ArticlePLOS digital health2026
A qualitative approach to applying virtual reality relaxation for patients with psychiatric problems: Focus group study with healthcare professionals.
Article in PLOS digital health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Virtual Reality (VR) is increasingly being used in mental healthcare settings. VR relaxation appears feasible, effective, and acceptable for reducing stress in patients with psychiatric problems. Understanding healthcare professionals' perspectives is essential for sustainable integration, as they play a key role in its adoption and use. This study explores the facilitators and barriers perceived by healthcare professionals in using VR relaxation (VRelax) while treating patients with psychiatric problems to support its implementation in mental healthcare, as part of a preliminary qualitative investigation informing the design of a subsequent randomized controlled trial (RCT) on its implementation and cost-effectiveness. From November to December 2021, three focus groups and three individual interviews were conducted with healthcare professionals who had used VRelax for four weeks in clinical practice. Participants were recruited via the researchers' professional network. Semi-structured interviews were analyzed thematically. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) guided data structuring and interpretation. Fifteen nurse specialists, psychologists, and psychiatrists were included. Six themes and seventeen subthemes emerged. Key barriers included the need for evidence-based information and technical and logistical challenges. Professionals' attitudes were shaped by their interest in technology and perceived technical skills, affecting their confidence in using VR. Healthcare professionals base VRelax use on patient characteristics rather than DSM-5 diagnoses. No themes emerged in the outer setting or implementation domains of the CFIR, suggesting underexplored systemic factors. Future implementation efforts should involve policymakers and implementation experts for a broader, multi-stakeholder approach to address these gaps. Structured guidance and clear workflows are recommended to support scalable and context-sensitive integration of VR relaxation in mental healthcare.
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.