Search

Objective: After stroke, people experience difficulties with walking that lead to restrictions in participation in daily life. The purpose of this study was to examine the effect of virtual reality gait training (VRT) compared to non-virtual reality gait training (non-VRT) on participation in community-living people after stroke., Methods: In this assessor-blinded, randomized controlled trial with 2 parallel groups, people were included between 2 weeks and 6 months after stroke and randomly assigned to the VRT group or non-VRT group. Participants assigned to the VRT group received training on the Gait Real-time Analysis Interactive Lab (GRAIL), and participants assigned to the non-VRT group received treadmill training and functional gait exercises without virtual reality. Both training interventions consisted of 12 30-minute sessions during 6 weeks. The primary outcome was participation measured with the restrictions subscale of the Utrecht Scale for Evaluation of Rehabilitation-Participation (USER-P) 3 months postintervention. Secondary outcomes included subjective physical functioning, functional mobility, walking ability, dynamic balance, walking activity, fatigue, anxiety and depression, falls efficacy, and quality of life., Results: Twenty-eight participants were randomly assigned to the VRT group and 27 to the non-VRT group, of whom 25 and 22 attended 75% or more of the training sessions, respectively. No significant differences between the groups were found over time for the USER-P restrictions subscale (1.23; 95% CI = -0.76 to 3.23) or secondary outcome measures. Patients' experiences with VRT were positive, and no serious adverse events were related to the interventions., Conclusions: The effect of VRT was not statistically different from non-VRT in improving participation in community-living people after stroke., Impact: Although outcomes were not statistically different, treadmill-based VRT was a safe and well-tolerated intervention that was positively rated by people after stroke. VR training might, therefore, be a valuable addition to stroke rehabilitation., Lay Summary: VRT is feasible and was positively experienced by people after stroke. However, VRT was not more effective than non-VRT for improving walking ability and participation after stroke., (© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Physical Therapy Association.)

Objective After stroke, people experience difficulties with walking that lead to restrictions in participation in daily life. The purpose of this study was to examine the effect of virtual reality gait training (VRT) compared to non–virtual reality gait training (non-VRT) on participation in community-living people after stroke. Methods In this assessor-blinded, randomized controlled trial with 2 parallel groups, people were included between 2 weeks and 6 months after stroke and randomly assigned to the VRT group or non-VRT group. Participants assigned to the VRT group received training on the Gait Real-time Analysis Interactive Lab (GRAIL), and participants assigned to the non-VRT group received treadmill training and functional gait exercises without virtual reality. Both training interventions consisted of 12 30-minute sessions during 6 weeks. The primary outcome was participation measured with the restrictions subscale of the Utrecht Scale for Evaluation of Rehabilitation-Participation (USER-P) 3 months postintervention. Secondary outcomes included subjective physical functioning, functional mobility, walking ability, dynamic balance, walking activity, fatigue, anxiety and depression, falls efficacy, and quality of life. Results Twenty-eight participants were randomly assigned to the VRT group and 27 to the non-VRT group, of whom 25 and 22 attended 75% or more of the training sessions, respectively. No significant differences between the groups were found over time for the USER-P restrictions subscale (1.23; 95% CI = −0.76 to 3.23) or secondary outcome measures. Patients' experiences with VRT were positive, and no serious adverse events were related to the interventions. Conclusions The effect of VRT was not statistically different from non-VRT in improving participation in community-living people after stroke. Impact Although outcomes were not statistically different, treadmill-based VRT was a safe and well-tolerated intervention that was positively rated by people after stroke. VR training might, therefore, be a valuable addition to stroke rehabilitation. Lay Summary VRT is feasible and was positively experienced by people after stroke. However, VRT was not more effective than non-VRT for improving walking ability and participation after stroke. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: A stroke often results in gait impairments, activity limitations and restricted participation in daily life. Virtual reality (VR) has shown to be beneficial for improving gait ability after stroke. Previous studies regarding VR focused mainly on improvements in functional outcomes. As participation in daily life is an important goal for rehabilitation after stroke, it is of importance to investigate if VR gait training improves participation. The primary aim of this study is to examine the effect of VR gait training on participation in community-living people after stroke.Methods/design: The ViRTAS study comprises a single-blinded, randomized controlled trial with two parallel groups. Fifty people between 2 weeks and 6 months after stroke, who experience constraints with walking in daily life, are randomly assigned to the virtual reality gait training (VRT) group or the non-virtual reality gait training (non-VRT) group. Both training interventions consist of 12 30-min sessions in an outpatient rehabilitation clinic during 6 weeks. Assessments are performed at baseline, post intervention and 3 months post intervention. The primary outcome is participation measured with the Utrecht Scale for Evaluation of Rehabilitation-Participation (USER-P). Secondary outcomes are subjective physical functioning, functional mobility, walking ability, walking activity, fatigue, anxiety and depression, falls efficacy and quality of life.Discussion: The results of the study provide insight into the effect of VR gait training on participation after stroke.Trial Registration: Netherlands National Trial Register, Identifier NTR6215 . Registered on 3 February 2017. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background. Virtual reality (VR) training is considered to be a promising novel therapy for balance and gait recovery in patients with stroke. Purpose. The aim of this study was to conduct a systematic literature review with meta-analysis to investigate whether balance or gait training using VR is more effective than conventional balance or gait training in patients with stroke. Data Sources. A literature search was carried out in the databases PubMed, Embase, MEDLINE, and Cochrane Library up to December 1, 2015. Study Selection. Randomized controlled trials that compared the effect of balance or gait training with and without VR on balance and gait ability in patients with stroke were included. Data Extraction and Synthesis. Twenty-one studies with a median PEDro score of 6.0 were included. The included studies demonstrated a significant greater effect of VR training on balance and gait recovery after stroke compared with conventional therapy as indicated with the most frequently used measures: gait speed, Berg Balance Scale, and Timed "Up & Go" Test. Virtual reality was more effective to train gait and balance than conventional training when VR interventions were added to conventional therapy and when time dose was matched. Limitations. The presence of publication bias and diversity in included studies were limitations of the study. Conclusions. The results suggest that VR training is more effective than balance or gait training without VR for improving balance or gait ability in patients with stroke. Future studies are recommended to investigate the effect of VR on participation level with an adequate follow-up period. Overall, a positive and promising effect of VR training on balance and gait ability is expected. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]