Technology-Based Distractions for Minor Procedures

August 16, 2026 updated by: Thomas Caruso, Stanford University
The purpose of this study is to determine if non-invasive distracting devices (Virtual Reality headset, Augmented Reality Headset) are more effective than the standard of care (i.e., no technology-based distraction) for decreasing anxiety and pain scores in pediatric patients undergoing various minor procedures (i.e lumbar punctures and cardiac catheterization). The anticipated primary outcome will be a reduction of overall cumulative medication and secondary outcomes include but are not limited to: physician satisfaction, discharge time, pain scores, anxiety scores, and procedure time.

Study Overview

Study Type

Interventional

Phase

  • Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Locations

    • California
      • Palo Alto, California, United States, 94304
        • Lucile Packard Children's Hospital Stanford

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Ages Eligible for Study

  • Child

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Pediatric patient age between 4-17
  • English speaking
  • Parental consent/patient assent
  • Undergoing minor procedure(s) at LPCH or Stanford Hospital

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Patient does not consent
  • Legal guardian not present to obtain consent
  • Patient with a significant neurological condition or major developmental disability
  • Patient experiencing nausea
  • Patient with active infection of the face or hand
  • A history of severe motion sickness
  • A history of visual problems
  • A history of seizures caused by flashing light
  • Major surgery within the last 48 hours
  • Patients who are clinically unstable or require urgent/emergent intervention
  • Patient or parental preference for general anesthesia

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: Supportive Care
  • Allocation: Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
  • Masking: None (Open Label)

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
Active Comparator: Standard of Care group
No immersive technology will be assigned to the participant. Participant will use their own distraction method.
Participant is allowed to use what they will use as a distraction tool while they are receiving treatment.
Experimental: Immersive Technology grorup
Immersive technologies including VR headsets, a bluetooth haptic device (Buddy Guard), a screen and projector (BERT), and a tablets with a game will be randomly assigned to the participants. Each participant will receive one technological intervention.
Participants will be randomly assigned to one of the following four groups; VR headsets, a bluetooth haptic device (Buddy Guard), a screen and projector (BERT), and a tablets with a game. Participant's anxiety will be assessed and pre- and post-intervention assessments will be completed.

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Evaluate the effectiveness of technological interventions on anxiety levels in patients who undergo minor procedures
Time Frame: baseline, immediately after the intervention
Participants will complete the Visual Analogue Scale for Anxiety (VAS-A), a self-report scale to measure anxiety levels before and after the technological intervention. The scale is a horizontal line from 0 to 10 with an anchor at 0 indicating "no anxiety" and an anchor at 10 indicating "worst possible anxiety".
baseline, immediately after the intervention

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Evaluate the effectiveness of technological interventions on pain levels in patients whose age is 4-11 years old and undergo minor procedures
Time Frame: baseline, immediately after the intervention
The FSP-R is a self-report measure of pain intensity displaying six faces representing equal intervals between the scale values from least pain = 0 to most pain = 10
baseline, immediately after the intervention
To evaluate pain levels pre- and post-intervention, participants will complete the Numerical Rating Pain Scale (NRPS) for patients 12-17 years old.
Time Frame: baseline, immediately after the intervention
The NRPS quantifies pain intensity on a scale from 0, being no pain, to 10, being the worst imaginable pain.
baseline, immediately after the intervention
To evaluate patient's, clinician's, and caregiver's satisfaction levels
Time Frame: immediately after the intervention
To analyze the patient's, clinician's, and caregiver's satisfaction levels, the feedback in the satisfaction survey at the end will be evaluated. The purpose of this analysis is to provide qualitative data on which aspects of the technological intervention the patient received mattered the most to the patient, clinician, and caregiver.
immediately after the intervention
To evaluate the patient's affect during the intervention using HRAD
Time Frame: during minor procedure
HRAD contains 5-item scale assessing participant's affective state; happy, relaxed, anxious, distressed, with a yes/no answer to cooperation.
during minor procedure
To evaluate the patient's cooperation during the intervention using the modified Induction Compliance Checklist (mICC)
Time Frame: during minor procedure
The mICC score will be recorded by the trained research observers during the minor procedure.11 behaviors that are commonly observed preoperatively will be recorded. Perfect compliance (score of 0) was compared to those that lacked cooperation. mICC will be rated at the time of intervention and only requires one RA.
during minor procedure

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start (Estimated)

May 1, 2026

Primary Completion (Estimated)

April 30, 2027

Study Completion (Estimated)

April 30, 2027

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

April 4, 2025

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

April 4, 2025

First Posted (Actual)

April 11, 2025

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

August 18, 2026

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

August 16, 2026

Last Verified

August 1, 2026

More Information

Terms related to this study

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

No

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

No

product manufactured in and exported from the U.S.

No

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Subscribe