The present review aims to explore the use of Immersive Virtual Reality (IVR) in the treatment of visual perception in Unilateral Spatial Neglect (USN) after a stroke. PubMed, Scopus, Embase and Pedro databases were searched, from inception to 1 February 2022. All studies that investigated the effect of IVR on USN, such as outcome in the stroke population, have been included. The current comprehensive systematic review was performed following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) recommendations and was registered in the PROSPERO database [CRD42022311284]. Methodological quality was assessed through JBI critical appraisal tool. A total of 436 articles were identified through the database searches. A total of 10 articles, with a heterogeneous study design, which involved 77 patients with USN with low-to-moderate methodological quality, have been selected. Five out the included studies tested usability of IVR for assessed or treated visual perception deficits in USN, comparing the results with 134 healthy subjects. In the rest of studies that tested IVR such as treatment, three showed statistical positive results (p < 0.05) in visual perception outcome. To date, the literature has suggested the potential benefits in the use of IVR for the treatment of visual perception disorders in USN. Interestingly, IVR motivates patients during the rehabilitation process improving compliance and interest. The heterogeneity in the studies’ design and in IVR treatments indicate the need of future investigations in the consideration of potentiality and low-cost of this technology.

Determining the walking ability of post-stroke patients is crucial for the design of rehabilitation programs and the correct functional information to give to patients and their caregivers at their return home after a neurorehabilitation program. We aimed to assess the convergent validity of three different walking tests: the Functional Ambulation Category (FAC) test, the 10-m walking test (10MeWT) and the 6-minute walking test (6MWT). Eighty walking participants with stroke (34 F, age 64.54 ± 13.02 years) were classified according to the FAC score. Gait speed evaluation was performed with 10MeWT and 6MWT. The cut-off values for FAC and walking tests were calculated using a receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curve. Area under the curve (AUC) and Youden’s index were used to find the cut-off value. Statistical differences were found in all FAC subgroups with respect to walking speed on short and long distances, and in the Rivermead Mobility Index and Barthel Index. Mid-level precision (AUC > 0.7; p < 0.05) was detected in the walking speed with respect to FAC score (III vs. IV and IV vs. V). The confusion matrix and the accuracy analysis showed that the most sensitive test was the 10MeWT, with cut-off values of 0.59 m/s and 1.02 m/s. Walking speed cut-offs of 0.59 and 1.02 m/s were assessed with the 10MeWT and can be used in FAC classification in patients with subacute stroke between the subgroups able to walk with supervision and independently on uniform and non-uniform surfaces. Moreover, the overlapping walking speed registered with the two tests, the 10MeWT showed a better accuracy to drive FAC classification.

Background: As one of the leading causes of disability in the world, stroke can determine a reduction of balance performance with a negative impact on daily activity and social life. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the effects of sensor-based balance training with exergaming feedback on balance skills in chronic stroke patients. Methods: 21 individuals (11F, 57.14 ± 13.82 years) with a single event of ischemic stroke were randomly assigned to the sensor-based balance training group (SB-group) or the usual care balance training group (UC-group). Both groups received 10 add-on sessions with exergaming feedback (SB-group) or conventional training (UC-group). Clinical and instrumental evaluation was performed before (t0), after (t1), and after one month (t2) from intervention. Participation level was assessed using the Pittsburgh Rehabilitation Participation Scale at the end of each session. Results: The SB-group showed an improvement in postural stability (p = 0.02) when compared to the UC-group. In the evaluation of motivational level, the score was statistically higher in the SB-group with respect to the UC-group (p < 0.01). Conclusion: Except for the improvement in postural stability, no difference was recorded in clinical score, suggesting a comparable gain in both groups. However, patients undergoing sensor-based training exhibited a higher participation score, ultimately indicating the use of this training to improve the adherence to rehabilitation settings, especially in patients with lower compliance.