ArticleBMC medical education2025
Awareness and perceptions of virtual reality in physiotherapy: a cross-sectional study among students and clinicians in Palestine.
Article in BMC medical education, 2025. 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.
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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundVirtual reality(VR) and augmented reality(AR) are increasingly used in physiotherapy to improve patient engagement and recovery outcomes. However, their adoption in Palestine remains limited. Understanding students’ and clinicians’ awareness and impressions is critical for planning future VR incorporation into physiotherapy education and practice.
objectivesTo explore and compare the awareness and perceptions of VR/AR technologies in physiotherapy among final-year physiotherapy students and practicing clinicians in Palestine.
methodsThis cross-sectional study was carried out from December 2024 to May 2025 involved 500 participants recruited via convenience sampling from accredited universities and rehabilitation centers throughout Palestine. A well-structured, self-administered questionnaire was developed to assess participants’ knowledge, clinical familiarity, training needs, and future perspectives regarding VR in physiotherapy among final-year students and clinicians. A pilot studywereth 30 participants was conducted to determine the questionnaire’s content validity and reliability, demonstrating a good internal consistency with a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.80.
resultsMost participants were female (70.6%) and aged 18–30 years (93.6%), with 70% final-year physiotherapy students and 30% clinicians. Clinicians reported higher VR/AR awareness (62.3% vs. 52.6%, p = 0.017) and greater participation in related workshops (p < 0.05). Both groups identified motion tracking as defining rehabilitation technology. High cost was the most cited disadvantage, while neurological and musculoskeletal applications were viewed as most suitable. Although 51.2% were neutral on ethical concerns, over half believed current training was inadequate, and most preferred combining VR with traditional methods (89%). Overall, 91.8% supported specialized educational programs to enhance clinical application, engagement, and progress tracking.
conclusionThe findings demonstrate moderate VR/AR awareness among Palestinian physiotherapists, but their limited hands-on experience and institutional support hinder widespread adoption. Clinicians are more familiar than students, indicating the need for earlier curricular exposure.
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.