Background and Objectives: The consequences of stroke have a significant impact on self-sufficiency and health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Virtual reality (VR)-based rehabilitation has the potential to impact these modalities, but information on timing, volume, and intensity is not yet available. The aim of this randomized controlled trial (1:1) was to evaluate the impact of conventional rehabilitation combined with VR on self-care and domains of HRQoL in patients ≤6 months post-stroke. Materials and Methods: The intervention group completed a total of 270 min of conventional VR + rehabilitation sessions. The control group underwent conventional rehabilitation only. Primary assessments with the WHO disability assessment schedule 2.0 (WHODAS 2) questionnaire were conducted before rehabilitation (T0), after completion of the intervention (T1), and at the 4-week follow-up (T2); secondary outcomes included self-sufficiency and balance assessments. Results: Fifty patients completed the study (mean age 61.2 ± 9.0 years, time since stroke 114.3 ± 39.4 days). There were no statistically significant differences between the groups in WHODAS 2, self-sufficiency, and balance scores (p > 0.05). Conclusions: In the experimental group, there was a statistically significant difference in WHODAS 2, assessment of self-sufficiency, and balance scores before and after therapy (p < 0.05). VR appears to be a suitable tool to supplement and modify rehabilitation in patients after stroke.

Background: Although fall prevention in patients after stroke is crucial, the clinical validity of fall risk assessment tools is underresearched in this population. The study aim was to determine the cut-off scores and clinical validity of the Sensory Organization Test (SOT), the Berg Balance Scale (BBS), and the Fall Efficacy Scale–International (FES-I) in patients after stroke. Methods: In this prospective cross-sectional study, we analyzed data for patients admitted to a rehabilitation unit after stroke from 2018 through 2021. Participants underwent SOT, BBS, and FES-I pre-discharge, and the fall incidence was recorded for 6 months. We used an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) to calculate predictive values. Results: Of 84 included patients (median age 68.5 (interquartile range 67–71) years), 32 (38.1%) suffered a fall. All three tests were significantly predictive of fall risk. Optimal cut-off scores were 60 points for SOT (AUC 0.686), 35 and 42 points for BBS (AUC 0.661 and 0.618, respectively), and 27 and 29 points for FES-I (AUC 0.685 and 0.677, respectively). Conclusions: Optimal cut-off scores for SOT, BBS, and FES-I were determined for patients at risk for falls after a stroke, which all three tools classified with a good discriminatory ability.