Virtual Reality Versus Conventional Treatment of Reaching Ability in Chronic Stroke: Clinical Feasibility Study

Neurology and Therapy

Volumn 1, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 1-15

  Levin, Mindy F ^a,b   Snir, Osnat ^c,d   Liebermann, Dario G ^c   Weingarden, Harold ^e   Weiss, Patrice L ^f  

^a School of Physical Therapy   (Canada)

^b CENTRE FOR INTERDISCIPLINARY RESEARCH IN REHABILITATION OF GREATER MONTREAL   (Canada)

^c TEL AVIV UNIVERSITY   (Israel)

^d BNAI ZION MEDICAL CENTER   (Israel)

^e SHEBA MEDICAL CENTER   (Israel)

^f UNIVERSITY OF HAIFA   (Israel)

Author keywords

Clinical outcomes; Intervention; Reaching; Stroke; Virtual reality

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; AMOUNT OF USE; ARTICLE; BEHAVIOR THERAPY; BOX AND BLOCKS TEST; BRAIN ISCHEMIA; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CLINICAL EVALUATION; COMPOSITE SPASTICITY INDEX; CONTROLLED STUDY; EXERCISE; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; FUGL MEYER ARM SCALE; GOAL ATTAINMENT; HUMAN; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MOTOR ACTIVITY; MOTOR ACTIVITY LOG; MOTOR DYSFUNCTION; MOTOR PERFORMANCE; NAMED INVENTORIES, QUESTIONNAIRES AND RATING SCALES; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PATIENT SATISFACTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PSYCHOLOGIC TEST; QUALITY OF MOVEMENT; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; REACHING PERFORMANCE SCALE FOR STROKE; TASK PERFORMANCE; VERY ELDERLY; VIDEO CAPTURE VIRTUAL REALITY THERAPY; VIDEORECORDER; WOLF MOTOR FUNCTION TEST;

EID: 84977119181     PISSN: 21938253     EISSN: 21936536     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s40120-012-0003-9     Document Type: Article

References (53)

1. Kwakkel G, Kollen BJ, van der Grond J, Prevo AJ. Probability of regaining dexterity in the flaccid upper limb: impact of severity of paresis and time since onset in acute stroke. Stroke. 2003;34: 2181-6.
2. Mayo NE, Wood-Dauphinee S, Cote R, Durcan L, Carlton J. Activity, participation, and quality of life 6 months poststroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2002;83: 1035-42.
3. Maldonado MA, Allred RP, Felthauser EL, Jones TA. Motor skill training, but not voluntary exercise, improves skilled reaching after unilateral ischemic lesions of the sensorimotor cortex in rats. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2008;22: 250-61.
4. Proteau L, Blandin Y, Alain C, Dorion A. The effects of the amount and variability of practice on the learning of a multi-segmented motor task. Acta Psychol. 1994;85: 61-74.
5. Winstein CJ, Merians AS, Sullivan KJ. Motor learning after unilateral brain damage. Neuropsychologia. 1999;37: 975-87.
6. Kantak SS, Sullivan KJ, Fisher BE, Knowlton BJ, Winstein CJ. Neural substrates of motor memory consolidation depend on practice structure. Nat Neurosci. 2010;13: 923-5.
7. Kwakkel G, Wagenaar RC, Koelman TW, Lankhorst GJ, Koetsier JC. Effects of intensity of rehabilitation after stroke. A research synthesis. Stroke. 1997;28: 1550-6.
8. Kleim JA, Jones TA. Principles of experience-dependent neural plasticity: implications for rehabilitation after brain damage. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2008;51: S225-39.
9. Cirstea CM, Ptito A, Levin MF. Feedback and cognition in arm motor skill reacquisition after stroke. Stroke. 2006;37: 1237-42.
10. Nudo RJ, Milliken GW. Reorganization of movement representations in primary motor cortex following focal ischemic infarcts in adult squirrel monkeys. J Neurophysiol. 1996;75: 2144-9.
11. Rizzo A. Virtual reality and disability: emergence and challenge. Disabil Rehabil. 2002;24: 567-9.
12. Rizzo AA, Kim GJ. A SWOT analysis of the field of VR rehabilitation and therapy. Presence-TeleopVirt. 2005;14: 119-46.
13. Weiss PL, Ring H. Commentary on virtual reality in stroke rehabilitation: still more virtual than real. Disabil Rehabil. 2007;29: 1147-9.
14. You SH, Jang SH, Kim YH, et al. Virtual reality-induced cortical reorganization and associated locomotor recovery in chronic stroke: an experimenter-blind randomized study. Stroke. 2005;36: 1166-71.
15. Holden MK. Virtual environments for motor rehabilitation: review. Cyberpsychol Behav. 2005;8: 187-211.
16. Henderson AK, Korner-Bitensky N, Levin MF. Virtual reality in stroke rehabilitation: a systematic review of its effectiveness for upper limb motor recovery. Top Stroke Rehabil. 2007;14: 52-61.
17. Adamovich SV, Fluet GG, Tunik E, Merians AS. Sensorimotor training in virtual reality: a review. Neurorehabilitation. 2009;25: 29-44.
18. Lucca LF. Virtual reality and motor rehabilitation of the upper limb after stroke: a generation of progress? J Rehabil Med. 2009;41: 1003-6.
19. Weiss PL, Sveistrup H, Rand D, Kizony R. Video capture virtual reality: a decade of rehabilitation assessment and intervention. Phys Ther Rev. 2009;14: 307-21.
20. Crosbie JH, Lennon S, Basford JR, McDonough SM. Virtual reality in stroke rehabilitation: still more virtual than real. Disabil Rehabil. 2007;29: 1139-46.
21. Mumford N, Wilson PH. Virtual reality in acquired brain injury upper limb rehabilitation: evidence-based evaluation of clinical research. Brain Inj. 2009;23: 179-91.
22. Laver KE, George S, Thomas S, Deutsch JE, Crotty M. Virtual reality for stroke rehabilitation. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011;9: CD008349.
23. Saposnik G, Levin MF. Virtual reality in stroke rehabilitation: a metanalysis and implications for clinicians. Stroke. 2011;42: 1380-6.
24. Creem-Regeh SH, Willemsen P, Gooch AA, Thompson WB. The influence of restricted viewing conditions on egocentric distance perception: implications for real and virtual environments. Perception. 2005;34: 191-204.
25. Magdalon EC, Michaelsen SM, Quevedo AAF, Levin MF. Comparison of grasping movements made by healthy subjects in a 3-dimentional immersive virtual versus physical environment. Acta Psychol (Amst). 2011;138: 126-34.
26. Liebermann DG, Berman S, Weiss PL, Levin MF. Kinematics of reaching movements in a 2D virtual environment in adults with and without stroke. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehab Eng. 2012. (In press).
27. Knaut LA, Subramanian S, McFadyen BJ, Bourbonnais D, Levin MF. Kinematics of pointing movements made in a virtual versus a physical 3D environment in stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2009;90: 793-802.
28. IOM: Institute of Medicine. Small Clinical Trials: Issues and Challenges. Washington: National Academies; 2001.
29. Jack D, Boian R, Merians AS, et al. Virtual reality-enhanced stroke rehabilitation. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehab Eng. 2011;9: 308-18.
30. Folstein MF, Folstein SE, McHugh PR. Mini-mental state". A practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. J Psychiatr Res. 1975;12: 189-98.
31. Rand D, Katz N, Weiss PL. Evaluation of virtual shopping in the VMall: comparison of post-stroke participants to healthy control groups. Disabil Rehabil. 2007;29: 1710-9.
32. World Health Organization. ICF: International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2001.
33. Fugl-Meyer AR, Jääsko L, Leyman L, Olsson S, Steglind S. The post-stroke hemiparetic patient. I. A method for evaluation of physical performance. Scand J Rehab Med. 1975;7: 13-31.
34. Levin MF, Hui-Chan CW. Relief of hemiparetic spasticity by TENS is associated with improvement in reflex and voluntary motor functions. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol. 1992;85: 131-42.
35. Levin MF, Desrosiers J, Beauchemin D, Bergeron N, Rochette A. Development and validation of a scale for rating motor compensations used for reaching in patients with hemiparesis: the reaching performance scale. Phys Ther. 2004;84: 8-22.
36. Mathiowetz V, Volland G, Kashman N, Weber K. Adult norms for the Box and Block Test of manual dexterity. Am J Occup Ther. 1985;39: 386-91.
37. Wolf SL, Catlin PA, Ellis M, Archer AL, Morgan B, Piacentino A. Assessing Wolf motor function test as outcome measure for research in patients after stroke. Stroke. 2001;32: 1635-9.
38. Uswatte G, Taub E, Morris D, Light K, Thompson PA. The Motor Activity Log-28: assessing daily use of the hemiparetic arm after stroke. Neurology. 2006;67: 1189-94.
39. Schwartz IS, Baer DM. Social validity assessments: is current practice state of the art? J Appl Behav Anal. 1991;24: 189-204.
40. Barlow DH, Nock MK, Hersen M. Single case experimental designs-strategies for studying behavior change. Boston: Pearson Education; 2009.
41. Trahan J, Malouin F. Intermittent intensive physiotherapy in children with cerebral palsy: a pilot study. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2002;44: 233-9.
42. Schneiberg S, Mckinley P, Sveistrup H, Gisel E, Mayo NE, Levin MF. Task-oriented intervention and trunk restraint on upper limb movement quality in children with cerebral palsy. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2010;52: e245-53.
43. Saposnik G, Mamdani M, Bayley M, Thorpe KE, Hall J, Cohen LG, Teasell R, EVREST Steering Committee, EVREST Study Group for the Stroke Outcome Research Canada Working Group. Effectiveness of Virtual Reality Exercises in STroke Rehabilitation (EVREST): rationale, design, and protocol of a pilot randomized clinical trial assessing the Wii gaming system. Int J Stroke. 2010;5: 47-51.
44. Scruggs TE, Mastropieri MA. Summarizing single-subject research: issues and applications. Behav Modif. 1994;22: 221-42.
45. Campbell JM. Statistical comparison of four effect sizes for single-subject designs. Behav Modif. 2004;28: 234-46.
46. Bingham GP, Pagano C. The necessity of a perception/action approach to definite distance perception: monocular distance perception to guide reaching. J Exp Psych Human Perc Perf. 1998;24: 145-68.
47. Bernstein NA. The Co-ordination and Regulation of Movements. Chapter II. The problem of the interrelation of co-ordination and localization, Oxford: Pergamon Press; 1967: 15-60.
48. Levin MF, Kleim JF, Wolf S. What do motor 'recovery' and 'compensation' mean in patients following stroke? Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2009;23: 313-9.
49. Subramanian SK, Massie CL, Malcolm MP, Levin MF. Does provision of extrinsic feedback result in improved motor learning in the upper limb poststroke? A systematic review of the evidence. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2010;24: 113-24.
50. Subramanian SK, Lourenco CB, Chilingaryan G, Sveistrup H, Levin MF. Arm motor recovery using virtual reality intervention in chronic stroke: randomized control trial. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2012. [Epub ahead of print].
51. Grezes J, Decety J. Functional anatomy of execution, mental simulation, observation, and verb generation of actions: a meta-analysis. Hum Brain Mapp. 2001;12: 1-19.
52. Anquetil T, Jeannerod M. Simulated actions in the first and in the third person perspectives share common representations. Brain Res. 2007;1130: 125-9.
53. Newport R, Brown L, Husain M, Mort D, Jackson SR. The role of the posterior parietal lobe in prism adaptation: failure to adapt to optical prisms in patients with bilateral damage to posterior parietal cortex. Cortex. 2006;42: 720-9.