Search

Immersive virtual reality (VR) games are increasingly becoming part of everyday life. Several studies support immersive VR technology as a treatment method for mental health problems. There is however little insight into the prevalence of commercially available VR games for treatment of mental health problems on commercial platforms such as STEAM, and to what extent they can be used as tools for treatment or add-on treatment of mental health problems. The aim of this study was to take a first look at the prevalence and overview of content of commercially available games. The games were found using search words related to psychiatric diagnosis or care. We performed a search for keywords related to symptoms, diagnosis, and treatment strategies of mental health problems. The search was performed November 2020 on STEAM. A scheme was created for elimination and inclusion of games, eliminating those games which were irrelevant to mental health or had triggering elements such as violence, excessive movement which could trigger nausea, horror and pornographic imagery. In total, 735 hits were found, 565 unique games. After the games were reviewed for content via trailers, descriptions and screenshots, 32%, i.e. 182 games passed the inclusion criteria. Majority of the games which were excluded were either not connected to mental health, contained violence, adult content or were in other ways irrelevant or inappropriate. Commercial platforms are only at the beginning of the development towards therapeutic content. Currently the quality and usability for therapeutic use is scarce but holds great potential. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The use of chatbots in mental health support has increased exponentially in recent years, with studies showing that they may be effective in treating mental health problems. More recently, the use of visual avatars called digital humans has been introduced. Digital humans have the capability to use facial expressions as another dimension in human-computer interactions. It is important to study the difference in emotional response and usability preferences between text-based chatbots and digital humans for interacting with mental health services., Objective: This study aims to explore to what extent a digital human interface and a text-only chatbot interface differed in usability when tested by healthy participants, using BETSY (Behavior, Emotion, Therapy System, and You) which uses 2 distinct interfaces: a digital human with anthropomorphic features and a text-only user interface. We also set out to explore how chatbot-generated conversations on mental health (specific to each interface) affected self-reported feelings and biometrics., Methods: We explored to what extent a digital human with anthropomorphic features differed from a traditional text-only chatbot regarding perception of usability through the System Usability Scale, emotional reactions through electroencephalography, and feelings of closeness. Healthy participants (n=45) were randomized to 2 groups that used a digital human with anthropomorphic features (n=25) or a text-only chatbot with no such features (n=20). The groups were compared by linear regression analysis and t tests., Results: No differences were observed between the text-only and digital human groups regarding demographic features. The mean System Usability Scale score was 75.34 (SD 10.01; range 57-90) for the text-only chatbot versus 64.80 (SD 14.14; range 40-90) for the digital human interface. Both groups scored their respective chatbot interfaces as average or above average in usability. Women were more likely to report feeling annoyed by BETSY., Conclusions: The text-only chatbot was perceived as significantly more user-friendly than the digital human, although there were no significant differences in electroencephalography measurements. Male participants exhibited lower levels of annoyance with both interfaces, contrary to previously reported findings., (©Almira Osmanovic Thunström, Hanne Krage Carlsen, Lilas Ali, Tomas Larson, Andreas Hellström, Steinn Steingrimsson. Originally published in JMIR Human Factors (https://humanfactors.jmir.org), 29.04.2024.)

Objective: Calm rooms have been developed and implemented in psychiatric inpatient care settings to offer patients a dedicated space for relaxation in a convenient and safe environment. Recent technology developments have enabled virtual reality (VR) equivalents of calm rooms that can be feasibly deployed in psychiatric care settings. While research has shown VR environments to be efficacious in inducing relaxation, little is known how these virtual calm rooms are perceived by patients. The aim of this study was to elucidate patient experiences of using a VR calm room in a psychiatric inpatient setting., Design: Qualitative interview study. Semi-structured interviews were analysed using qualitive inductive content analysis, which focuses on the interpretation of texts for making replicable and valid inferences., Setting: Swedish hospital psychiatric inpatient care setting with a wireless, three degrees-of-freedom VR head-mounted display running a calm room application simulating nature environment., Participants: 20 adult patients (12 women) with bipolar disorder (n=18) or unipolar depression (n=2)., Results: Participants experienced the use of the VR calm room as having a positive impact on them, inducing awareness, calmness and well-being. They were thankful to be offered a non-pharmacological alternative for anxiety relief. Participants also expressed that they had some concerns about how they would react emotionally before using the VR device. However, after use, they highlighted that their overall experience was positive. They also expressed that they could see potential for further development of VR technology in psychiatric care., Conclusions: VR technology has the potential to solve pressing logistic issues in offering calm rooms in psychiatric inpatient care. VR calm rooms appear to be appreciated by psychiatric inpatients, who value their accessibility, convenience and variety of modalities offered. Participants perceived an increase in their well-being after use., Competing Interests: Competing interests: PL reports having received minor consulting fees from Mimerse, the company that developed the VR application used. Mimerse is no longer an active company., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Interest in sensory rooms or so-called "calm rooms" in psychiatric inpatient care has increased significantly. In a hospital setting, their purpose is to introduce a relaxing environment to increase well-being as well as to decrease anxiety and aggressive behaviors. Calm rooms can also be used as a tool to provide self-help through a convenient environment for the patients and, at the same time, strengthen the therapeutic relationship between the patient and the professional. Recent developments in virtual reality (VR) have made virtual calm rooms possible, but these have not yet been evaluated in psychiatric inpatient care., Objective: This study aimed to compare the effects of VR and physical calm rooms on self-reported well-being and physiological markers of arousal., Methods: The study was conducted in 2 inpatient psychiatric wards specializing in bipolar disorder from March 2019 to February 2021. Patients who were already admitted were asked if they were interested in using a calm room and willing to provide ratings. This study relied on the quasi-randomized allocation of patients to the wards, which either had a physical or VR calm room. Self-assessment scales (Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale-Self Assessment [MADRS-S], Beck Anxiety Scale, and Clinical Global Impression) were used to determine the participants' baseline level of depressive and anxiety symptoms before their use of the physical or VR calm room. The study determined the state of well-being measured using an 11-point visual analog scale (VAS) as well as arousal measured by blood pressure (systolic and diastolic) and heart rate before and after the use of the calm rooms. The primary end point was self-reported well-being using the VAS., Results: A total of 60 participants were included-40 used the VR calm room and 20 used the physical calm room. The mean age of participants was 39 years and the majority were women (35/60, 58%). Analysis of VAS measurement showed improved well-being at the group level from before to after the intervention (P<.05), with no statistically significant difference in effects between the 2 different interventions. Effects were not moderated by baseline depression levels (dichotomized as MADRS-S >20 or ≤20) despite an overall difference in reported well-being between subgroups., Conclusions: Although the power in this study was low, the findings of this first study indicate comparable effects with respect to well-being and arousal of a VR calm room and a physical calm room. This suggests that a VR calm room can be a viable alternative when the use of a physical calm room is not an option for logistic or other reasons., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03918954; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03918954., (©Maria Ilioudi, Philip Lindner, Lilas Ali, Sara Wallström, Almira Osmanovic Thunström, Michael Ioannou, Nicole Anving, Viktor Johansson, William Hamilton, Örjan Falk, Steinn Steingrimsson. Originally published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research (https://www.jmir.org), 19.05.2023.)