Do Robotics and Virtual Reality Add Real Progress to Mirror Therapy Rehabilitation? A Scoping Review

Background. Mirror therapy has been used in rehabilitation for multiple indications since the 1990s. Current evidence supports some of these indications, particularly for cerebrovascular accidents in adults and cerebral palsy in children. Since 2000s, computerized or robotic mirror therapy has been...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Nelly Darbois, Albin Guillaud, Nicolas Pinsault
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Hindawi Limited 2018-01-01
Series:Rehabilitation Research and Practice
Online Access:http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2018/6412318
id doaj-e3d58d3db18848b9980b3364dab9d7ba
record_format Article
spelling doaj-e3d58d3db18848b9980b3364dab9d7ba2020-11-25T00:11:04ZengHindawi LimitedRehabilitation Research and Practice2090-28672090-28752018-01-01201810.1155/2018/64123186412318Do Robotics and Virtual Reality Add Real Progress to Mirror Therapy Rehabilitation? A Scoping ReviewNelly Darbois0Albin Guillaud1Nicolas Pinsault2Critical Thinking Research Federation FED 4276, University Grenoble-Alpes, Grenoble, FranceCritical Thinking Research Federation FED 4276, University Grenoble-Alpes, Grenoble, FranceCritical Thinking Research Federation FED 4276, University Grenoble-Alpes, Grenoble, FranceBackground. Mirror therapy has been used in rehabilitation for multiple indications since the 1990s. Current evidence supports some of these indications, particularly for cerebrovascular accidents in adults and cerebral palsy in children. Since 2000s, computerized or robotic mirror therapy has been developed and marketed. Objectives. To map the extent, nature, and rationale of research activity in robotic or computerized mirror therapy and the type of evidence available for any indication. To investigate the relevance of conducting a systematic review and meta-analysis on these therapies. Method. Systematic scoping review. Searches were conducted (up to May 2018) in the Cochrane Library, Google Scholar, IEEE Xplore, Medline, Physiotherapy Evidence Database, and PsycINFO databases. References from identified studies were examined. Results. In sum, 75 articles met the inclusion criteria. Most studies were publicly funded (57% of studies; n = 43), without disclosure of conflict of interest (59% of studies; n = 44). The main outcomes assessed were pain, satisfaction on the device, and body function and activity, mainly for stroke and amputees patients and healthy participants. Most design studies were case reports (67% of studies; n = 50), with only 12 randomized controlled trials with 5 comparing standard mirror therapy versus virtual mirror therapy, 5 comparing second-generation mirror therapy versus conventional rehabilitation, and 2 comparing other interventions. Conclusion. Much of the research on second-generation mirror therapy is of very low quality. Evidence-based rationale to conduct such studies is missing. It is not relevant to recommend investment by rehabilitation professionals and institutions in such devices.http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2018/6412318
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Nelly Darbois
Albin Guillaud
Nicolas Pinsault
spellingShingle Nelly Darbois
Albin Guillaud
Nicolas Pinsault
Do Robotics and Virtual Reality Add Real Progress to Mirror Therapy Rehabilitation? A Scoping Review
Rehabilitation Research and Practice
author_facet Nelly Darbois
Albin Guillaud
Nicolas Pinsault
author_sort Nelly Darbois
title Do Robotics and Virtual Reality Add Real Progress to Mirror Therapy Rehabilitation? A Scoping Review
title_short Do Robotics and Virtual Reality Add Real Progress to Mirror Therapy Rehabilitation? A Scoping Review
title_full Do Robotics and Virtual Reality Add Real Progress to Mirror Therapy Rehabilitation? A Scoping Review
title_fullStr Do Robotics and Virtual Reality Add Real Progress to Mirror Therapy Rehabilitation? A Scoping Review
title_full_unstemmed Do Robotics and Virtual Reality Add Real Progress to Mirror Therapy Rehabilitation? A Scoping Review
title_sort do robotics and virtual reality add real progress to mirror therapy rehabilitation? a scoping review
publisher Hindawi Limited
series Rehabilitation Research and Practice
issn 2090-2867
2090-2875
publishDate 2018-01-01
description Background. Mirror therapy has been used in rehabilitation for multiple indications since the 1990s. Current evidence supports some of these indications, particularly for cerebrovascular accidents in adults and cerebral palsy in children. Since 2000s, computerized or robotic mirror therapy has been developed and marketed. Objectives. To map the extent, nature, and rationale of research activity in robotic or computerized mirror therapy and the type of evidence available for any indication. To investigate the relevance of conducting a systematic review and meta-analysis on these therapies. Method. Systematic scoping review. Searches were conducted (up to May 2018) in the Cochrane Library, Google Scholar, IEEE Xplore, Medline, Physiotherapy Evidence Database, and PsycINFO databases. References from identified studies were examined. Results. In sum, 75 articles met the inclusion criteria. Most studies were publicly funded (57% of studies; n = 43), without disclosure of conflict of interest (59% of studies; n = 44). The main outcomes assessed were pain, satisfaction on the device, and body function and activity, mainly for stroke and amputees patients and healthy participants. Most design studies were case reports (67% of studies; n = 50), with only 12 randomized controlled trials with 5 comparing standard mirror therapy versus virtual mirror therapy, 5 comparing second-generation mirror therapy versus conventional rehabilitation, and 2 comparing other interventions. Conclusion. Much of the research on second-generation mirror therapy is of very low quality. Evidence-based rationale to conduct such studies is missing. It is not relevant to recommend investment by rehabilitation professionals and institutions in such devices.
url http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2018/6412318
work_keys_str_mv AT nellydarbois doroboticsandvirtualrealityaddrealprogresstomirrortherapyrehabilitationascopingreview
AT albinguillaud doroboticsandvirtualrealityaddrealprogresstomirrortherapyrehabilitationascopingreview
AT nicolaspinsault doroboticsandvirtualrealityaddrealprogresstomirrortherapyrehabilitationascopingreview
_version_ 1725405424872587264