[1]
;
Acosta Yansapanta, Estefanía Alexandra
[1]
;
Tacuri Pérez, Sheila Melany
[1]
;
Defaz Defaz, Lisseth Monserrath
[1]
;
Sangacha Yugsi, Anderson Jose
[1]
;
Venegas Mera, Beatriz
[1]
;
Chisag Guamán, María Marlene
[1]
;
Chasillacta Amores, Fabiola Beatriz
[1]
;
Chérrez-Ramírez, Andrés
[1]
;
Acosta Nuñez, Christopher Hilario
[1]
Ambato, Ecuador
Introduction: Cancer treatment, especially chemotherapy, not only causes adverse physical effects but also has a significant emotional impact on patients, manifesting as anxiety, depression, fear, and pain. In response to this situation, Immersive Virtual Reality (IVR) has emerged as a non-pharmacological intervention capable of improving the patient experience through sensory distraction, relaxation, and reduction of suffering. Its effectiveness is based on Melzack and Wall's Gate Control Theory of Pain, which explains how certain stimuli can inhibit the perception of pain. Objective: To evaluate the effectiveness of IVR as a complementary non-pharmacological intervention for reducing anxiety and pain in cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy. Methodology: A systematic review was conducted under the PRISMA 2020 guidelines, using a qualitative-descriptive approach. Studies in English and Spanish published between 2014 and 2025 were included, consulting 10 databases (PubMed, Scopus, SciELO, among others). The search strategy used DeCS and MeSH terms combined with Boolean operators. Filters were applied to include only studies with full text and open access. The target population was adults undergoing active treatment with pain and anxiety. Results were evaluated using validated scales such as EVA, HADS-A, STAI, NRS, BPS, and ESCID. The research question was formulated according to the PICO model. Results: The included studies show that Immersive Virtual Reality (IVR) significantly reduces anxiety and pain in cancer patients during chemotherapy. Decreases of 30–45% were reported on the STAI scale and 25–40% on the HADS-A. In terms of pain, reductions were 20–50% on the VAS and 35% on the NRS. In addition, there was a reduced need for anxiolytics (20–30%) and greater satisfaction in 70% of patients. The BPS and ESCID scales also reflected behavioral improvements. These results support the effectiveness of IVR as a complementary intervention, although larger and more standardized studies are still needed. Conclusion: IVR is an effective, safe, and humanizing intervention that can complement oncological treatment and significantly improve the patient experience during chemotherapy.
© 2001-2026 Fundación Dialnet · Todos los derechos reservados