Cargando…

What do randomized controlled trials say about virtual rehabilitation in stroke? A systematic literature review and meta-analysis of upper-limb and cognitive outcomes

BACKGROUND: Virtual-reality based rehabilitation (VR) shows potential as an engaging and effective way to improve upper-limb function and cognitive abilities following a stroke. However, an updated synthesis of the literature is needed to capture growth in recent research and address gaps in our und...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Aminov, Anna, Rogers, Jeffrey M., Middleton, Sandy, Caeyenberghs, Karen, Wilson, Peter H.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5870176/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29587853
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12984-018-0370-2
_version_ 1783309423121268736
author Aminov, Anna
Rogers, Jeffrey M.
Middleton, Sandy
Caeyenberghs, Karen
Wilson, Peter H.
author_facet Aminov, Anna
Rogers, Jeffrey M.
Middleton, Sandy
Caeyenberghs, Karen
Wilson, Peter H.
author_sort Aminov, Anna
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Virtual-reality based rehabilitation (VR) shows potential as an engaging and effective way to improve upper-limb function and cognitive abilities following a stroke. However, an updated synthesis of the literature is needed to capture growth in recent research and address gaps in our understanding of factors that may optimize training parameters and treatment effects. METHODS: Published randomized controlled trials comparing VR to conventional therapy were retrieved from seven electronic databases. Treatment effects (Hedge’s g) were estimated using a random effects model, with motor and functional outcomes between different protocols compared at the Body Structure/Function, Activity, and Participation levels of the International Classification of Functioning. RESULTS: Thirty-three studies were identified, including 971 participants (492 VR participants). VR produced small to medium overall effects (g = 0.46; 95% CI: 0.33–0.59, p < 0.01), above and beyond conventional therapies. Small to medium effects were observed on Body Structure/Function (g = 0.41; 95% CI: 0.28–0.55; p < 0.01) and Activity outcomes (g = 0.47; 95% CI: 0.34–0.60, p < 0.01), while Participation outcomes failed to reach significance (g = 0.38; 95% CI: -0.29-1.04, p = 0.27). Superior benefits for Body Structure/Function (g = 0.56) and Activity outcomes (g = 0.62) were observed when examining outcomes only from purpose-designed VR systems. Preliminary results (k = 4) suggested small to medium effects for cognitive outcomes (g = 0.41; 95% CI: 0.28–0.55; p < 0.01). Moderator analysis found no advantage for higher doses of VR, massed practice training schedules, or greater time since injury. CONCLUSION: VR can effect significant gains on Body Structure/Function and Activity level outcomes, including improvements in cognitive function, for individuals who have sustained a stroke. The evidence supports the use of VR as an adjunct for stroke rehabilitation, with effectiveness evident for a variety of platforms, training parameters, and stages of recovery. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12984-018-0370-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5870176
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-58701762018-03-29 What do randomized controlled trials say about virtual rehabilitation in stroke? A systematic literature review and meta-analysis of upper-limb and cognitive outcomes Aminov, Anna Rogers, Jeffrey M. Middleton, Sandy Caeyenberghs, Karen Wilson, Peter H. J Neuroeng Rehabil Research BACKGROUND: Virtual-reality based rehabilitation (VR) shows potential as an engaging and effective way to improve upper-limb function and cognitive abilities following a stroke. However, an updated synthesis of the literature is needed to capture growth in recent research and address gaps in our understanding of factors that may optimize training parameters and treatment effects. METHODS: Published randomized controlled trials comparing VR to conventional therapy were retrieved from seven electronic databases. Treatment effects (Hedge’s g) were estimated using a random effects model, with motor and functional outcomes between different protocols compared at the Body Structure/Function, Activity, and Participation levels of the International Classification of Functioning. RESULTS: Thirty-three studies were identified, including 971 participants (492 VR participants). VR produced small to medium overall effects (g = 0.46; 95% CI: 0.33–0.59, p < 0.01), above and beyond conventional therapies. Small to medium effects were observed on Body Structure/Function (g = 0.41; 95% CI: 0.28–0.55; p < 0.01) and Activity outcomes (g = 0.47; 95% CI: 0.34–0.60, p < 0.01), while Participation outcomes failed to reach significance (g = 0.38; 95% CI: -0.29-1.04, p = 0.27). Superior benefits for Body Structure/Function (g = 0.56) and Activity outcomes (g = 0.62) were observed when examining outcomes only from purpose-designed VR systems. Preliminary results (k = 4) suggested small to medium effects for cognitive outcomes (g = 0.41; 95% CI: 0.28–0.55; p < 0.01). Moderator analysis found no advantage for higher doses of VR, massed practice training schedules, or greater time since injury. CONCLUSION: VR can effect significant gains on Body Structure/Function and Activity level outcomes, including improvements in cognitive function, for individuals who have sustained a stroke. The evidence supports the use of VR as an adjunct for stroke rehabilitation, with effectiveness evident for a variety of platforms, training parameters, and stages of recovery. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12984-018-0370-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2018-03-27 /pmc/articles/PMC5870176/ /pubmed/29587853 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12984-018-0370-2 Text en © The Author(s). 2018 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research
Aminov, Anna
Rogers, Jeffrey M.
Middleton, Sandy
Caeyenberghs, Karen
Wilson, Peter H.
What do randomized controlled trials say about virtual rehabilitation in stroke? A systematic literature review and meta-analysis of upper-limb and cognitive outcomes
title What do randomized controlled trials say about virtual rehabilitation in stroke? A systematic literature review and meta-analysis of upper-limb and cognitive outcomes
title_full What do randomized controlled trials say about virtual rehabilitation in stroke? A systematic literature review and meta-analysis of upper-limb and cognitive outcomes
title_fullStr What do randomized controlled trials say about virtual rehabilitation in stroke? A systematic literature review and meta-analysis of upper-limb and cognitive outcomes
title_full_unstemmed What do randomized controlled trials say about virtual rehabilitation in stroke? A systematic literature review and meta-analysis of upper-limb and cognitive outcomes
title_short What do randomized controlled trials say about virtual rehabilitation in stroke? A systematic literature review and meta-analysis of upper-limb and cognitive outcomes
title_sort what do randomized controlled trials say about virtual rehabilitation in stroke? a systematic literature review and meta-analysis of upper-limb and cognitive outcomes
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5870176/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29587853
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12984-018-0370-2
work_keys_str_mv AT aminovanna whatdorandomizedcontrolledtrialssayaboutvirtualrehabilitationinstrokeasystematicliteraturereviewandmetaanalysisofupperlimbandcognitiveoutcomes
AT rogersjeffreym whatdorandomizedcontrolledtrialssayaboutvirtualrehabilitationinstrokeasystematicliteraturereviewandmetaanalysisofupperlimbandcognitiveoutcomes
AT middletonsandy whatdorandomizedcontrolledtrialssayaboutvirtualrehabilitationinstrokeasystematicliteraturereviewandmetaanalysisofupperlimbandcognitiveoutcomes
AT caeyenberghskaren whatdorandomizedcontrolledtrialssayaboutvirtualrehabilitationinstrokeasystematicliteraturereviewandmetaanalysisofupperlimbandcognitiveoutcomes
AT wilsonpeterh whatdorandomizedcontrolledtrialssayaboutvirtualrehabilitationinstrokeasystematicliteraturereviewandmetaanalysisofupperlimbandcognitiveoutcomes