Background: Among all diseases globally, mental illnesses are one of the major causes of burden. As many people are resistant to conventional evidence-based treatments, there is an unmet need for the implementation of novel mental health treatments. Efforts to increase the effectiveness and benefits of evidence-based psychotherapy in psychiatry have led to the emergence of virtual reality (VR)–based interventions. These interventions have shown a wide range of advantages over conventional psychotherapies. Currently, VR-based interventions have been developed mainly for anxiety-related disorders; however, they are also used for developmental disorders, severe mental disorders, and neurocognitive disorders.Objective: This meta-review aims to summarize the current state of evidence on the efficacy of VR-based interventions for various psychiatric disorders by evaluating the quality of evidence provided by meta-analytical studies.Methods: A systematic search was performed using the following electronic databases: PubMed, PsycINFO, Web of Science, and Google Scholar (any time until February 2020). Meta-analyses were included as long as they quantitatively examined the efficacy of VR-based interventions for symptoms of a psychiatric disorder. To avoid overlap among meta-analyses, for each subanalysis included within this meta-review, only one analysis provided from one meta-analysis was selected based on the best quality of evidence.Results: The search retrieved 11 eligible meta-analyses. The quality of evidence varied from very low to moderate quality. Several reasons account for the lower quality evidence, such as a limited number of randomized controlled trials, lack of follow-up analysis or control group, and the presence of heterogeneity and publication bias. Nonetheless, evidence has shown that VR-based interventions for anxiety-related disorders display overall medium-to-large effects when compared with inactive controls but no significant difference when compared with standard evidence-based approaches. Preliminary data have highlighted that such effects appear to be sustained in time, and subjects may fare better than active controls. Neurocognitive disorders also appear to improve with VR-based approaches, with small effects being found for various clinical outcomes (eg, cognition, emotion). Finally, there are insufficient data to classify VR-based interventions as an evidence-based practice for social skills training in neurodevelopmental disorders and compliance among patients with schizophrenia.Conclusions: VR provides unlimited opportunities by tailoring approaches to specific complex problems and individualizing the intervention. However, VR-based interventions have not shown superiority compared with usual evidence-based treatments. Future VR-based interventions should focus on developing innovative approaches for complex and treatment-resistant symptoms that are difficult to address with traditional treatments. Future research should also aim to gain a better understanding of the potential factors that may mediate VR outcomes to improve treatment.

The gold-standard cognitive–behavioral therapy (CBT) for psychosis offers at best modest effects. With advances in technology, virtual reality (VR) therapies for auditory verbal hallucinations (AVH), such as AVATAR therapy (AT) and VR-assisted therapy (VRT), are amid a new wave of relational approaches that may heighten effects. Prior trials have shown greater effects of these therapies on AVH up to a 24-week follow-up. However, no trial has compared them to a recommended active treatment with a 1-year follow-up. We performed a pilot randomized comparative trial evaluating the short- and long-term efficacy of VRT over CBT for patients with treatment-resistant schizophrenia. Patients were randomized to VRT (n = 37) or CBT (n = 37). Clinical assessments were administered before and after each intervention and at follow-up periods up to 12 months. Between and within-group changes in psychiatric symptoms were assessed using linear mixed-effects models. Short-term findings showed that both interventions produced significant improvements in AVH severity and depressive symptoms. Although results did not show a statistically significant superiority of VRT over CBT for AVH, VRT did achieve larger effects particularly on overall AVH (d = 1.080 for VRT and d = 0.555 for CBT). Furthermore, results suggested a superiority of VRT over CBT on affective symptoms. VRT also showed significant results on persecutory beliefs and quality of life. Effects were maintained up to the 1-year follow-up. VRT highlights the future of patient-tailored approaches that may show benefits over generic CBT for voices. A fully powered single-blind randomized controlled trial comparing VRT to CBT is underway.

BackgroundAuditory hallucinations in patients with psychotic disorders may be very distressing. Unfortunately, a large proportion of individuals are resistant to pharmacological interventions and the gold-standard cognitive-behavioral therapy for psychosis offers at best modest effects. To improve therapeutic outcomes, several therapies have been created to establish a relationship between voice-hearers and their voices. With increasing literature, we conducted a systematic review of dialogical therapies and examined the evidence behind their efficacy.MethodsA systematic search was performed in PubMed, PsycINFO, Web of Science, and Google Scholar. Articles were included if they discussed the effects of dialogical interventions for patients with psychotic disorders.ResultsA total of 17 studies were included within this systematic review. Cumulative evidence from various therapies has shown that entering in a dialog with voices is beneficial to patients, even those who are resistant to current pharmacological treatments. Heightened benefits have been mainly observed with Relating Therapy and Avatar Therapy/Virtual Reality assisted Therapy, with evidence generally of moderate quality. Both these interventions have shown large to very large effects on voices and voice-related distress as well as moderate to large magnitude improvements on affective symptoms. Though, cognitive-behavioral therapy for command hallucinations and making sense of voices noted no improvements on voices.ConclusionsLiterature on relational-based interventions with a strong emphasis on the relational aspects of voice hearing has shown positive effects. Results suggest that these dialogical therapies might surpass the efficacy of current gold-standard approaches.

Background: Combining cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) for psychosis with another psychosocial intervention comprising virtual reality (VR)-assisted therapy (VRT) may improve targeted outcomes in treatment-resistant schizophrenia patients. Methods: Ten participants having followed CBT were part of our comparative clinical trial comparing VRT to CBT and were selected at the end of the study as they desired to continue to achieve improvements with VRT (CBT + VRT). Clinical assessments were administered before/after treatments and at follow-ups. Changes in outcomes were examined using linear mixed-effects models. To gain a more in depth understanding on CBT + VRT, therapists’ notes, and open interviews on a sub-group of patients were qualitatively analyzed. Results: Findings showed that the sequence of both interventions was appreciated by all patients. Several significant improvements were found throughout time points on auditory verbal hallucinations, beliefs about voices, depressive symptoms, symptoms of schizophrenia and quality of life. Although most of these improvements were in similar range to those observed in our comparative trial, effects of CBT + VRT on depressive symptoms and symptoms of schizophrenia were larger than those found for either intervention alone. Conclusion: This proof of concept is the first to merge gold-standard CBT with VRT for treatment refractory voices and to suggest a certain synergistic effect.