Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35704460›Full record

ArticleDisability and rehabilitation. Assistive technology2024

Comparison of brain activation and functional outcomes between physical and virtual reality box and block test: a case study.

Sheridan M Parker, Sydney C Andreasen, Brian Ricks, Mark S Kaipust, Jorge Zuniga, Brian A Knarr

Open access · greenAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Disability and rehabilitation. Assistive technology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 29% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Sheridan M ParkerDepartment of Biomechanics, University of Nebraska at Omaha, Omaha, NE, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-7546-7524
Sydney C AndreasenDepartment of Biomechanics, University of Nebraska at Omaha, Omaha, NE, USA.
Brian RicksDepartment of Computer Science, University of Nebraska at Omaha, Omaha, NE, USA.
Mark S KaipustDepartment of Occupational Therapy, Creighton University, Omaha, NE, USA.
Jorge ZunigaDepartment of Biomechanics, University of Nebraska at Omaha, Omaha, NE, USA.
Brian A KnarrDepartment of Biomechanics, University of Nebraska at Omaha, Omaha, NE, USA.
University of Nebraska at Omaha · USCreighton University · US

Funding

Visual control of locomotion in people with Parkinsons diseaseP20GM109090 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA OMAHA · PI STERGIOU, NIKOLAOS · 2014 to 2023
$20.5M
The influence of 3D printed prostheses on neural activation patterns of the primary motor cortex in children with unilateral congenital upper-limb reductionsR01NS114282 · NINDS · UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA OMAHA · PI KNARR, BRIAN ANDREW, ZUNIGA, JORGE M · 2020 to 2023
$1.5M
Impact of assistive device use during treadmill and overground walking post-strokeR15HD094194 · NICHD · UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA OMAHA · PI KNARR, BRIAN ANDREW · 2018 to 2018
$443k
NICHD NIH HHS R15 HD094194NIGMS NIH HHS P20 GM109090NINDS NIH HHS R01 NS114282
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeImmersive Virtual Reality (VR) systems allow for highly repetitive tasks to be performed within a virtual environment that increases practice in home environments. VR can increase access to rehabilitation by reducing access barriers. However, rehabilitation outcomes between immersive VR systems and conventional physical rehabilitation are not well understood. The purpose of this case study was to assess the use of a custom clinically based VR simulation for testing gross hand dexterity with an individual with chronic stroke. MATERIALS AND

methodsThe participant performed the box and blocks test (BBT) in an immersive VR environment and a physical environment. Three trials of the BBT were performed with their less-affected and affected hands each in both environments while measuring cortical activity using fNIRS. Rests were given between trials and environment conditions.

resultsOur results show that there was no statistical difference in the number of blocks moved between the physical and VR BBT for both the affected and less-affected hands. Furthermore, our results also indicate no statistically significant difference between the physical BBT and VR BBT conditions on contralateral motor cortex activation, suggesting that cortical involvement is comparable between physical and VR conditions.

conclusionsThese results suggest that an immersive VR system may be able to elicit functional and motor cortex activations that are comparable to the conventional physical BBT. Importantly, these findings highlights the potential benefits of VR therapy as a remote therapy intervention and/or to increase the effectiveness and practicality of current in-person rehabilitation programs.Implications for rehabilitationThese findings highlight the potential benefits of immersive virtual reality as a remote therapy intervention.Immersive virtual reality use has potential benefits to increase the effectiveness and practicality of current in-person rehabilitation programs.

Indexed as

StrokeStroke RehabilitationVirtual RealityVirtual Reality Exposure TherapyBrainHumansTreatment OutcomeUpper Extremitybox and block testchronic strokefNIRSfunctional near-infra-red spectroscopyrehabilitationVirtual reality

Identifiers

PMID35704460
PMCPMC12368915
OpenAlexW4282913788

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.