Table 3 Patient responses to questionnaires post-procedure, post-ECV physiological parameters and comparison with pre-ECV observations.

From: A randomised controlled trial to assess the feasibility of utilising virtual reality to facilitate analgesia during external cephalic version

Parameters

Results for entire sample (n = 50)

Results for intervention (n = 25)

Results for control (n = 25)

p-value

Pain during procedure (mm)

55.20 (±25.14)

60.68 (±21.10)

49.76 (±28.00)

0.17+

SBP post-procedure (mmHg)

121.96 (±13.40)

122.72 (±13.77)

121.20 (±13.25)

0.69+

ΔSBP (mmHg)

−3.50 (15)

−5.00 (12.50)

0 (17.50)

0.57^

DBP post-procedure (mmHg)

72.00 (±9.90)

72.20 (±10.71)

71.80 (±9.23)

0.89+

ΔDBP (mmHg)

−8.60 (±11.00)

−9.40 (±10.34)

−7.80 (±11.73)

0.61+

HR post-procedure (bpm)

91.94 (±12.23)

90.84 (±11.56)

93.04 (±13.0)

0.530+

ΔHR (bpm)

4.91 (±14.31)

2.16 (±12.41)

7.63 (±15.78)

0.190+

Procedural success

39 (78%)

20 (80%)

19 (76%)

0.73#

Procedural difficulty

Easy

18 (36.0%)

9 (36.0%)

9 (36.0%)

0.94#

Moderate

17 (34.0%)

9 (36.0%)

8 (32.0%)

Difficult

15 (30.0%)

7 (28.0%)

8 (32.0%)

Number of attempts

2 (2)

2(2)

2(2)

0.60^

Duration of ECV (s)

530 (749.50)

623 (722.00)

439 (751.50)

0.20^

How would you rate using the device (mm)?

 

75 (32.50)

  

Side effects noted during procedure

13 (25.5%)

6 (24.0%)

7 (28.0%)

0.75#

Would you reconsider your decision to have the procedure based on the pain felt?

Yes

10 (20%)

3 (12.0%)

7 (28.0%)

0.16#

No

40 (80%)

22 (88.0%)

18 (72.0%)

  1. ^Mean (±SD), Median (IQR), +Independent samples t-test, ^Mann-Whitney U test, *statistically significant (p < 0.05), #Chi square test, ~z-test of proportions, Δchange in pre- and post-intervention parameter.