ArticleScientific reports2023
Limitations and solutions of low cost virtual reality mirror therapy for post-stroke patients.
Article in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Mirror therapy is applied to reduce phantom pain and as a rehabilitation technique in post-stroke patients. Using Virtual Reality and head-mounted displays this therapy can be performed in virtual scenarios. However, for its efficient use in clinical settings, some hardware limitations need to be solved. A new system to perform mirror therapy in virtual scenarios for post-stroke patients is proposed. The system requires the patient a standalone virtual reality headset with hand-tracking features and for the rehabilitator an external computer or tablet device. The system provides functionalities for the rehabilitator to prepare and follow-up rehabilitation sessions and a virtual scenario for the patient to perform rehabilitation. The system has been tested on a real scenario with the support of three experienced rehabilitators and considering ten post-stroke patients in individual sessions focused on upper limb motor rehabilitation. The development team observed all the sessions and took note of detected errors regarding technological aspects. Solutions to solve detected problems will be proposed and evaluated in terms of feasibility, performance cost, additional system cost, number of solved issues, new limitations, or advantages for the patient. Three types of errors were detected and solved. The first error is related to the position of the hands relative to the head-mounted display. To solve it the exercise area can be limited to avoid objectives that require turning the head too far. The second error is related to the interaction between the hands and the virtual objects. It can be solved making the main hand non-interactive. The last type of error is due to patient limitations and can be mitigated by having a virtual hand play out an example motion to bring the patient's attention back to the exercise. Other solutions have been evaluated positively and can be used in addition or instead of the selected ones. For mirror therapy based on virtual reality to be efficient in post-stroke rehabilitation the current head-mounted display-based solutions need to be complemented with specific strategies that avoid or mitigate the limitations of the technology and the patient. Solutions that help with the most common issues have been proposed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.