Translational pediatrics · 2026
Comparative and synergistic effects of digital devices and Child Life services in pediatric clinical practice: a systematic review.
СтатьяОбзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Deng Jia, Wu Liping, Zhang Shun, Jing Liu, Zhang Rong, Bai Yongqi
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Examinations and treatments in pediatric healthcare settings may cause anxiety, fear, and psychological distress among children. Child Life services provide psychosocial support through therapeutic play, procedural preparation, and emotional support to help children cope with medical experiences. Meanwhile, digital devices, including virtual reality (VR), augmented reality (AR), tablet-based applications, and video-based tools, have been increasingly applied to support children during healthcare procedures. However, differences in study populations, intervention designs, and outcome assessments make direct comparisons between digital devices and Child Life services difficult. This review aimed to summarize the clinical applications, reported outcomes, and potential complementary roles of these approaches in pediatric healthcare.
METHODS: A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, Embase, Web of Science, PsycINFO, VIP Database, and Wanfang Database for quantitative studies published from January 2015 to June 1, 2026. Eligible studies included randomized controlled trials (RCTs), non-RCTs, and pre-post studies evaluating digital devices and/or Child Life interventions in pediatric healthcare settings. Study quality was assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for RCTs and the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) quasi-experimental assessment tool. Due to variations in study designs, intervention characteristics, and outcome measures, meta-analysis was not performed, and findings were synthesized narratively.
RESULTS: Seven RCTs were included. Digital devices used alone were associated with reduced anxiety and fear, improved behavioral responses, and increased satisfaction among children. When combined with Child Life support, digital interventions showed additional benefits, including reduced preoperative anxiety, lower caregiver anxiety, and improved cooperation during anesthesia induction. However, heterogeneity among interventions and assessment methods limited direct comparisons.
CONCLUSIONS: Digital devices and Child Life services may serve complementary roles in pediatric healthcare. Digital devices mainly provide immediate support through distraction and engagement, whereas Child Life services focus on preparation, coping, and family support. Combining these approaches may offer additional support for children undergoing healthcare experiences.
METHODS: A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, Embase, Web of Science, PsycINFO, VIP Database, and Wanfang Database for quantitative studies published from January 2015 to June 1, 2026. Eligible studies included randomized controlled trials (RCTs), non-RCTs, and pre-post studies evaluating digital devices and/or Child Life interventions in pediatric healthcare settings. Study quality was assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for RCTs and the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) quasi-experimental assessment tool. Due to variations in study designs, intervention characteristics, and outcome measures, meta-analysis was not performed, and findings were synthesized narratively.
RESULTS: Seven RCTs were included. Digital devices used alone were associated with reduced anxiety and fear, improved behavioral responses, and increased satisfaction among children. When combined with Child Life support, digital interventions showed additional benefits, including reduced preoperative anxiety, lower caregiver anxiety, and improved cooperation during anesthesia induction. However, heterogeneity among interventions and assessment methods limited direct comparisons.
CONCLUSIONS: Digital devices and Child Life services may serve complementary roles in pediatric healthcare. Digital devices mainly provide immediate support through distraction and engagement, whereas Child Life services focus on preparation, coping, and family support. Combining these approaches may offer additional support for children undergoing healthcare experiences.