A total of 60 patients were included in our study, with half (30 patients) wearing VR glasses during their surgery. The participants comprised 28 women and 32 men. In the group without VR glasses, there were 15 women and 15 men, whereas in the group with VR glasses, there were 13 women and 17 men, see Table 1.

First, we analyzed the PCS and found no significant differences in catastrophizing perception between the two groups, as shown in Fig. 5. This indicates that both groups had a comparable psychological baseline, which is crucial for accurately evaluating the effects of future therapeutic interventions. These results emphasize the importance of a comparable psychological baseline in both patient groups for the evaluation of future therapeutic measures.

The pain catastrophizing scale (PCS) is equivalent in both patient groups, indicating that the groups have approximately the same psychological baseline

The results of the regression analysis with PCS (Pain Catastrophizing Scale) as the dependent variable and age, gender, and the use of a VR headset as independent variables are shown in Table 2.

In summary, age has a significant but small effect on the PCS score, while gender and the use of a VR headset show no statistically significant impact in this model.

The average amount of local anesthesia administered differed significantly between the two groups. Patients without VR headset required an average of 24.93 ml (± 6.64), while patients with VR headset received an average of 20.97 ml (± 1.77), p = 0.0025**, see Fig. 6. Patients using the VR headset required significantly less local anesthesia.

Patients using the VR headset require significantly less local anesthesia

A gender-specific analysis revealed that male patients on average required more local anesthesia (23.84 ml ± 6.43) compared to female patients (21.93 ml ± 3.16). However, this difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.14).

The results of the regression analyses for the amount of local anesthesia in ml as the dependent variable in relation to age, gender, and PCS are shown in Table 2.

The PCS score has a significant impact on the amount of local anesthesia in both groups (with and without VR glasses). In the group without VR glasses, gender also has a significant impact. Men require significantly more local anesthesia than women. In the group with VR glasses, there is no difference. Based on these results, it could be asserted that men are more influenced by the glasses. Age shows no significant influence in either group.

The Pearson correlation between the PCS score and the amount of local anesthesia shows the correlation is not random. Patients with higher PCS scores tend to receive larger amounts of local anesthesia. Interestingly, the correlation is stronger in the group that used VR glasses.

The analysis of patients' self-assessments before and after surgery showed that patients with VR glasses postoperatively had a significant increase in levels of calmness and relaxation. However, there was no significant influence of VR glasses on patient satisfaction, as well as on levels of anger and concern.

The improvement in the state of calmness in patients using VR glasses was statistically significant compared to patients without VR glasses (p = 0.0098**), see Fig. 7.

Patients with VR headset show a significant increase in calmness in their self-assessment using the Y6 questionnaire postoperatively

Similarly, there was a significant improvement in the level of relaxation among patients using VR glasses (p = 0.0148*), suggesting that the use of VR glasses effectively contributed to increasing patient relaxation after the procedure, see Fig. 8.

Patients with VR glasses show a significant increase in relaxation in their self-assessment using the Y6 questionnaire postoperatively

A significant difference in the McGill total pain score for pain perception was observed between patients who used a VR headset and those who did not (p = 0.028*). This also suggests that the use of VR technology could have a significant impact on patients' pain perception, see Fig. 9. The regression analyses for the McGill Total Scores regarding age and gender suggest that neither age nor gender has a significant influence on the McGill Total Score of patients, regardless of whether they use a VR headset or not.

Postoperative McGill total pain scores for pain perception are significantly lower in patients with VR headset

The study also assessed patients' perceptions of using a VR headset using a specialized questionnaire [9]. Patients rated various statements regarding the use of VR glasses on a scale from 1 (low agreement) to 5 (high agreement).

The overall feedback was very positive. Most patients expressed a strong willingness to use the VR headset regularly. Patients found the VR system to be simple and not complicated. The system was considered very user-friendly and easy to understand. Most patients were able to operate the VR system independently, needing little assistance. Patients felt that the various features of the VR system were well integrated. The use of the VR headset was perceived as safe.

The VR system was viewed as reliable and consistent in its performance. The system was described as easy to handle and not cumbersome. Patients found the VR system easy to learn and quickly grasped how to use it. Overall, the VR headset was described by patients as user-friendly, safe, and intuitive. These positive evaluations suggest that VR technology could be widely accepted and further implemented in healthcare settings, see Figs. 10 and 11.

Patients perceived the use of the VR headset as functional, easy to use, easy to learn, and safe. They would like to use the VR headset more frequently

Patients found the system to be uncomplicated and believe they require little technical support. They did not perceive the usage as cumbersome and observed minimal inconsistencies. They do not believe much prelearning is necessary before use