In recent years, hospitals in several countries (from the United States to the United Kingdom, from South Korea to Brazil) have started using virtual reality for clinical use in some departments. One question comes up early in any conversation with management: does it shorten hospital stays? The honest answer is that the evidence on length of stay is limited and depends heavily on context. This article summarises what published studies looked at, what they found, and what nobody can yet claim.
Where virtual reality is already used in hospitals
Published reports cluster in a few departments: paediatrics (needle procedures, dressing changes, imaging), oncology (long treatment sessions), orthopaedics and rehabilitation, burns, intensive care and preparation for surgery. In almost all of them, virtual reality comes in as a complementary, non-pharmacological approach, alongside usual care and under the team's supervision, not as a substitute for analgesia, sedation or clinical assessment.
Some departments use it routinely; in others it never went beyond the pilot. Both happen, and both tell you something.
What makes a hospital stay last longer
Length of stay does not depend only on the illness. It is also driven by:
- poorly controlled pain and anxiety, before and after procedures;
- immobility and loss of strength, especially in long stays;
- delirium and disrupted sleep, common in intensive care and in frailer patients;
- complications and infections that arise along the way;
- and factors that are not clinical at all: waiting for a test, for transport, for a place in continuing care or for support at home.
At most, virtual reality may touch some of the first. It does not touch the last at all, and in many hospitals those are what add the most days.
What studies have observed
- Pain and anxiety during procedures. This is where the evidence is most abundant. Randomised trials and systematic reviews have observed lower reported pain and anxiety during procedures, in children and adults, with immersive distraction. Virtual reality can help manage pain and anxiety, but effects vary with the procedure, age and content, and some studies found no difference.
- Sleep and agitation. Small studies, mostly in intensive care, have explored calm immersive environments for sleep and agitation. The results are preliminary and do not support firm conclusions.
- Mobilisation. There are rehabilitation studies using exercise in virtual reality, with mixed results. In RVer, guided exercise corresponds to RVer Motion, a module in development and not covered by the Class I medical device registration, which covers only the base product.
- Length of stay. Few studies measure it as a primary outcome. Those that do come from specific settings with small samples, and the results are not consistent. A calmer procedure does not automatically translate into an earlier discharge.
What is not known yet
It is not known whether virtual reality reduces length of stay in general, or by how much. There is no basis for promising freed beds, fewer drugs or a financial return in any particular department. In our public library, only eight studies are about costs and return, all from very specific settings, and their figures do not transfer to another hospital: the population, the comparator and who pays are all different.
We explain this in more detail in “The VR ROI nobody can prove”. The conclusion is not that there is no value. It is that value has to be measured in your own department, with metrics decided before you start.
What a manager can measure
Rather than starting from a savings figure, a well-designed pilot answers implementation questions: how many sessions happen per week, how much staff time they take (timed, not estimated), how many patients decline or stop early, and in which departments the tool actually becomes routine. A pilot does not demonstrate clinical efficacy and should not be presented as if it did. See how to run a pilot in a healthcare service.
Where RVer fits
RVer is a virtual reality system for clinical use whose base product, the 360° video library, is registered as a Class I Medical Device in EUDAMED (Basic UDI-DI 56006195127RVERTZ) and with INFARMED (Portugal, CDM 94571546) and CE-marked under MDR 2017/745. The RVer Motion, RVer Neuro and RVer Exposure modules are in development and not covered by that registration. Nor is the registration an efficacy claim.
It runs offline, does not depend on hospital IT systems and does not collect patients' clinical data. It is always used with a professional present, with patients aged 10 to 100. It does not prescribe, assess or diagnose, and it does not replace usual care. The studies are in the public library, including those with weak or neutral results, and what the registration covers is set out in Science and regulation.
Important note: virtual reality for clinical use is a complementary, non-pharmacological approach, presented on the basis of the available evidence and used under the supervision of healthcare professionals. It does not replace proven treatments, clinical assessment, or medical prescription. This article is informational and does not constitute clinical advice.
Frequently asked questions
Does virtual reality reduce length of stay?
It is not known in general. Few studies measure length of stay as a primary outcome, they come from specific settings, and the results are not consistent. The strongest evidence concerns pain and anxiety during procedures, and even there effects vary.
Which hospital departments use virtual reality?
Published reports cluster in paediatrics, oncology, orthopaedics and rehabilitation, burns, intensive care and preparation for surgery, always as a complement to usual care and under the team's supervision.
Can a hospital know in advance how much it will save?
No. There are few economic studies (eight in our public library) and their figures do not transfer to another hospital, because the population, the comparator and who pays are different. What a pilot can measure is sessions per week, staff time and refusals.
Does RVer replace analgesia, sedation or clinical assessment?
No. RVer is a complementary, non-pharmacological approach, always used with a professional present. It does not prescribe, assess or diagnose. The Class I medical device registration covers the base product, the 360° video library, and is not an efficacy claim.