Rehabilitation that incorporates virtual reality is more effective than standard rehabilitation for improving walking speed, balance and mobility after stroke

A systematic review

Davide Corbetta, Federico Imeri, Roberto Gatti

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

65 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Question: In people after stroke, does virtual reality based rehabilitation (VRBR) improve walking speed, balance and mobility more than the same duration of standard rehabilitation? In people after stroke, does adding extra VRBR to standard rehabilitation improve the effects on gait, balance and mobility? Design: Systematic review with meta-analysis of randomised trials. Participants: Adults with a clinical diagnosis of stroke. Intervention: Eligible trials had to include one these comparisons: VRBR replacing some or all of standard rehabilitation or VRBR used as extra rehabilitation time added to a standard rehabilitation regimen. Outcome measures: Walking speed, balance, mobility and adverse events. Results: In total, 15 trials involving 341 participants were included. When VRBR replaced some or all of the standard rehabilitation, there were statistically significant benefits in walking speed (MD 0.15 m/s, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.19), balance (MD 2.1 points on the Berg Balance Scale, 95% CI 1.8 to 2.5) and mobility (MD 2.3 seconds on the Timed Up and Go test, 95% CI 1.2 to 3.4). When VRBR was added to standard rehabilitation, mobility showed a significant benefit (0.7 seconds on the Timed Up and Go test, 95% CI 0.4 to 1.1), but insufficient evidence was found to comment about walking speed (one trial) and balance (high heterogeneity). Conclusion: Substituting some or all of a standard rehabilitation regimen with VRBR elicits greater benefits in walking speed, balance and mobility in people with stroke. Although the benefits are small, the extra cost of applying virtual reality to standard rehabilitation is also small, especially when spread over many patients in a clinic. Adding extra VRBR time to standard rehabilitation also has some benefits; further research is needed to determine if these benefits are clinically worthwhile. [Corbetta D, Imeri F, Gatti R (2015) Rehabilitation that incorporates virtual reality is more effective than standard rehabilitation for improving walking speed, balance and mobility after stroke: a systematic review. Journal of Physiotherapy XX: XX-XX]

Original languageEnglish
JournalJournal of Physiotherapy
DOIs
Publication statusAccepted/In press - 2015

Fingerprint

Rehabilitation
Stroke
Walking Speed
Telerehabilitation
Gait
Meta-Analysis
Outcome Assessment (Health Care)

Keywords

  • Postural balance
  • Stroke rehabilitation
  • Virtual reality exposure therapy
  • Walking

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation

Cite this

@article{ec7c632f0ca64f5eb0cb0e143ff682bc,
title = "Rehabilitation that incorporates virtual reality is more effective than standard rehabilitation for improving walking speed, balance and mobility after stroke: A systematic review",
abstract = "Question: In people after stroke, does virtual reality based rehabilitation (VRBR) improve walking speed, balance and mobility more than the same duration of standard rehabilitation? In people after stroke, does adding extra VRBR to standard rehabilitation improve the effects on gait, balance and mobility? Design: Systematic review with meta-analysis of randomised trials. Participants: Adults with a clinical diagnosis of stroke. Intervention: Eligible trials had to include one these comparisons: VRBR replacing some or all of standard rehabilitation or VRBR used as extra rehabilitation time added to a standard rehabilitation regimen. Outcome measures: Walking speed, balance, mobility and adverse events. Results: In total, 15 trials involving 341 participants were included. When VRBR replaced some or all of the standard rehabilitation, there were statistically significant benefits in walking speed (MD 0.15 m/s, 95{\%} CI 0.10 to 0.19), balance (MD 2.1 points on the Berg Balance Scale, 95{\%} CI 1.8 to 2.5) and mobility (MD 2.3 seconds on the Timed Up and Go test, 95{\%} CI 1.2 to 3.4). When VRBR was added to standard rehabilitation, mobility showed a significant benefit (0.7 seconds on the Timed Up and Go test, 95{\%} CI 0.4 to 1.1), but insufficient evidence was found to comment about walking speed (one trial) and balance (high heterogeneity). Conclusion: Substituting some or all of a standard rehabilitation regimen with VRBR elicits greater benefits in walking speed, balance and mobility in people with stroke. Although the benefits are small, the extra cost of applying virtual reality to standard rehabilitation is also small, especially when spread over many patients in a clinic. Adding extra VRBR time to standard rehabilitation also has some benefits; further research is needed to determine if these benefits are clinically worthwhile. [Corbetta D, Imeri F, Gatti R (2015) Rehabilitation that incorporates virtual reality is more effective than standard rehabilitation for improving walking speed, balance and mobility after stroke: a systematic review. Journal of Physiotherapy XX: XX-XX]",
keywords = "Postural balance, Stroke rehabilitation, Virtual reality exposure therapy, Walking",
author = "Davide Corbetta and Federico Imeri and Roberto Gatti",
year = "2015",
doi = "10.1016/j.jphys.2015.05.017",
language = "English",
journal = "Journal of Physiotherapy",
issn = "1836-9553",
publisher = "Australian Physiotherapy Association",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Rehabilitation that incorporates virtual reality is more effective than standard rehabilitation for improving walking speed, balance and mobility after stroke

T2 - A systematic review

AU - Corbetta, Davide

AU - Imeri, Federico

AU - Gatti, Roberto

PY - 2015

Y1 - 2015

N2 - Question: In people after stroke, does virtual reality based rehabilitation (VRBR) improve walking speed, balance and mobility more than the same duration of standard rehabilitation? In people after stroke, does adding extra VRBR to standard rehabilitation improve the effects on gait, balance and mobility? Design: Systematic review with meta-analysis of randomised trials. Participants: Adults with a clinical diagnosis of stroke. Intervention: Eligible trials had to include one these comparisons: VRBR replacing some or all of standard rehabilitation or VRBR used as extra rehabilitation time added to a standard rehabilitation regimen. Outcome measures: Walking speed, balance, mobility and adverse events. Results: In total, 15 trials involving 341 participants were included. When VRBR replaced some or all of the standard rehabilitation, there were statistically significant benefits in walking speed (MD 0.15 m/s, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.19), balance (MD 2.1 points on the Berg Balance Scale, 95% CI 1.8 to 2.5) and mobility (MD 2.3 seconds on the Timed Up and Go test, 95% CI 1.2 to 3.4). When VRBR was added to standard rehabilitation, mobility showed a significant benefit (0.7 seconds on the Timed Up and Go test, 95% CI 0.4 to 1.1), but insufficient evidence was found to comment about walking speed (one trial) and balance (high heterogeneity). Conclusion: Substituting some or all of a standard rehabilitation regimen with VRBR elicits greater benefits in walking speed, balance and mobility in people with stroke. Although the benefits are small, the extra cost of applying virtual reality to standard rehabilitation is also small, especially when spread over many patients in a clinic. Adding extra VRBR time to standard rehabilitation also has some benefits; further research is needed to determine if these benefits are clinically worthwhile. [Corbetta D, Imeri F, Gatti R (2015) Rehabilitation that incorporates virtual reality is more effective than standard rehabilitation for improving walking speed, balance and mobility after stroke: a systematic review. Journal of Physiotherapy XX: XX-XX]

AB - Question: In people after stroke, does virtual reality based rehabilitation (VRBR) improve walking speed, balance and mobility more than the same duration of standard rehabilitation? In people after stroke, does adding extra VRBR to standard rehabilitation improve the effects on gait, balance and mobility? Design: Systematic review with meta-analysis of randomised trials. Participants: Adults with a clinical diagnosis of stroke. Intervention: Eligible trials had to include one these comparisons: VRBR replacing some or all of standard rehabilitation or VRBR used as extra rehabilitation time added to a standard rehabilitation regimen. Outcome measures: Walking speed, balance, mobility and adverse events. Results: In total, 15 trials involving 341 participants were included. When VRBR replaced some or all of the standard rehabilitation, there were statistically significant benefits in walking speed (MD 0.15 m/s, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.19), balance (MD 2.1 points on the Berg Balance Scale, 95% CI 1.8 to 2.5) and mobility (MD 2.3 seconds on the Timed Up and Go test, 95% CI 1.2 to 3.4). When VRBR was added to standard rehabilitation, mobility showed a significant benefit (0.7 seconds on the Timed Up and Go test, 95% CI 0.4 to 1.1), but insufficient evidence was found to comment about walking speed (one trial) and balance (high heterogeneity). Conclusion: Substituting some or all of a standard rehabilitation regimen with VRBR elicits greater benefits in walking speed, balance and mobility in people with stroke. Although the benefits are small, the extra cost of applying virtual reality to standard rehabilitation is also small, especially when spread over many patients in a clinic. Adding extra VRBR time to standard rehabilitation also has some benefits; further research is needed to determine if these benefits are clinically worthwhile. [Corbetta D, Imeri F, Gatti R (2015) Rehabilitation that incorporates virtual reality is more effective than standard rehabilitation for improving walking speed, balance and mobility after stroke: a systematic review. Journal of Physiotherapy XX: XX-XX]

KW - Postural balance

KW - Stroke rehabilitation

KW - Virtual reality exposure therapy

KW - Walking

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84931060980&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84931060980&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.jphys.2015.05.017

DO - 10.1016/j.jphys.2015.05.017

M3 - Article

JO - Journal of Physiotherapy

JF - Journal of Physiotherapy

SN - 1836-9553

ER -