Study}},
  journal = {The American journal of hospice \& palliative care},
  year    = {2020},
  doi     = {10.1177/1049909120901525},
  pmid    = {31975609},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1177/1049909120901525}
}

Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. Check the citation against the original before you use it.

How to read this study

Design: our record does not state a study design, so check the methods section of the original before weighing the result.
Size: the record lists 25 participants. Ask whether that is enough for the question, and who they were.
Effect: the record gives no effect size, so the summary above cannot say how large any difference was.

What the evidence grade means here

This page is graded low. alzhub.org assigns the grade automatically from keywords in the abstract, not from reading the paper. Low means the abstract matched neither pattern. It is the default label, and it does not mean the work is poor; many sound lab and imaging papers land here. It can add at most 5 of the 100 points in the study score, and it is a label about design, not a verdict on whether the findings are true.

New to reading papers? Six questions to ask of any Alzheimer’s study · how we score.

Key findings

Results The VR was stopped early in 2 of the participants due to a ≥2-point increase in PAINAD score.
There was no significant difference between dementia type and usage time or dementia severity and usage time.

Study details

Participants25
Evidence strengthLow

How this study scored 45/100

Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, effect reported and randomized / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on journal's citation record, times cited, citations per year, impact for its field and year, cited by studies here, still being cited, senior author's track record, institution's track record and multicenter collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 26 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 45 out of 100.

Component	Points	Why
Journal tier	7 / 10	Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (The American journal of hospice & palliative care)
Journal's citation record	— / 4	No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score
Study design	0 / 12	No study design recorded — scores zero, not guessed (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Strength of evidence	1 / 5	Rated “low” in our summary
Peer-review validation	10 / 10	Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal.
How recent	2 / 5	2020 — within 10 year(s) of the newest study here
Sample size	1 / 4	25 participants
Effect reported	0 / 3	No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Studied in people	3 / 3	Studied in people (participant count stated)
Randomized / blinded	0 / 2	No randomization or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Times cited	— / 7	No citation count (not found in OpenAlex) — left out of this score
Citations per year	— / 5	No citation count or no year — left out of this score
Impact for its field and year	— / 6	No field-weighted citation impact (OpenAlex has none yet) — left out of this score
Cited by studies here	— / 6	Not yet checked against this library's citation graph — left out of this score
Still being cited	— / 4	No yearly citation counts — left out of this score
Senior author's track record	— / 4	Senior author's record not available — left out of this score
Institution's track record	— / 3	No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score
Multicenter collaboration	— / 3	Institutions not listed — left out of this score
Indexed in PubMed	2 / 2	Indexed in PubMed (PMID 31975609)
Free to read	0 / 2	Behind a paywall — scores zero
Points	26 / 58	Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 26 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 45 out of 100.
Total	45 / 100	—

What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →

Read the original

Free copy unknown: no free-copy check has an answer for this record yet. That does not mean it is paywalled.

Studies in the library that share something with this one. The line above each title says what.

Related studies in End-of-life care from nearby years

Also tagged “nursing”

995 studies in the library carry the topic tag “nursing”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 995 tagged studies.

Studies sharing this one's topic tags

Similar studies

More on End-of-life care

See all studies in End-of-life care →