Clinical trial · Interventional
Virtual Reality in Imaging Review for Cancer Patients
The Use of Virtual Reality for Diagnostic Imaging Review With Cancer Patients
- Source
- ClinicalTrials.gov
- Retrieved
- Sep 8, 2026
- Layer
- normalized (units and labels harmonized; values unchanged)
- Run
- ING-CLINICALTRIALS-20260908-000001
Why stopped (as posted): Study was not approved in 2020 secondary to COVID-19 restrictions on trials
Summary
Brief summary (as posted)
Patients with cancer and their caregivers may have difficulty understanding the site and extent of their disease. Poor comprehension may negatively impact patients and caregivers, leading to increased anxiety, reduced compliance, decreased trust of the physician, and limited shared medical decision making ability. Most patients want to be thoroughly informed, with over a third of cancer patients wishing they had been better informed about side effects that they experienced due to their treatment. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the impact of diagnostic imaging review using 3D virtual reality compared to standard 2D imaging review for patients and their caregiver(s) using a mixed methods approach of survey and qualitative interview based approaches.
Conditions
Conditions (4)
Free-text conditions as registered, with the CancerIndex entity they were reconciled to and the match type.
| Condition (as posted) | Mapped entity | Match | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cancer Patient | — | UNRESOLVED | — |
| Diagnostic Imaging | — | UNRESOLVED | — |
| Patient Education | — | UNRESOLVED | — |
| Virtual Reality | — | UNRESOLVED | — |
Interventions
Interventions (1)
| Intervention | Type | Mapped drug | Match |
|---|---|---|---|
| Survey and interview | Other | — | UNRESOLVED |
Design
Arms and outcomes
Arms (1)
- type
- EXPERIMENTAL
- label
- Virtual Reality for imaging review
- description
- Each participant (patient and caregiver(s)) will undergo standard 2D imaging review on a computer screen, followed by 3D imaging review in virtual reality during their radiation oncology consultation
- interventionNames
- Other: Survey and interview
Primary outcomes (1)
- measure
- Successful Completion of Imaging Review Using Virtual Reality
- timeFrame
- During the consultation 1 day visit
- description
- The percentage of patients able to complete the review of their imaging using virtual reality
Secondary outcomes (4)
- measure
- Satisfaction and preference
- timeFrame
Eligibility
Eligibility (as posted)
- Sex
- All
- Minimum age
- 18 Years
Show eligibility criteria text
Inclusion Criteria: * Willingness to sign and date the consent form. * Willingness to comply with all study procedures and be available for the duration of the study. * Male or female patient 18 years or older. * Available diagnostic imaging (MRI, CT and/or PET) * Consultation in radiation oncology for consideration of radiation therapy. * English speaking. Exclusion Criteria: * Inability to complete virtual reality, survey and interview. * Non-English speaking * Patients with visual defects that affect their ability to view content in VR
References
Publications (10)
- BACKGROUNDFernsler JI, Cannon CA. The whys of patient education. Semin Oncol Nurs. 1991 May;7(2):79-86. doi: 10.1016/0749-2081(91)90085-4. PMID 1882153
- BACKGROUNDGold DT, McClung B. Approaches to patient education: emphasizing the long-term value of compliance and persistence. Am J Med. 2006 Apr;119(4 Suppl 1):S32-7. doi: 10.1016/j.amjmed.2005.12.021. PMID 16563940
- BACKGROUNDHess CB, Chen AM. Measuring psychosocial functioning in the radiation oncology clinic: a systematic review. Psychooncology. 2014 Aug;23(8):841-54. doi: 10.1002/pon.3521. Epub 2014 May 21. PMID 24846702
- BACKGROUNDTakahashi T, Hondo M, Nishimura K, Kitani A, Yamano T, Yanagita H, Osada H, Shinbo M, Honda N. Evaluation of quality of life and psychological response in cancer patients treated with radiotherapy. Radiat Med. 2008 Aug;26(7):396-401. doi: 10.1007/s11604-008-0248-5. Epub 2008 Sep 4. PMID 18769996
- BACKGROUNDJohnson A, Sandford J. Written and verbal information versus verbal information only for patients being discharged from acute hospital settings to home: systematic review. Health Educ Res. 2005 Aug;20(4):423-9. doi: 10.1093/her/cyg141. Epub 2004 Nov 30. PMID 15572437
- BACKGROUNDTheis SL, Johnson JH. Strategies for teaching patients: a meta-analysis. Clin Nurse Spec. 1995 Mar;9(2):100-5, 120. doi: 10.1097/00002800-199503000-00010. PMID 7600475
- BACKGROUNDFriedman AJ, Cosby R, Boyko S, Hatton-Bauer J, Turnbull G. Effective teaching strategies and methods of delivery for patient education: a systematic review and practice guideline recommendations. J Cancer Educ. 2011 Mar;26(1):12-21. doi: 10.1007/s13187-010-0183-x. PMID 21161465
- BACKGROUNDPress Ganey: public reporting gives huge boost to patient satisfaction. Healthcare Benchmarks Qual Improv. 2008 Dec;15(12):121-3.