Neurology · 2017 · 164 citations · 23 references
MedicineNeurologyRehabilitation MedicinePhysical TherapyRehabilitationStroke RehabilitationHand RehabilitationNeurological RehabilitationPhysical RehabilitationUpper Extremity Function AssessmentUpper Limb RehabilitationVirtual Reality RehabilitationBetween-group ComparisonFunctional Independence MeasureOutcome MeasuresPost-stroke Upper-limb RehabilitationStroke Upper Limb RehabilitationSubacute Stroke RehabilitationVirtual Reality-based Motor RehabilitationVirtual Rehabilitation
OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness of upper extremity virtual reality rehabilitation training (VR) to time-matched conventional training (CT) in the subacute phase after stroke. METHODS: In this randomized, controlled, single-blind phase III multicenter trial, 120 participants with upper extremity motor impairment within 12 weeks after stroke were consecutively included at 5 rehabilitation institutions. Participants were randomized to either VR or CT as an adjunct to standard rehabilitation and stratified according to mild to moderate or severe hand paresis, defined as ≥20 degrees wrist and 10 degrees finger extension or less, respectively. The training comprised a minimum of sixteen 60-minute sessions over 4 weeks. The primary outcome measure was the Action Research Arm Test (ARAT); secondary outcome measures were the Box and Blocks Test and Functional Independence Measure. Patients were assessed at baseline, after intervention, and at the 3-month follow-up. RESULTS: = 0.777) assessments. Patients in VR improved 12 (SD 11) points from baseline to the postintervention assessment and 17 (SD 13) points from baseline to follow-up, while patients in CT improved 13 (SD 10) and 17 (SD 13) points, respectively. Improvement was also similar for our subgroup analysis with mild to moderate and severe upper extremity paresis. CONCLUSIONS: Additional upper extremity VR training was not superior but equally as effective as additional CT in the subacute phase after stroke. VR may constitute a motivating training alternative as a supplement to standard rehabilitation. CLINICALTRIALSGOV IDENTIFIER: NCT02079103. CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE: This study provides Class I evidence that for patients with upper extremity motor impairment after stroke, compared to conventional training, VR training did not lead to significant differences in upper extremity function improvement.
23
Thomas Platz, Cosima Pinkowski, Frederike van Wijck et al. · Clinical Rehabilitation · 2005 · 899 citations
Getting Neurorehabilitation Right
John W. Krakauer, S. Thomas Carmichael, Dale Corbett et al. · Neurorehabilitation and neural repair · 2012 · 566 citations · Full text
Medicine, Neurology, Neuroscience +16
Impact of Time on Improvement of Outcome After Stroke
Gert Kwakkel, Boudewijn J. Kollen, Jos W. R. Twisk · Stroke · 2006 · 524 citations · Full text
Johanna H. van der Lee, Vincent de Groot, Heleen Beckerman et al. · Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation · 2001 · 501 citations · Full text