Trial objective: To verify whether conventional rehabilitation combined with specific virtual reality is more effective than conventional therapy alone in restoring hand motor function and muscle tone after stroke. Trial design: This prospective single-blind randomized controlled trial compared conventional rehabilitation based on physiotherapy and occupational therapy (control group) with the combination of conventional rehabilitation and specific virtual reality technology (experimental group). Participants were allocated to these groups in a ratio of 1:1. The conventional rehabilitation therapists were blinded to the study, but neither the participants nor the therapist who applied the virtual reality–based therapy could be blinded to the intervention. Participants: Forty-six patients (43 of whom completed the intervention period and follow-up evaluation) were recruited from the Neurology and Rehabilitation units of the Hospital General Universitario of Talavera de la Reina, Spain. Intervention: Each participant completed 15 treatment sessions lasting 150 min/session; the sessions took place five consecutive days/week over the course of three weeks. The experimental group received conventional upper-limb strength and motor training (100 min/session) combined with specific virtual reality technology devices (50 min/session); the control group received only conventional training (150 min/session). Results: As measured by the Ashworth Scale, a decrease in wrist muscle tone was observed in both groups (control and experimental), with a notably larger decrease in the experimental group (baseline mean/postintervention mean: 1.22/0.39; difference between baseline and follow-up: 0.78; 95% confidence interval: 0.38–1.18; effect size = 0.206). Fugl-Meyer Assessment scores were observed to increase in both groups, with a notably larger increase in the experimental group (total motor function: effect size = 0.300; mean: − 35.5; 95% confidence interval: − 38.9 to − 32.0; wrist: effect size = 0.290; mean: − 5.6; 95% confidence interval: − 6.4 to − 4.8; hand: effect size = 0.299; mean: − -8.9; 95% confidence interval: − 10.1 to − 7.6). On the Action Research Arm Test, the experimental group quadrupled its score after the combined intervention (effect size = 0.321; mean: − 32.8; 95% confidence interval: − 40.1 to − 25.5). Conclusion: The outcomes of the study suggest that conventional rehabilitation combined with a specific virtual reality technology system can be more effective than conventional programs alone in improving hand motor function and voluntary movement and in normalizing muscle tone in subacute stroke patients. With combined treatment, hand and wrist functionality and motion increase; resistance to movement (spasticity) decreases and remains at a reduced level. Trials Registry: International Clinical Trials Registry Platform: ISRCTN27760662 (15/06/2020; retrospectively registered).

The accessibility, versatility and motivation provided by virtual reality technology (VRT) have fostered its rapid expansion as a rehabilitation technique to improve functional mobility. The aim of this study was to investigate the effectiveness of rehabilitation programmes using VRT, specific virtual reality technology (VRT-S) and non-specific virtual reality technology (VRT-NS), to improve functional mobility in individuals aged >60 years versus conventional treatment (CT) or no intervention. Nine databases (Cochrane Library, Scopus, PEDro, Medline, CSIC, Web of Science, OT Seeker, NGCH and CINAHL) were searched to identify randomised trials up to December 2019. Results of clinical trials that used VRT-S and VRT-NS in rehabilitation were combined, using a random effects model with inverse variance weighting of the studies. GRADE was used to assess the quality of evidence. The protocol was registered in PROSPERO: CRD42019131630. Overall, there was moderate quality of evidence for the functional mobility results, which means that the estimate of effect is likely to change. Sixteen of the 18 studies selected (n = 568) provided data for the subgroup meta-analysis. VRT-NS was more effective in improving functional mobility than no intervention [standardised mean difference (SMD) = -1.02; 95% confidence interval (CI) -1,91 to -0,14). VRT-NS was also more effective than CT in improving resistance in ambulation (SMD = -1.20; 95% CI -1.93 to 0.46). No significant differences were found between VRT-S and CT or no intervention. Programmes in which >18 sessions were applied were more beneficial (SMD = -0.89; 95% CI -1.71 to -0.08; <0.001) than programmes with ≤18 sessions (SMD = 0.04; 95% CI -0.51 to 0.59) versus no intervention. Our results suggest that VRT is an effective intervention for improving functional mobility in older persons compared with CT. VRT-NS proved to be more effective than VRT-S. However, these results are still not conclusive due to the low methodological quality of the studies. Thus, new studies and analyses are required.

(1) This review aims to evaluate the effectiveness of treatments with virtual reality systems (VRSs) on the functional autonomy of older adults versus conventional treatment. (3) Methods: Systematic review and meta-analysis. An electronic data search was carried out, following the PRISMA statement, up to February 2020. We combined results from clinical trials using VRSs for the improvement of basic and instrumental activities of daily living. The guidelines of the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions were followed for calculations and risk of bias. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) was used to assess the quality of evidence. (4) Results: The final analysis included 23 studies with a population of 1595 participants. A moderate, but clinically significant, effect was found for basic activities of daily living (BADLs), (Standard Medium Deviation, SMD 0.61; 95% CI: −0.15–1.37; P < 0.001). A small effect was found for instrumental ADLs (Instrumental Activities of daily living, IADLs) (SMD −0.34; 95% CI: −0.82–0.15; P < 0.001). Functional ambulation was the BADL which improved the most (SMD −0.63; 95% CI: −0.86, −0.40; P < 0.001). (5) Conclusion: The use of VRSs is an innovative and feasible technique to support and improve the functional autonomy of community-dwelling older adults. Due to the very low quality of the evidence for our main outcomes, the effects of a VRS on the BADLs and IADLs are uncertain. Clinical trials of a higher methodological quality are necessary to increase the level of knowledge of its actual effectiveness.

Objective: To evaluate the influence of conventional rehabilitation combined with virtual reality on improving quality of life related to post-stroke health. Design: Randomized controlled trial. Setting: Rehabilitation and neurology departments of a general hospital (Talavera de la Reina, Spain). Subjects: A total of 43 participants with subacute stroke. Intervention: Participants were randomized into experimental group (conventional treatment + virtual reality) and control (conventional treatment). Main measures: Health-related quality of life as measured by the EuroQoL-5 dimensions instrument (EQ-5D-5L) and EuroQoL visual analog scale (EQ-VAS). Results: A total of 23 patients in the experimental group (62.6 ± 13.5 years) and 20 in the control (63.6 ± 12.2 years) completed the study. In the experimental group, EQ-VAS score was 29.1 ± 12.8 at baseline, 86.5 ± 7.1 post-intervention, and 78.3 ± 10.3 at the three-month follow-up. The control group obtained scores of 25.5 ± 5.1, 57.0 ± 4.7, and 58.5 ± 5.9, respectively. We identified significant differences at the post-intervention and follow-up timepoints (p = 0.000) and a partial η² of 0.647. In EQ-5D-5L, the severity of issues decreased after intervention in the experimental group, while pain and anxiety dimensions increased between post-intervention and follow-up. Conclusions: The conventional rehabilitative approach combined with virtual reality appears to be more effective for improving the perceived health-related quality of life in stroke survivors.

This research analyzed the combined effect of conventional treatment and virtual reality exposure therapy on the motor function of the upper extremities in people with stroke. We designed a randomized controlled trial set in the rehabilitation and neurology departments of a hospital (Talavera de la Reina, Spain). The subjects included 43 participants, all randomized into experimental (conventional treatment + virtual reality exposure therapy) and control group (conventional treatment).; The main measures were Fugl-Meyer Assessment for upper extremity, Modified Ashworth Scale, and Stroke Impact Scale 3.0. The results included 23 patients in the experimental (62.6 ± 13.5 years) and 20 in the control group (63.6 ± 12.2 years) who completed the study. After the intervention, muscle tone diminished in both groups, more so in the experimental group (mean baseline/post-intervention: from 1.30 to 0.60; η² = 0.237; p = 0.001). Difficulties in performing functional activities that implicate the upper limb also diminished. Regarding the global recovery from stroke, both groups improved scores, but the experimental group scored significantly higher than the controls (mean baseline/post-intervention: from 28.7 to 86.5; η² = 0.633; p = 0.000). In conclusion, conventional rehabilitation combined with specific virtual reality seems to be more efficacious than conventional physiotherapy and occupational therapy alone in improving motor function of the upper extremities and the autonomy of survivors of stroke in activities of daily living.