Effect of a four-week virtual reality-based training versus conventional therapy on upper limb motor function after stroke: A multicenter parallel group randomized trial.

BACKGROUND:Virtual reality-based training has found increasing use in neurorehabilitation to improve upper limb training and facilitate motor recovery. OBJECTIVE:The aim of this study was to directly compare virtual reality-based training with conventional therapy. METHODS:In a multi-center, paralle...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Corina Schuster-Amft, Kynan Eng, Zorica Suica, Irene Thaler, Sandra Signer, Isabelle Lehmann, Ludwig Schmid, Michael A McCaskey, Miura Hawkins, Martin L Verra, Daniel Kiper
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2018-01-01
Series:PLoS ONE
Online Access:http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC6200191?pdf=render
Description
Summary:BACKGROUND:Virtual reality-based training has found increasing use in neurorehabilitation to improve upper limb training and facilitate motor recovery. OBJECTIVE:The aim of this study was to directly compare virtual reality-based training with conventional therapy. METHODS:In a multi-center, parallel-group randomized controlled trial, patients at least 6 months after stroke onset were allocated either to an experimental group (virtual reality-based training) or a control group receiving conventional therapy (16x45 minutes within 4 weeks). The virtual reality-based training system replicated patients´ upper limb movements in real-time to manipulate virtual objects. Blinded assessors tested patients twice before, once during, and twice after the intervention up to 2-month follow-up for dexterity (primary outcome: Box and Block Test), bimanual upper limb function (Chedoke-McMaster Arm and Hand Activity Inventory), and subjective perceived changes (Stroke Impact Scale). RESULTS:54 eligible patients (70 screened) participated (15 females, mean age 61.3 years, range 20-81 years, time since stroke 3.0±SD 3 years). 22 patients were allocated to the experimental group and 32 to the control group (3 drop-outs). Patients in the experimental and control group improved: Box and Block Test mean 21.5±SD 16 baseline to mean 24.1±SD 17 follow-up; Chedoke-McMaster Arm and Hand Activity Inventory mean 66.0±SD 21 baseline to mean 70.2±SD 19 follow-up. An intention-to-treat analysis found no between-group differences. CONCLUSIONS:Patients in the experimental and control group showed similar effects, with most improvements occurring in the first two weeks and persisting until the end of the two-month follow-up period. The study population had moderate to severely impaired motor function at entry (Box and Block Test mean 21.5±SD 16). Patients, who were less impaired (Box and Block Test range 18 to 72) showed higher improvements in favor of the experimental group. This result could suggest that virtual reality-based training might be more applicable for such patients than for more severely impaired patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01774669.
ISSN:1932-6203