Choosing the Right VR Experience for a Short Clinical Moment

Not every immersive experience is equally useful during a brief clinical procedure. A visually impressive world may take too long to understand. A highly active game may encourage movement at the wrong moment. A peaceful scene may be ideal for one person and too quiet to hold another person’s attention.

The right experience is not simply the most exciting one. It is the one that fits the person, the procedure and the time available.

Start with the person, not the technology

Age can guide a choice, but it should not define it. Two people of the same age may have very different interests, sensitivities and levels of familiarity with VR. A useful starting point is to offer a small number of clear options and let the person express a preference where practical.

That choice can create an early point of engagement. Instead of waiting passively for the procedure, the person has something specific to look forward to and focus on. Participation should always remain optional: declining VR is also a valid choice.

Match the level of activity to the procedure

VR distraction can be active or more passive. An active experience might ask the person to look, select, aim or respond. A passive experience may invite them to watch a story, explore a scene or follow gentle movement.

Both approaches can hold attention, but the clinical context matters. If the head, arm or body must remain still, the experience should avoid movements that conflict with the position chosen by staff. Controls should be simple, and the experience should never compete with an instruction from the clinician.

A 2024 multicentre randomised controlled trial studied 304 children aged 5–9 during blood draws. Children used either a VR task, the same task on a non-VR screen, or usual care. The VR and non-VR versions performed similarly and both compared favourably with usual care on key measures. This is a useful reminder that the quality of the distraction task matters alongside the display technology.

Engagement needs to begin quickly

A short procedure does not leave time for a long tutorial, complicated menu or slow story introduction. The person should be able to understand what they are seeing and begin engaging within moments.

For brief use, strong experiences often share a few qualities:

• an immediate point of interest from the opening scene;
• simple interactions that are easy to understand;
• continuous engagement without abrupt pauses or loading screens;
• comfortable visual movement that does not demand rapid head turns; and
• a natural stopping point when the procedure is complete.

Comfort includes the headset experience

Immersion should not come at the cost of physical comfort. Headset fit, visual clarity, sound level and the amount of virtual motion all influence whether an experience feels easy to use. Staff should be able to check comfort before proceeding and remove the headset promptly if the person wishes to stop.

A systematic review of VR safety in children under 14 found limited evidence of harms during short, supervised exposure, but it also noted that safety reporting across studies was often poor. Mild cybersickness symptoms can occur, and more consistent research is needed. Appropriate screening, supervision and individual choice therefore remain important.

Staff control should stay simple

During a clinical procedure, the professional’s attention belongs on the person and the care being delivered. VR should fit around that responsibility. Starting, pausing or ending an experience should require as little attention as possible.

The practical questions are straightforward:

1. Can the experience start quickly?
2. Can staff see that it is running correctly?
3. Does it support the position required for the procedure?
4. Can it be stopped immediately?
5. Can the workflow return to normal care without delay?

Variety is useful when it is purposeful

A library does not need endless options. A smaller selection can be more useful when each experience serves a clear purpose—for example, calm observation, gentle interaction, stronger active engagement or age-appropriate storytelling.

Relevant filters can help staff narrow the choice by procedure, age range, body area or level of activity. The goal is not to make a perfect psychological prediction. It is to make a sensible, person-centred choice quickly.

Designing for real clinical moments

Research on VR distraction is encouraging, but studies differ in their procedures, content, equipment and outcome measures. Results about VR in general should not be treated as proof that every application will have the same effect.

SendorVR is being designed as an optional, non-clinical comfort and engagement aid that works alongside standard clinical practice. It is not a medical treatment or a replacement for pain management, professional judgement or established care.

Learn more about the evidence and the limits of current research on the SendorVR science page.