During the COVID-19 pandemic, nonpharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) were implemented in order to control the transmission of SARS-CoV-2, potentially affecting the prevalence of respiratory syncytial virus (RSV). This review evaluated the impact of NPIs on RSV-related hospitalizations in children during the lockdown (2020–2021) compared to the pre-pandemic (2015–2020) and post-lockdown (2021–2022) periods. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched through PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science for studies published in English between 1 January 2015 and 31 December 2022. Additionally, we conducted hand searches of other records published between 1 January 2023 and 22 January 2024. Our target population was hospitalized children aged 0–18 years with RSV-related lower respiratory tract infections confirmed through immunofluorescence, antigen testing, or molecular assays. We focused on peer-reviewed observational studies, analyzing the primary outcome of pooled RSV prevalence. A generalized linear mixed model with a random-effects model was utilized to pool each RSV prevalence. Heterogeneity was assessed using Cochran’s Q and I² statistics, while publication bias was evaluated through funnel plots and Egger’s tests. We identified and analyzed 5815 publications and included 112 studies with 308,985 participants. Notably, RSV prevalence was significantly lower during the lockdown period (5.03% [95% CI: 2.67; 9.28]) than during the pre-pandemic period (25.60% [95% CI: 22.57; 28.88], p < 0.0001). However, RSV prevalence increased notably in the post-lockdown period after the relaxation of COVID-19 prevention measures (42.02% [95% CI: 31.49; 53.33] vs. 5.03% [95% CI: 2.67; 9.28], p < 0.0001). Most pooled effect estimates exhibited significant heterogeneity (I²: 91.2% to 99.3%). Our findings emphasize the effectiveness of NPIs in reducing RSV transmission. NPIs should be considered significant public health measures to address RSV outbreaks.

Introduction: Augmented reality (AR) is seeing an increase in its applications in healthcare, but its reach in outpatient care remains undefined. Patients in outpatient settings face poor medical understanding. AR may help address this gap between patients and physicians through immersive and interactive models and supporting tools. This narrative review aims to evaluate the status of AR in outpatient care, categorise its applications, and identify limitations and future research needs. Methods: Four databases–PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and Cochrane Library–were conducted for peer‐reviewed studies published from January 2015 to February 2025. Studies were included if they regarded AR interventions in outpatient care settings. Studies were analysed and grouped thematically into five clinical domains of AR intervention. Results: After review, 19 studies–spanning 987 participants–were included. AR applications were categorised into patient education and engagement (n = 3), cognitive and functional assessment (n = 3), device interaction and remote monitoring (n = 3), procedural guidance in outpatient interventions (n = 5), and rehabilitation and functional recovery support (n = 5). Most included studies were pilot studies (n = 6) and had relatively small sample sizes (median = 28). Studies proved that AR interventions consistently improved patient understanding, engagement and procedural support. Nevertheless, studies faced limitations including the need for specialised and bulky hardware–which affected patient comfort as well–reliability issues, technical difficulties and platform‐specific inconsistencies. Conclusion: AR has been proved to have the potential to improve outpatient care across five main areas: patient education, cognitive and functional assessment, medical device interaction, procedural guidance and rehabilitation. Studies consistently support that AR enhances patient comprehension, engagement and procedural accuracy while allowing for remote monitoring and personalised therapy. Furthermore, AR interventions demonstrate high usability and clinical relevance. Nevertheless, limitations such as hardware complexity and inconsistent technical performance remain. Future research should prioritise large‐scale RCTs and strategies to integrate AR into pre‐existing digital workflows.