Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34276550›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in neurology2021

The Challenges and Perspectives of the Integration Between Virtual and Augmented Reality and Manual Therapies.

Francesco Cerritelli, Marco Chiera, Marco Abbro, Valentino Megale, Jorge Esteves, Alberto Gallace, Andrea Manzotti

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in neurology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
4.2field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

22 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 47 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Review
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. An Interactive Vision-Based 3D Augmented Reality System for In-Home Physical Rehabilitation: A Qualitative Inquiry to Inform System Development.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2024
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Novel Therapies for Centralized Pain: a Brief Review.Current pain and headache reports · 2022
    Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Francesco CerritelliFoundation COME Collaboration, Pescara, Italy.
Marco ChieraFoundation COME Collaboration, Pescara, Italy.
Marco AbbroFoundation COME Collaboration, Pescara, Italy.
Valentino MegaleSoftcare Studios, Rome, Italy.
Jorge EstevesFoundation COME Collaboration, Pescara, Italy.
Alberto GallaceDepartment of Psychology, Bicocca University, Milan, Italy.
Andrea ManzottiFoundation COME Collaboration, Pescara, Italy.
University of Milano-Bicocca · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Virtual reality (VR) and augmented reality (AR) have been combined with physical rehabilitation and psychological treatments to improve patients' emotional reactions, body image, and physical function. Nonetheless, no detailed investigation assessed the relationship between VR or AR manual therapies (MTs), which are touch-based approaches that involve the manipulation of tissues for relieving pain and improving balance, postural stability and well-being in several pathological conditions. The present review attempts to explore whether and how VR and AR might be integrated with MTs to improve patient care, with particular attention to balance and to fields like chronic pain that need an approach that engages both mind and body. MTs rely essentially on touch to induce tactile, proprioceptive, and interoceptive stimulations, whereas VR and AR rely mainly on visual, auditory, and proprioceptive stimulations. MTs might increase patients' overall immersion in the virtual experience by inducing parasympathetic tone and relaxing the mind, thus enhancing VR and AR effects. VR and AR could help manual therapists overcome patients' negative beliefs about pain, address pain-related emotional issues, and educate them about functional posture and movements. VR and AR could also engage and change the sensorimotor neural maps that the brain uses to cope with environmental stressors. Hence, combining MTs with VR and AR could define a whole mind-body intervention that uses psychological, interoceptive, and exteroceptive stimulations for rebalancing sensorimotor integration, distorted perceptions, including visual, and body images. Regarding the technology needed to integrate VR and AR with MTs, head-mounted displays could be the most suitable devices due to being low-cost, also allowing patients to follow VR therapy at home. There is enough evidence to argue that integrating MTs with VR and AR could help manual therapists offer patients better and comprehensive treatments. However, therapists need valid tools to identify which patients would benefit from VR and AR to avoid potential adverse effects, and both therapists and patients have to be involved in the development of VR and AR applications to define truly patient-centered therapies. Furthermore, future studies should assess whether the integration between MTs and VR or AR is practically feasible, safe, and clinically useful.

Indexed as

balancecybersicknesshead-mounted displaymultisensory integrationpresencesimulationtouch

Identifiers

PMID34276550
PMCPMC8278005
OpenAlexW3177199282

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.