Novel virtual reality system integrating online self-face viewing and mirror visual feedback for stroke rehabilitation: Rationale and feasibility

Topics in Stroke Rehabilitation

Volumn 19, Issue 4, 2012, Pages 277-286

  Shiri, Shimon ^a   Feintuch, Uri ^a   Lorber Haddad, Adi ^a   Moreh, Elior ^a   Twito, Dvora ^a   Tuchner Arieli, Maya ^a   Meiner, Zeev ^a  

^a HADASSAH HEBREW UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Israel)

Author keywords

mirror neurons; mirror therapy; motor imagery; rehabilitation; stroke; virtual reality

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARM MOVEMENT; ARTICLE; BOX AND BLOCK SCALE; BRAIN HEMORRHAGE; BRAIN ISCHEMIA; CLINICAL ARTICLE; DYNAMOMETER; FEASIBILITY STUDY; FEMALE; FUGL MEYER ASSESSMENT; HUMAN; MALE; MOTOR ACTIVITY LOG; PARESIS; PATIENT COMPLIANCE; QUALITY OF LIFE; RATING SCALE; SAFETY; SHORT FORM 36; STROKE; STROKE PATIENT; TASK PERFORMANCE; TREATMENT OUTCOME; VIRTUAL REALITY; VISUAL ANALOG SCALE; VISUAL FEEDBACK; WOLF MOTOR FUNCTION TEST;

ACTIVITIES OF DAILY LIVING; AGED; COMPUTER SIMULATION; FEASIBILITY STUDIES; FEEDBACK, SENSORY; FEMALE; HAND; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MOTOR ACTIVITY; MUSCLE STRENGTH; ONLINE SYSTEMS; PHYSICAL THERAPY MODALITIES; PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; STATISTICS, NONPARAMETRIC; STROKE; THERAPY, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; TREATMENT OUTCOME; USER-COMPUTER INTERFACE;

EID: 84863429412     PISSN: 10749357     EISSN: 19455119     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1310/tsr1904-277     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. Williams GR, Jiang JG, Matchar DB, Samsa GP. Incidence and occurrence of total (first-ever and recurrent) stroke. Stroke. 1999;30:2523-2528.
2. Kwakkel G, Kollen B, Lindeman E. Understanding the pattern of functional recovery after stroke: facts and theories. Restor Neurol Neurosci. 2004;22: 281-299.
3. Nakayama H, Jorgensen HS, Raaschou HO, Olsen TS. Recovery of upper extremity function in stroke patients: the Copenhagen stroke study. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1994;75:394-398.
4. Aras MD, Gokkaya NK, Comert D, Kaya DA, Cakci A. Shoulder pain in hemiplegia: results from a national rehabilitation hospital in Turkey. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2004;83:713-719.
5. Barreca S, Wolf SL, Fasoli S, Bohannon R. Treatment interventions for the paretic upper limb of stroke survivors: a critical review. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2003;17:220-226.
6. Shi YX, Tian JH, Yang KH, Zhao Y Modified constraint-induced movement therapy versus traditional rehabilitation in patients with upper-extremity dysfunction after stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2011;92:972-982.
7. Bolton DA, Cauraugh JH, Hausenblas HA. Electromyogram-triggered neuromuscular stimulation and stroke motor recovery of arm/hand functions: a meta-analysis. J Neurol Sci. 2004;223:121-127.
8. Lo AC, Guarino PD, Richards LG, et al. Robot-assisted therapy for long-term upper-limb impairment after stroke. N Engl J Med. 2010;362:1772-1783.
9. Truelsen T, Bonita R. Stroke in developing countries: a continuing challenge. Stroke Rev. 2003;7: 61-66.
10. Simmons L, Sharma N, Baron JC, Pomeroy VM. Motor imagery to enhance recovery after subcortical stroke: who might benefit, daily dose, and potential effects. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2008;22:5:458-467.
11. Rizzolatti G, Fabbri-Destro GM, Cattaneo L. Mirror neurons and their clinical relevance. Nat Clin Pract Neurol. 2009;5:24-34.
12. Iacoboni M, Mazziotta JC. Mirror neuron system: basic findings and clinical applications. Ann Neurol. 2007;62:213-218.
13. Rizzolatti G, Craighero L. The mirror-neuron system. Annu Rev Neurosci. 2004;27:169-192.
14. Fabbri-Destro M, Rizzolatti G. The mirror system in monkeys and humans. Physiology. 2008:23: 171-179.
15. Moseley GL, Gallace A, Spence C. Is mirror therapy all it is cracked up to be? Current evidence and future directions. Pain. 2008;138:7-10.
16. Burns MS. Application of neuroscience to technology in stroke rehabilitation. Top Stroke Rehabil. 2008;15:6:570-579.
17. Lucca LF. Virtual reality and motor rehabilitation of the upper limb after stroke: a generation of progress? J Rehabil Med. 2009;41:1003-1006.
18. Weiss PL, Jessel AS. Virtual reality applications to work. Work.1998;11:277-293.
19. McElligott JM, Greenwald BD, Watanabe TK. Congenital and acquired brain injury. 4. New frontiers: neuroimaging, neuroprotective agents, cognitive-enhancing agents, new technology, and complementary medicine. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2003;84 (Suppl 1):S18-22.
20. Jang SH, You SH, Hallett M, et al. Cortical reorganization and associated functional motor recovery after virtual reality in patients with chronic stroke: an experimenter-blind preliminary study. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2005;86: 2218-2223.
21. Henderson A, Korner-Bitensky N, Levin M. Virtual reality in stroke rehabilitation: a systematic review of its effectiveness for upper limb motor recovery, Top Stroke Rehabil. 2007;14:2:52-61.
22. Deutsch JE, Mirelman A. Virtual reality based approaches to enable walking for people poststroke. Top Stroke Rehabil. 2007;14:6:45-53.
23. Gaggioli A, Morganti F, Walker R, et al. Training with computer supported motor imagery in post-stroke rehabilitation. CyberPsychol Behav. 2004;7:327-332.
24. Murray CD, Patchick E, Pettifer S, Caillette F, Howard T. Immersive virtual reality as a rehabilitative technology for phantom limb experience: a protocol. CyberPsychol Behav. 2006;9:167-170.
25. Eng K, Siekierka E, Pyk P, et al. Interactive visuo-motor therapy system for stroke rehabilitation. Med Bio Eng Comput. 2007;45:901-907.
26. Sui J, Zhu Y, Han S. Self-face recognition in attended and unattended condition: an event-related brain potential study. Neuroreport. 2006;20:17:4:423-427.
27. Tong F, Nakayama K. Robust representations for faces: evidence from visual search. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 1999;25:1016-1035.
28. Kircher T, Senior C, Phillips M, et al. Recognizing one's own face. Cognition. 2001;78:1-15.
29. American Heart Association. Heart Disease and Stroke Statistics-2005 Update. Dallas, TX: Author; 2004.
30. Goldstein LB, Samsa GP. Reliability of the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale. Extension to non-neurologists in the context of a clinical trial. Stroke. 1997;28:307-310.
31. Naghdi S, Ansari NN, Mansouri K, Hasson S. A neurophysiological and clinical study of Brunnstrom recovery stages in the upper limb following stroke. Brain Inj. 2010;24:1372-1378.
32. Medical Research Council. Aids to the Examination of the Peripheral Nervous System, Memorandum no. 45. London: Her Majesty's Stationery Office; 1981.
33. Fugl-Meyer AR, Jaasko L, Leyman I, Olsson S, Steglind S. The post-stroke hemiplegic patient: a method for evaluation of physical performance. Scand J Rehabil Med. 1975;7:13-31.
34. Wolf SL, Catlin PA, Ellis M, Archer AL, Morgan B, Piacentino A. Assessing Wolf Motor Function Test as an outcome measure for research in patients after stroke. Stroke. 2001;32:1635-1639.
35. Taub E, Miller NE, Novack TA, et al. Technique to improve chronic motor deficit after stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1993;74:347-354.
36. Ware JE, Sherbourne CD. The MOS 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36): I. Conceptual framework and item selection. Med Care. 1992;30:473-496.
37. Argyros AA, Lourakis MIA. Real time tracking of multiple skin-colored objects with a possibly moving camera. In: Proceedings of the European Conference on Computer Vision (ECCV'04). 2004;368-379.
38. Sebe N, Cohen I, Huang TS, Gevers T. Skin detection: a Bayesian network approach. In: Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Pattern Recognition. 2004; 903-906.
39. Rizzo A, Kim GJ. A SWOT analysis of the field of virtual reality rehabilitation and therapy. Presence. 2005;14:2:119-146.
40. Laver KE, George S, Thomas S, Deutsch JE, Crotty M. Virtual reality for stroke rehabilitation. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011;9:CD008349
41. Stanney KM, Kennedy RS, Drexler JM, Harm DL. Motion sickness and proprioceptive aftereffects following virtual environment exposure. Appl Ergonomics. 1999;30:27-38.
42. Lee JH, Ku J, Cho W, et al. A virtual reality system for the assessment and rehabilitation of the activities of daily living. CyberPsychol Behav. 2003;6:383-388.
43. Rand D, Kizony R, Weiss PT. The Sony PlayStation II EyeToy: low-cost virtual reality for use in rehabilitation. J Neurol Phys Ther. 2008;32: 155-163.
44. Keyes H, Brady N. Self-face recognition is characterized by "bilateral gain" and by faster, more accurate performance which persists when faces are inverted. QJ Exp Psychol. 2010;63: 840-847.
45. Uddin LQ, Kaplan JT, Molnar-Szakacs I, Zaidel E, Iacoboni M. Self-face recognition activates a frontoparietal "mirror" network in the right hemisphere: an event-related fMRI study. NeuroImage. 2005;25:926-935.
46. Sugiura M, Shah NJ, Zilles K, Fink GR. Cortical representations of personally familiar objects and places: functional organization of the human posterior cingulate cortex. J Cogn Neurosci. 2005;17:183-198.