Immersive Healing: The Therapeutic Potential of Virtual Reality

Although studies exploring the efficacy of VR therapy for PLP have reported positive outcomes, several limitations, such as small sample sizes, lack of randomization, and inconsistent treatment protocols, have impeded widespread adoption of these innovative approaches. Additionally, the literature does not sufficiently delineate which aspects of the phantom limb experience may be addressed with VR therapy. To overcome these limitations and optimize treatment efficacy, it is crucial to gain a comprehensive understanding of the phantom limb experience, including both somatosensory and kinesthesia-related symptoms. Additionally, this study will address these limitations by employing a larger sample size, rigorous methodology, and a standardized treatment protocol.

Individuals undergoing virtual reality therapy intervention

Device: virtual reality therapy

The matched controls will receive standard care without the VR intervention

Other: matched control group

6 2 times weekly sessions of 30-minute VR therapy in the office with pre- and post-intervention surveys

taking the same surveys as the VR intervention group on a weekly basis for 6 weeks

Time frame: Baseline

Short-form McGill Pain Questionnaire - The maximum score an individual can reach on the MPQ is 78. According to the questionnaire, a person with a score of 0 effectively does not experience pain. A person with a high score, nearer to the highest score of 78, more than likely deals with chronic pain daily.

Time frame: Week 1

Short-form McGill Pain Questionnaire - The maximum score an individual can reach on the MPQ is 78. According to the questionnaire, a person with a score of 0 effectively does not experience pain. A person with a high score, nearer to the highest score of 78, more than likely deals with chronic pain daily.

Time frame: Week 2

Short-form McGill Pain Questionnaire - The maximum score an individual can reach on the MPQ is 78. According to the questionnaire, a person with a score of 0 effectively does not experience pain. A person with a high score, nearer to the highest score of 78, more than likely deals with chronic pain daily.

Time frame: Week 3

Short-form McGill Pain Questionnaire - The maximum score an individual can reach on the MPQ is 78. According to the questionnaire, a person with a score of 0 effectively does not experience pain. A person with a high score, nearer to the highest score of 78, more than likely deals with chronic pain daily.

Time frame: Week 6

Short-form McGill Pain Questionnaire - The maximum score an individual can reach on the MPQ is 78. According to the questionnaire, a person with a score of 0 effectively does not experience pain. A person with a high score, nearer to the highest score of 78, more than likely deals with chronic pain daily.

Time frame: Hour 24

Worst Pain Score: 1 - 4 = Mild Pain. Worst Pain Score: 5 - 6 = Moderate Pain. Worst Pain Score: 7 - 10 = Severe Pain - Scores range from 0 to 10 with higher scores indicating greater pain interference.

Time frame: Week 6

A short form of the McGill Pain Questionnaire (SF-MPQ) has been developed. The main component of the SF-MPQ consists of 15 descriptors (11 sensory; 4 affective) which are rated on an intensity scale as 0 = none, 1 = mild, 2 = moderate or 3 = severe.

Consists of 22 different descriptors of pain and each item is rated based on a 0-10 scale with 0 equal to no pain and 10 equal to the worst pain ever during the past week. The total score is calculated by summing 22 individual scores.

Time frame: Baseline

it is qualitative and there is no good or bad, this is just to define the population and better characterize phantom limb experience - assesses presence, onset, location, character, intensity, triggers, and treatment of phantom limb sensations and phantom limb pain. Includes questions on phantom limb posture, movement, size changes, and telescoping.

Time frame: Week 6

There are several questions within this survey to assess attitude towards VR, which activities are favored and then the effect VR had on them. There is a mix of qualitative questions and quantitative. Quantitative questions are on Likert Scale 1-5. An interval change of +1 on Likert scale would be "good" for question on posture, control over limb. For how long the therapy effect lasts after session is over, it will vary from hours to days to weeks (which is why all descriptors are in there). Even if it lasted 1 hour this would be considered "good".

Time frame: Week 6

Assesses subjective usability and satisfaction with the VR system - A perfect score of 100% signifies flawless usability and an exceptional user experience. The average SUS score is 68, and scores up to 70% are generally considered good; a good sus score indicates a decent level of usability.

Time frame: Week 6

negligible (\< 5), minimal (5 - 10), significant (10 - 15), and concerning (15 - 20) symptoms. A simulator resulting in total scores above 20 is considered "bad"

Time frame: Week 6

Each dimension has 5 levels: no problems, slight problems, moderate problems, severe problems and extreme problems. The patient is asked to indicate his/her health state by ticking the box next to the most appropriate statement in each of the five dimensions.EQ-5D-5L index scores range from -0.59 to 1, where 1 is the best possible health state

Immersive Healing: The Therapeutic Potential of Virtual Reality in Phantom Limb Experience