Ethical tensions of virtual reality treatment in vulnerable patients

Article metrics

Emerging virtual reality systems offer intriguing therapeutic possibilities, but their development and use should be guided by ethical priorities that account for the specific vulnerabilities of patients.

Access optionsAccess options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.

from$8.99

All prices are NET prices.

Fig. 1

References

  1. 1.

    Dascal, J. et al. Virtual reality and medical inpatients: a systematic review of randomized, controlled trials. Innov. Clin. Neurosci. 14, 14–21 (2017).

  2. 2.

    Howard, M. C. A meta-analysis and systematic literature review of virtual reality rehabilitation programs. Comput. Hum. Behav. 70, 317–327 (2017).

  3. 3.

    Freeman, D. et al. Automated psychological therapy using immersive virtual reality for treatment of fear of heights: a single-blind, parallel-group, randomised controlled trial. Lancet Psychiatry 5, 625–632 (2018).

  4. 4.

    Pot-Kolder, R. M. C. A. et al. Virtual-reality-based cognitive behavioural therapy versus waiting list control for paranoid ideation and social avoidance in patients with psychotic disorders: a single-blind randomised controlled trial. Lancet Psychiatry 5, 217–226 (2018).

  5. 5.

    Klein Tuente, S., Bogaerts, S., van IJzendoorn, S. & Veling, W. Effect of virtual reality aggression prevention training for forensic psychiatric patients (VRAPT): study protocol of a multi-center RCT. BMC Psychiatry 18, 251 (2018).

  6. 6.

    Kellmeyer, P. Neurophilosophical and ethical aspects of virtual reality therapy in neurology and psychiatry. Camb. Q. Healthc. Ethics 27, 610–627 (2018).

  7. 7.

    Mackenzie, C., Rogers, W. & Dodds, S. Vulnerability: New Essays in Ethics and Feminist Philosophy (Oxford University Press, 2013).

  8. 8.

    Ganguli-Mitra, A. & Biller-Andorno, N. Vulnerability in healthcare and research ethics. in The SAGE Handbook of Health Care Ethics (eds. Chadwick, R., ten Have, H. & Meslin, E. M.) 239–250 (SAGE, 2011).

  9. 9.

    Hurst, S. A. Vulnerability in research and health care; describing the elephant in the room? Bioethics 22, 191–202 (2008).

  10. 10.

    Orji, R. & Moffatt, K. Persuasive technology for health and wellness: State-of-the-art and emerging trends. Health Inform. J. 24, 66–91 (2018).

  11. 11.

    Timmer, J., Kool, L. & van Est, R. Ethical challenges in emerging applications of persuasive technology. in Persuasive Technology (eds. MacTavish, T. & Basapur, S.) 196–201 (Springer International, 2015).

  12. 12.

    Beauchamp, T. L. & Childress, J. F. Principles of Biomedical Ethics (Oxford University Press, 2001).

  13. 13.

    Morozov, E. To Save Everything, Click Here: The Folly of Technological Solutionism (PublicAffairs, 2014).

  14. 14.

    Fogg, B. J. Persuasive Technology: Using Computers to Change what We Think and Do (Morgan Kaufmann, 2003).

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was partly supported by the German Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF) grant no. 13GW0053D to the University of Freiburg - Medical Center; and by the German Research Foundation (DFG) grant no. EXC1086 (BrainLinks-BrainTools) to the University of Freiburg. Author P.K. wishes to thank his friend Dr. med. Lorenz Lehmann (University of Heidelberg - Medical Center) for valuable inspiration in designing the figure.

Author information

Correspondence to Philipp Kellmeyer.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark