https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1293-8755
Figures
Abstract
Objective
The aim of this study was to compare the therapeutic efficacy of integrating virtual reality technology with conventional pelvic floor rehabilitation therapy versus conventional therapy alone in postpartum women with myofascial pelvic pain syndrome.
Methods
Fifty-seven postpartum women diagnosed with myofascial pelvic pain syndrome were recruited for this study between March 1, 2023, and December 29, 2023. All participants were randomly assigned to two groups. The experimental group (n = 27) underwent virtual reality training combined with conventional pelvic floor rehabilitation therapy, while the control group (n = 30) received only conventional pelvic floor rehabilitation therapy. Both groups completed ten treatment sessions. Changes in pelvic floor muscle contraction function were assessed using pelvic floor surface electromyography. Musculoskeletal ultrasound was employed to measure muscle thickness and Young’s modulus of the pelvic floor muscles. The Visual Analog Scale was used to evaluate the degree of pain experienced during palpation of the pelvic floor muscles.
Results
The experimental group demonstrated a significant reduction in relaxation time during the fast muscle contraction stage of the pelvic floor muscle’s Glazer S-EMG (P < 0.05). No statistically significant differences were observed in the Visual Analog Scale, pelvic floor muscle thickness, or Young’s modulus of the pelvic floor muscle during resting and maximum contraction states (P > 0.05).
Conclusion
The integration of virtual reality technology with conventional pelvic floor rehabilitation therapy has the potential to improve the relaxation capacity of fast-twitch muscle fibers within the pelvic floor muscles. However, it does not seem to offer any benefits in increasing pelvic floor muscle thickness or in alleviating myofascial pelvic pain.
Citation: Liu L, Lin Z, Chen X, Hou Y, Liu Y, Wang X, et al. (2026) Effectiveness of virtual reality technology combined with conventional pelvic floor rehabilitation training in postpartum myofascial pelvic pain syndrome: A randomized controlled trial. PLoS One 21(3): e0340918. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0340918
Editor: Mehrnaz Kajbafvala, Iran University of Medical Sciences, IRAN, ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF
Received: July 17, 2025; Accepted: December 29, 2025; Published: March 31, 2026
Copyright: © 2026 Liu et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Data Availability: All relevant data are within the paper and its Supporting Information files.
Funding: This study is funded by the Foreign Cooperation Program of Fujian Provincial Science and Technology Department [No. 2021I0019], the Fujian Provincial Health and Health Commission Project [No. 2018-1-78] and the Rehabilitation technology innovation center by joint collaboration of ministry of education and Fujian province, Fujian University of traditional Chinese Medicine [No. X2022006-Collaboration]. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Introduction
Myofascial pelvic pain syndrome (MPPS) is characterized by the presence of highly sensitive trigger points within the pelvic floor muscles (PFM) and surrounding musculature. This condition manifests as pelvic floor pain accompanied by myofascial tension or spasm [1,2]. It is one of the common pelvic floor dysfunction disorders affecting women after delivery [3]. The experience of pain has been shown to cause prolonged fatigue and psychological disorders [4], which significantly affect the daily lives and occupational functioning of patients with MPPS.
Pregnancy is typically associated with significant changes in the musculoskeletal system [5]. As pregnancy progresses, the gradual increase in fetal weight leads to a corresponding rise in the load on the pelvic floor muscles (PFM) [6]. Prolonged overloading, as well as acute or repeated microtrauma can cause chronic tightening and contracture of muscle tissue [7]. This process results in local muscle hypoxia and acidosis, which gradually contribute to the formation of myofascial pain trigger points. The presence of these trigger points induce hypertonia of the PFM, leading to muscle spasms and difficulty in achieving muscle relaxation [8].
Current rehabilitation modalities include myofascial manipulation release, biofeedback therapy, electrical stimulation, and magnetic therapy, among others [9,10]. All of these treatments require a basic awareness of PFM. However, unlike other skeletal muscles, the contraction and relaxation of the PFM are not easily observable to the naked eye [11]. Previous research has shown that 70% of women with pelvic floor dysfunction are unable to correctly contract their PFM, and 97% can only achieve a weak contraction [12]. Effective contraction of the PFM is crucial for restoring its function. Therefore, it is essential to develop methods that enhance sensory perception during PFM training.
In recent years, virtual reality (VR) has been extensively utilized in managing musculoskeletal pain, emerging as an effective approach for chronic pain management [13–17]. By immersing individuals in engaging virtual environments, VR provides a multifaceted sensory experience that includes visual, auditory, and tactile stimuli [18]. Previous studies have demonstrated that VR technology can enhance muscle perception, facilitate muscle relaxation, and improve motor function [19–22]. For individuals with MPPS, impaired sensory perception and reduced relaxation capacity are critical factors that significantly influence both pain recurrence and the effectiveness of PFM training [7,23]. In clinical practice, patients with MPPS are typically instructed to perceive and relax their PFM through verbal guidance or imagery techniques. However, these methods often lack contextual and sensory intuitiveness, resulting in largely unsatisfactory outcomes. To date, no research has investigated the rehabilitative impact of VR technology combined with conventional PFM rehabilitation training for postpartum women with MPPS.
This study aimed to investigate the therapeutic potential of VR technology in enhancing PFM proprioception among individuals with MPPS. We hypothesized that VR technology would demonstrate superior efficacy in facilitating both the relaxation and contraction functions of the PFM compared to conventional rehabilitation training alone.
Materials and methods
Study design
This randomized controlled clinical trial recruited participants from March 1, 2023, to December 29, 2023. A total of 60 eligible subjects were enrolled and randomly assigned to either the experimental group or the control group. The study was conducted at the Third People’s Hospital and the Rehabilitation Hospital affiliated with Fujian University of Chinese Medicine. Ethical approval was granted by the Ethics Committee of the Rehabilitation Hospital affiliated with Fujian University of Chinese Medicine (approval number 2022KY-025–01. Ethical approval was obtained in written form. This study was registered on March 20, 2023, at https://www.chictr.org.cn/index.html (registration number ChiCTR2300069517). Participants who expressed willingness to participate and signed the written informed consent form were then assessed for eligibility.
Participants
The study participants consisted of women who experienced MPPS, characterized by moderate to severe pelvic pain lasting at least six months, along with identifiable trigger points detected through palpation assessment. Inclusion criteria were as follows: (1) postpartum women meeting the MPPS diagnostic criteria [24]; (2) aged between 20 and 45 years; (3) hypertonicity of the PFM as determined by the Glazer assessment. Exclusion criteria included: (1) reproductive system-related diseases (e.g., endometriosis, acute pelvic inflammatory disease, pelvic venous congestion syndrome); (2) urinary system-related diseases (e.g., interstitial cystitis, recurrent urinary tract infection, urethral diverticulum); (3) digestive system-related diseases (e.g., irritable bowel syndrome, inflammatory bowel disease, diverticular colitis); (4) neurological disorders (e.g., brain injury, spinal cord injury, severe cognitive impairment); (5) postmenopausal women; (6) contraindications for pelvic floor ultrasonography; (7) unclean lochia; and (8) a history of pelvic girdle pain.
Sample size
In this study, the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) was chosen as the primary measure of symptom improvement in patients with MPPS. Based on this outcome, a two-sided test with α = 0.05, a confidence level power (1-β) of = 0.8, and an expected effect size of 0.83 were established. Using G*Power 3.1 software, the required sample size for each group was calculated to be 24 participants per group. Additionally, accounting for a potential attrition rate of 20%, the total sample size required need for this study was ultimately determined to be 60 participants.
Randomised
The project supervisor used SPSS version 25.0 to sequentially compile 60 datasets labeled 1 through 60. Random numbers were generated using the software’ s random number generator with a fixed seed value of 2,000,000. After ranking these numbers, participants were sorted in ascending order based on their ranks: those with ranked 1 to 30 were assigned to the experimental group, while those ranked 31 to 60 were allocated to the control group.
Sixty eligible MPPS participants were enrolled and assigned sequential numbers (1–60) based on their enrollment dates. The randomization sequence, generated using SPSS 25.0, was securely stored by an independent researcher who was not involved in treatment or assessment. Using this pre-generated sequence, participants were randomized into either the VR training group or the control group. Group assignments were disclosed to eligible participants by the project coordinator during their initial treatment session.
Treatments
The control group received general pelvic floor physical therapy using the Vishee Pelvic Floor Rehabilitation Instrument (model SA9800). The therapy comprised the following components: (1) Electrical stimulation therapy, with a the frequency was set at 50 Hz, a duration of 2 seconds, and a pulse width ranging from 200 to 320 μs. The current intensity was gradually increased from 0 to the patient’s comfort threshold not exceeding 60 mA, and was applied for 10 minutes per session. (2) pelvic floor muscle training, where the training intensity was determined based on the results of the participants’ PFM evaluation results. The training intensity was set between 50% and 80% of the maximum PFM contraction strength. All participants followed to the voice-guided instructions from the biofeedback device, performing a 5-second PFM contraction followed by a 5-second relaxation phase. This cycle was repeated for 10 minutes per session. (3) Abdominal breathing exercises, conducted for 10 minutes following the voice prompts. Each treatment session lasted 30 minutes. A total of 10 treatments treatment sessions were administered, with an average frequency of 2–3 times per week.
The experimental group received the same electrical stimulation and PFM training as the control group, with the addition of relaxation training facilitated by VR glasses (Pico 4k). In the designed simulated scenarios-Scenario 1 (Ocean, Fig 1) and Scenario 2 (Swing, Fig 2), — participants selected a scene based on their comfort level. Participants engaged in deep inhalation and slow exhalation synchronized with the rhythm of the visual display and auditory cues. During inhalation, subjects followed the guidance of a virtual character to slightly distend their abdomen while simultaneously relaxing the PFM, extending and relaxing toward the end of the body in accordance with the wave or swing movement. During exhalation, participants were instructed to slowly exhale through the mouth while contracting the abdomen and moving the PFM back and upward in harmony with the wave or swing. All treatments were administered by the same physiotherapist Fig 3.
Outcome measurements
Pelvic floor muscle surface electromyography.
The Glazer assessment (Vishee, SA9800) was used to evaluate the surface electromyography (s-EMG) of the PFM in both groups before and after the intervention. The evaluation process is divided into five stages [25]: (1) Pre-resting stage: average s-EMG value (reference range: 2–4μV) and variability (reference range: < 0.2); (2) Rapid contraction stage: average s-EMG value (reference range: 35–45μV), and relaxation time (<0.5seconds). (3) Tension contraction stage: the average s-EMG value (reference range: 30–40μV), relaxation time (<1second), and variability (reference range: < 0.2); (4) Endurance contraction stage: average s-EMG value (reference range: 25–35μV), and variability (reference range: < 0.2); (5) Post-resting stage: values consistent with those observed during the preceding resting phase.
The thickness and Young’s modulus of the pelvic floor muscle.
The musculoskeletal ultrasound device (ACUSON Sequoia Silver) was used to measure the thickness and Young’s modulus of PFM. Muscle thickness is positively correlated with and muscle contraction function. Shear wave elastography (SWE) was employed to obtain the Young’s modulus of the PFM. The Young’s modulus value reflects muscle stiffness and tension, with higher values indicating increased tissue stiffness and muscle tension [26,27]. Following the standardized measurement position and protocol for PFM ultrasound examination [28], we assessed the thickness and Young’s modulus of the PFM at rest and during maximum contraction.
Pain scale.
The Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) [29] was used to assess the level of pain experienced during the palpation of the PFM, both before and after treatment.
Follow-up
An online questionnaire survey was administered to the participants one year after the intervention concluded. The questionnaire primarily included the following items (see Table 1):
Statistical analysis
The analysis was conducted using SPSS (Version 27). Data normality was assessed through visual inspection and the Shapiro-Wilk test. Continuous variables were reported as mean (SD) or median (first quartile[Q1]−third quartile[Q3]). The Student’s t-test or Mann–Whitney U test was employed to compare baseline characteristics and outcomes—including VAS, s-EMG, thickness, and Young’s modulus of the PFM—between the two groups before and after the intervention. Within-group comparisons were performed using the paired t-test. A p-value of less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant throughout the analysis. Follow-up visits with participants were conducted from December 29, 2024, to January 10, 2025.
Results
Baseline data of participants
A total of 60 participants were initially selected for inclusion in this study. Three were excluded from the trial group, resulting in a final sample size of 27 participants in that group. Table 2 provides a summary of the basic demographic information for both groups. No statistically significant differences were observed between the groups in terms of age, height, weight, or body mass index (BMI)(P > 0.05).
The Glazer surface EMG of pelvic floor muscle
Following the intervention, a significant difference was observed between the two groups regarding relaxation time during the rapid contraction phase (P < 0.05), as shown in Table 3. The experimental group demonstrated a shorter recovery period from maximum contraction to the resting state.
Thickness and young’s modulus of the pelvic floor muscle
Table 4 shows the differences in musculoskeletal ultrasound measurements of PFM between the two groups. There were no statistically significant differences in the thickness or Young’s modulus of the PFM at both the resting state and maximum contraction state following the intervention (P > 0.05).
Visual Analog Scale (VAS)
Fig 4 shows the comparison of VAS scores between the two groups. There was no statistically significant difference in VAS scores after the intervention (P > 0.05). However, both the experimental and control groups demonstrated a significant reduction in VAS scores following the intervention compared to pre-treatment levels (P < 0.05), as illustrated in Fig 5.
Follow up results
One year after the conclusion of the project intervention, an online questionnaire survey was conducted among the participants. A total of 26 women from the experimental group participated, while one woman did not. Similarly, 29 women from the control group participated, with one woman also not participating. The statistical analysis of the five follow-up questions showed no significant difference between the two groups (P > 0.05), as illustrated in Figs 6–10. Finally, the perceptions and experiences of the participants in the experimental group following VR therapy are presented in Fig 11.
Discussion
The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of VR technology combined with general pelvic floor rehabilitation therapy compared to general pelvic floor rehabilitation alone. Following the intervention, the relaxation time during the rapid contraction stage was significantly shorter in the trial group. These results indicate an improved ability to relax fast-twitch muscle fibers, suggesting that the integration of VR has a more pronounced effect on enhancing the relaxation capacity of PFM.
Pelvic floor muscle s-EMG
Our findings revealed that the relaxation time of the fast muscle in the experimental group was significantly shorter than that in the control group. This result indicates that the relaxation ability of PFM in the experimental group was significantly improved compared to the control group. To our knowledge, individuals with MPPS exhibit PFM overactivity and hypertonicity, which impede PFM relaxation and result in prolonged relaxation time [30]. These results are consistent with the findings of Yongmei Shi [31], who demonstrated that PFM exercises based on VR technology can significantly improve PFM tone among individuals with postpartum pelvic floor dysfunction.
There may be three reasons for the significant differences observed in fast muscle function. First, previous studies have identified a correlation between chronic pain and muscle tension [32]. The immersive nature of VR promotes muscle relaxation, potentially alleviating overactivity in these muscles [33–35]. Second, anxiety symptoms are commonly observed in individuals with MPPS [36]. Numerous studies have demonstrated that VR can effectively reduce stress, anxiety, and pain [34,37,38], which may contribute to the relaxation of the PFM. Third, VR technology engages multiple senses, including visual and auditory perception, thereby stimulating the brain in a multisensory manner [39]. Previous research has shown that the immersive experience of VR can evoke a profound sense of presence, enhancing the efficacy of motor training through the mediation of mirror neurons [40,41]. In summary, our findings suggest that VR may facilitate relaxation of the PFM and relieve tension in these muscles.
The thickness of the pelvic floor muscle
The results of this study indicate that there are no significant differences in the thickness and Young’s modulus of the PFM between the two groups. Our findings are consistent with those of two previous studies. Cho et al. reported that a VR-based running training program did not effectively increase the thickness of the non-paralyzed side of the medial gastrocnemius after six weeks [42]. Similarly, Gopal Nambi et al. [43] found no statistically significant change in lumbar multifidus muscle thickness among individuals with chronic non-specific low back pain following the VR intervention. Although VR training is insufficient to alter muscle thickness, it can effectively stimulate sensory receptors, thereby enhancing muscle strength and motor function [43]. Studies have confirmed that VR, as a modality for pelvic floor muscle training, can improve participant compliance, alleviate voiding symptoms, and enhance PFM function. It is an important adjunctive therapy for PFM rehabilitation in patients with urinary incontinence [42]. In summary, VR can serve as an auxiliary method to enhance the contractile function of the PFM, but changes in muscle thickness may require long-term intervention.
VAS
The study observed a reduction in VAS scores among participants in both groups. However, no significant difference was found between the groups, indicating that the two intervention methods had similar effects in alleviating pain. This result aligns with previous studies [44,45], which also reported no significant differences in VAS scores when comparing VR interventions with conventional training in individuals suffering from neck pain or non-specific chronic low back pain. Nevertheless, the findings regarding the effect of VR on chronic pain remain inconsistent. A meta-analysis [46] examining the impact of VR on acute and chronic pain demonstrated that VR is an effective tool for alleviating acute pain, while maintaining long-term analgesic effects for chronic pain remains challenging. This inconsistency may be attributed to factors such as the characteristics of the VR device and the dosage of the intervention. An inadequate intervention dosage is likely to result in no significant alleviation of chronic pain. Furthermore, the primary symptom of MPPS is pain caused by the presence of myofascial trigger points. It is possible that the VR intervention was insufficient in addressing these trigger points, which may explain the lack of significant differences in VAS scores between the two groups.
Follow-up results
One year after the conclusion of the intervention, an online questionnaire survey was conducted among the participants. A total of 26 individuals from the experimental group participated, with one individual not participating; similarly, 29 individuals from the control group participated, also with one individual not participating. The survey results indicate that 80.77% of participants in the experimental group experienced complete resolution of their pain, and 79.31% expressed a favorable perception of the treatment using VR glasses. These findings suggest that VR intervention produces positive outcomes and may serve as a potentially viable alternative to conventional pelvic floor rehabilitation training.
Conclusions
Virtual reality can enhance the relaxation capacity of fast-twitch muscle fibers in the pelvic floor muscles, thereby improving their motor function. However, it does not increase muscle thickness or reduce muscle pain.
Study limitations
This study has several limitations that should be acknowledged. First, the design included only two VR scenes, resulting in a limited number of training scenarios for participants and making it difficult to accommodate diverse participant preferences. Second, all participants were diagnosed with mild MPPS, which limited the ability to demonstrate significant efficacy. Third, the sample size was relatively small. Additionally, MPPS is a complex multisystem disorder, and the efficacy achieved through VR alone may be insufficient. Therefore, a multidisciplinary and multi-technological approach is essential.
Supporting information
S4 File. The thickness and Youngs modulus of pelvic floor muscle.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0340918.s004
(XLSX)
S6 File. Pelvic floor muscle surface electromyography.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0340918.s006
(XLSX)
Acknowledgments
Thank you to everyone who contributed to this article. We also wish to acknowledge all participants in this project.
References
- 1. Barbero M, Schneebeli A, Koetsier E, Maino P. Myofascial pain syndrome and trigger points: evaluation and treatment in patients with musculoskeletal pain. Curr Opin Support Palliat Care. 2019;13(3):270–6. pmid:31313700
- 2. Espejo-Antúnez L, Tejeda JF-H, Albornoz-Cabello M, Rodríguez-Mansilla J, de la Cruz-Torres B, Ribeiro F, et al. Dry needling in the management of myofascial trigger points: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials. Complement Ther Med. 2017;33:46–57. pmid:28735825
- 3. Ye J, Fei H, Du J, Liu Y, He J, Li M, et al. Exploring transvaginal sonographic characteristics of the levator ani muscle in women with postpartum pelvic floor myofascial pain. BMC Womens Health. 2024;24(1):245. pmid:38637819
- 4. Berghmans B. Physiotherapy for pelvic pain and female sexual dysfunction: an untapped resource. Int Urogynecol J. 2018;29(5):631–8. pmid:29318334
- 5. Casagrande D, Gugala Z, Clark SM, Lindsey RW. Low Back Pain and Pelvic Girdle Pain in Pregnancy. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2015;23(9):539–49. pmid:26271756
- 6. DeLancey JOL, Masteling M, Pipitone F, LaCross J, Mastrovito S, Ashton-Miller JA. Pelvic floor injury during vaginal birth is life-altering and preventable: what can we do about it?. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2024;230(3):279-294.e2. pmid:38168908
- 7. Ross V, Detterman C, Hallisey A. Myofascial Pelvic Pain: An Overlooked and Treatable Cause of Chronic Pelvic Pain. J Midwifery Womens Health. 2021;66(2):148–60. pmid:33788379
- 8. Phan VT, Stratton P, Tandon HK, Sinaii N, Aredo JV, Karp BI, et al. Widespread myofascial dysfunction and sensitisation in women with endometriosis-associated chronic pelvic pain: A cross-sectional study. Eur J Pain. 2021;25(4):831–40. pmid:33326662
- 9. Zhu M, Huang F, Xu J, Zhou Q, Ding B, Shen Y. Efficacy and factors of myofascial release therapy combined with electrical and magnetic stimulation in the treatment of chronic pelvic pain syndrome. Open Med (Wars). 2024;19(1):20240936. pmid:38841178
- 10. Huang N, Qin Z, Sun W, Bao K, Zha J, Zhang P, et al. Comparing the effectiveness of extracorporeal shockwave therapy and myofascial release therapy in chronic pelvic pain syndrome: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial. Trials. 2023;24(1):675. pmid:37853420
- 11. Díaz-Álvarez L, Lorenzo-Gallego L, Romay-Barrero H, Prieto-Gómez V, Torres-Lacomba M, Navarro-Brazález B. Does the Contractile Capability of Pelvic Floor Muscles Improve with Knowledge Acquisition and Verbal Instructions in Healthy Women? A Systematic Review. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022;19(15):9308. pmid:35954665
- 12. Ignácio Antônio F, Bø K, Pena CC, Bueno SM, Mateus-Vasconcelos ECL, Fernandes ACNL, et al. Intravaginal electrical stimulation increases voluntarily pelvic floor muscle contractions in women who are unable to voluntarily contract their pelvic floor muscles: a randomised trial. J Physiother. 2022;68(1):37–42. pmid:34952812
- 13. Eldaly AS, Avila FR, Torres-Guzman RA, Maita KC, Garcia JP, Serrano LP. Virtual and Augmented Reality in Management of Phantom Limb Pain: A Systematic Review. Hand. 2022.
- 14. Wong KP, Tse MMY, Qin J. Effectiveness of Virtual Reality-Based Interventions for Managing Chronic Pain on Pain Reduction, Anxiety, Depression and Mood: A Systematic Review. Healthcare (Basel). 2022;10(10):2047. pmid:36292493
- 15. Cerda IH, Therond A, Moreau S, Studer K, Donjow AR, Crowther JE, et al. Telehealth and Virtual Reality Technologies in Chronic Pain Management: A Narrative Review. Curr Pain Headache Rep. 2024;28(3):83–94. pmid:38175490
- 16. Zhang T, Li X, Zhou X, Zhan L, Wu F, Huang Z, et al. Virtual Reality Therapy for the Management of Chronic Spinal Pain: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. JMIR Serious Games. 2024;12:e50089. pmid:38345832
- 17. Xie P, Wang Z, Li Z, Wang Y, Wang N, Liang Z, et al. Research on Rehabilitation Training Strategies Using Multimodal Virtual Scene Stimulation. Front Aging Neurosci. 2022;14:892178. pmid:35847664
- 18. Kiper P, Godart N, Cavalier M, Berard C, Cieślik B, Federico S, et al. Effects of Immersive Virtual Reality on Upper-Extremity Stroke Rehabilitation: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis. J Clin Med. 2023;13(1):146. pmid:38202153
- 19. Palacios-Navarro G, Hogan N. Head-Mounted Display-Based Therapies for Adults Post-Stroke: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Sensors. 2021;21(4).
- 20. Hodgson DD, King JA, Darici O, Dalton BH, Cleworth TW, Cluff T, et al. Visual feedback-dependent modulation of arousal, postural control, and muscle stretch reflexes assessed in real and virtual environments. Front Hum Neurosci. 2023;17:1128548. pmid:37082148
- 21. Elaraby AER, Shahien M, Jahan AM, Etoom M, Bekhet AH. The Efficacy of Virtual Reality Training in the Rehabilitation of Orthopedic Ankle Injuries: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Adv Rehabil Sci Pract. 2023;12:11795727231151636. pmid:36891135
- 22. Faghihi R, Khanmohammadi R. Comparing virtual reality and balance training effects on postural strategies during ball kicking in soccer players with chronic ankle instability. Sci Rep. 2024;14(1):31448. pmid:39733187
- 23. Namazi G, Chauhan N, Handler S. Myofascial pelvic pain: the forgotten player in chronic pelvic pain. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2024;36(4):273–81. pmid:38837702
- 24. Engeler DS, Baranowski AP, Dinis-Oliveira P, Elneil S, Hughes J, Messelink EJ, et al. The 2013 EAU guidelines on chronic pelvic pain: is management of chronic pelvic pain a habit, a philosophy, or a science? 10 years of development. Eur Urol. 2013;64(3):431–9. pmid:23684447
- 25. Glazer HI, Rodke G, Swencionis C, Hertz R, Young AW. Treatment of vulvar vestibulitis syndrome with electromyographic biofeedback of pelvic floor musculature. J Reprod Med. 1995;40(4):283–90. pmid:7623358
- 26. Maïsetti O, Hug F, Bouillard K, Nordez A. Characterization of passive elastic properties of the human medial gastrocnemius muscle belly using supersonic shear imaging. J Biomech. 2012;45(6):978–84. pmid:22326058
- 27. Zhang X, Zhang L, Sun Y, Li T, Zhou M. Quantitative assessment of biceps brachii muscle stiffness by using Young’s modulus-Angle curve during passive stretching in stroke patients. Front Physiol. 2023;14:907337. pmid:36969599
- 28. Wang R, Zhu Z, Gan Y. Expert consensus on standardized clinical practice of pelvic floor ultrasound (2022 edition). Chinese Journal of Medical Imaging. 2023;31(02):97–107.
- 29. Wan L, Zhao Q, Chen J, Fan B, Gao C, Hu L. Chinese expert consensus on the application of pain assessment scales (2020 edition). Chinese Journal of Pain. 2020;16(3).
- 30. Hoffman D. Understanding multisymptom presentations in chronic pelvic pain: the inter-relationships between the viscera and myofascial pelvic floor dysfunction. Curr Pain Headache Rep. 2011;15(5):343–6. pmid:21739128
- 31. Shi Y, Shang W, Jia L, Li L, Li Q, Chang G. The influence of pelvic floor muscle exercise based on virtual reality technology on patients with postpartum pelvic floor dysfunction. Chinese Sexual Science. 2021;30(02):109–12.
- 32. Linton SJ, Götestam KG. Relations between pain, anxiety, mood and muscle tension in chronic pain patients. A correlation study. Psychother Psychosom. 1985;43(2):90–5. pmid:3983350
- 33. Addab S, Hamdy R, Thorstad K, Le May S, Tsimicalis A. Use of virtual reality in managing paediatric procedural pain and anxiety: An integrative literature review. J Clin Nurs. 2022;31(21–22):3032–59. pmid:35068011
- 34. Ioannou A, Papastavrou E, Avraamides MN, Charalambous A. Virtual Reality and Symptoms Management of Anxiety, Depression, Fatigue, and Pain: A Systematic Review. SAGE Open Nurs. 2020;6:2377960820936163. pmid:33415290
- 35. Gerçeker GÖ, Bektaş M, Aydınok Y, Ören H, Ellidokuz H, Olgun N. The effect of virtual reality on pain, fear, and anxiety during access of a port with huber needle in pediatric hematology-oncology patients: Randomized controlled trial. Eur J Oncol Nurs. 2021;50:101886. pmid:33321461
- 36. Brünahl CA, Löwe B, Ketels G, Klotz S, Dybowski C. Predictors of pain perception and quality of life in a 1-year follow-up of patients with Chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CPPS). Journal of Psychosomatic Research. 2017;97:140–1.
- 37. Eijlers R, Utens EMWJ, Staals LM, de Nijs PFA, Berghmans JM, Wijnen RMH, et al. Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Virtual Reality in Pediatrics: Effects on Pain and Anxiety. Anesth Analg. 2019;129(5):1344–53. pmid:31136330
- 38. Schröder D, Wrona KJ, Müller F, Heinemann S, Fischer F, Dockweiler C. Impact of virtual reality applications in the treatment of anxiety disorders: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized-controlled trials. J Behav Ther Exp Psychiatry. 2023;81:101893. pmid:37453405
- 39. Leeb R, Pérez-Marcos D. Brain-computer interfaces and virtual reality for neurorehabilitation. Handb Clin Neurol. 2020;168:183–97. pmid:32164852
- 40. Nunes JD, Vourvopoulos A, Blanco-Mora DA, Jorge C, Fernandes J-C, Bermudez I Badia S, et al. Brain activation by a VR-based motor imagery and observation task: An fMRI study. PLoS One. 2023;18(9):e0291528. pmid:37756271
- 41. Mekbib DB, Debeli DK, Zhang L, Fang S, Shao Y, Yang W, et al. A novel fully immersive virtual reality environment for upper extremity rehabilitation in patients with stroke. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2021;1493(1):75–89. pmid:33442915
- 42. Cho K. The Effects of Virtual Reality Based Treadmill Training on the Muscle Architecture of Gastrocnemius in Chronic Stroke Patients : Randomized Controlled Trial. jkpts. 2017;24(3):1–11.
- 43. Nambi G, Alghadier M, Kashoo FZ, Aldhafian OR, Nwihadh NA, Saleh AK, et al. Effects of Virtual Reality Exercises versus Isokinetic Exercises in comparison with Conventional Exercises on the Imaging Findings and Inflammatory Biomarker Changes in Soccer Players with Non-Specific Low Back Pain: A Randomized Controlled Trial. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022;20(1):524. pmid:36612846
- 44. Tejera DM, Beltran-Alacreu H, Cano-de-la-Cuerda R, Leon Hernández JV, Martín-Pintado-Zugasti A, Calvo-Lobo C, et al. Effects of Virtual Reality versus Exercise on Pain, Functional, Somatosensory and Psychosocial Outcomes in Patients with Non-specific Chronic Neck Pain: A Randomized Clinical Trial. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020;17(16):5950. pmid:32824394
- 45. Bağcıer F, Batıbay SJBMJ. The Effects of Virtual Reality-based Wii Fit Yoga on Pain, Functionality and Trigger Points in Non-specific Chronic Low Back Pain Patients: A Randomized Controlled Trial. 2020;7(3):75.
- 46. Mallari B, Spaeth EK, Goh H, Boyd BS. Virtual reality as an analgesic for acute and chronic pain in adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Pain Res. 2019;12:2053–85. pmid:31308733