Virtual reality for the rehabilitation of the upper limb motor function after stroke: a prospective controlled trial

Andrea Turolla, Mauro Dam, Laura Ventura, Paolo Tonin, Michela Agostini, Carla Zucconi, Pawel Kiper, Annachiara Cagnin, Lamberto Piron, Andrea Turolla, Mauro Dam, Laura Ventura, Paolo Tonin, Michela Agostini, Carla Zucconi, Pawel Kiper, Annachiara Cagnin, Lamberto Piron

Abstract

Background: Recent evidence has demonstrated the efficacy of Virtual Reality (VR) for stroke rehabilitation nonetheless its benefits and limitations in large population of patients have not yet been studied.

Objectives: To evaluate the effectiveness of non-immersive VR treatment for the restoration of the upper limb motor function and its impact on the activities of daily living capacities in post-stroke patients.

Methods: A pragmatic clinical trial was conducted among post-stroke patients admitted to our rehabilitation hospital. We enrolled 376 subjects who had a motor arm subscore on the Italian version of the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (It-NIHSS) between 1 and 3 and without severe neuropsychological impairments interfering with recovery. Patients were allocated to two treatments groups, receiving combined VR and upper limb conventional (ULC) therapy or ULC therapy alone. The treatment programs consisted of 2 hours of daily therapy, delivered 5 days per week, for 4 weeks. The outcome measures were the Fugl-Meyer Upper Extremity (F-M UE) and Functional Independence Measure (FIM) scales.

Results: Both treatments significantly improved F-M UE and FIM scores, but the improvement obtained with VR rehabilitation was significantly greater than that achieved with ULC therapy alone. The estimated effect size of the minimal difference between groups in F-M UE and FIM scores was 2.5 ± 0.5 (P < 0.001) pts and 3.2 ± 1.2 (P = 0.007) pts, respectively.

Conclusions: VR rehabilitation in post-stroke patients seems more effective than conventional interventions in restoring upper limb motor impairments and motor related functional abilities.

Trial registration: Italian Ministry of Health IRCCS Research Programme 2590412.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Motor exercises in the virtual environment. The two scenarios (VRRS® Khymeia Group, Ltd. Noventa Padovana. Italy) represent: A) a simple reaching movement: the patient has to raise the red glass and place it among the blue glasses on the shelf, according to a pre-recorded path (yellow line); B) a complex movement of increasing difficulty: the patient has to move the blue ball through the orange circles. The green box represents the start zone, while the yellow box represents the end zone to reach, following the circular-like displayed path.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Scatter plot of the Fugl - Meyer Upper Extremity scores before and after treatment. Fitted models in the RFVE and ULC groups are displayed in dashed and dotted line, respectively. The plot shows the better score at F-M UE scale after RFVE compared with ULC therapy, adjusted for the severity of pre treatment motor impairment. Empty circle (о) represents individual F-M UE score of the RFVE patients group, cross symbol (+) represents individual F-M UE score of the ULC patients group.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Scatter plot of the Functional Independence Measure scores before and after treatment. Fitted models in the RFVE and ULC groups are displayed in dashed and dotted line, respectively. The plot shows the better score at FIM scale after RFVE compared with ULC therapy, adjusted for the severity of pre treatment motor impairment. Empty circle (о) represents individual FIM score of the RFVE patients group, cross symbol (+) represents individual FIM score of the UCL patients group.

References

    1. Donnan GA, Fisher M, Macleod M, Davis SM. Stroke. Lancet. 2008;371:1612–1623. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(08)60694-7.
    1. Hochstenbach J, Prigatano G, Mulder T. Patients’ and relatives’ reports of disturbances 9 months after stroke: subjective changes in physical functioning, cognition, emotion, and behavior. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2005;86:1587–1593. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2004.11.050.
    1. Kaplan PE, Cailliet R, Kaplan CP. Rehabilitation of stroke. 1. Burlington: Butterworth-Heinemann; 2003.
    1. Page SJ, Gauthier LV, White S. Size doesn’t matter: cortical stroke lesion volume is not associated with upper extremity motor impairment and function in mild, chronic hemiparesis. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2013;94:817–821. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2013.01.010.
    1. Piron L, Turolla A, Agostini M, Zucconi C, Tonin P, Piccione F, Dam M. Assessment and treatment of the upper limb by means of virtual reality in post-stroke patients. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2009;145:55–62.
    1. Buma FE, Lindeman E, Ramsey NF, Kwakkel G. Functional neuroimaging studies of early upper limb recovery after stroke: a systematic review of the literature. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2010;24:589–608. doi: 10.1177/1545968310364058.
    1. Kwakkel G, Kollen BJ, van der Grond J, Prevo AJ. Probability of regaining dexterity in the flaccid upper limb: impact of severity of paresis and time since onset in acute stroke. Stroke. 2003;34:2181–2186. doi: 10.1161/.
    1. Dam M, Tonin P, De Boni A, Pizzolato G, Casson S, Ermani M, Freo U, Piron L, Battistin L. Effects of fluoxetine and maprotiline on functional recovery in poststroke hemiplegic patients undergoing rehabilitation therapy. Stroke. 1996;27:1211–1214. doi: 10.1161/01.STR.27.7.1211.
    1. Chollet F, Tardy J, Albucher JF, Thalamas C, Berard E, Lamy C, Bejot Y, Deltour S, Jaillard A, Niclot P. et al.Fluoxetine for motor recovery after acute ischaemic stroke (FLAME): a randomised placebo-controlled trial. Lancet Neurol. 2011;10:123–130. doi: 10.1016/S1474-4422(10)70314-8.
    1. Sirtori V, Corbetta D, Moja L, Gatti R. Constraint-induced movement therapy for upper extremities in stroke patients. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2009;4:CD004433.
    1. Moseley AM, Stark A, Cameron ID, Pollock A. Treadmill training and body weight support for walking after stroke. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2005;4:CD002840.
    1. Valentin-Gudiol M, Mattern-Baxter K, Girabent-Farres M, Bagur-Calafat C, Hadders-Algra M, Angulo-Barroso RM. Treadmill interventions with partial body weight support in children under six years of age at risk of neuromotor delay. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011;12:CD009242.
    1. Mehrholz J, Hadrich A, Platz T, Kugler J, Pohl M. Electromechanical and robot-assisted arm training for improving generic activities of daily living, arm function, and arm muscle strength after stroke. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012;6:CD006876.
    1. Henderson A, Korner-Bitensky N, Levin M. Virtual reality in stroke rehabilitation: a systematic review of its effectiveness for upper limb motor recovery. Top Stroke Rehabil. 2007;14:52–61.
    1. Laver KE, George S, Thomas S, Deutsch JE, Crotty M. Virtual reality for stroke rehabilitation. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011;9:CD008349.
    1. Krakauer JW. Motor learning: its relevance to stroke recovery and neurorehabilitation. Curr Opin Neurol. 2006;19:84–90. doi: 10.1097/.
    1. Page SJ, Gater DR, Bach-y-Rita P. Reconsidering the motor recovery plateau in stroke rehabilitation. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2004;85:1377–1381. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2003.12.031.
    1. Winstein CJ. Knowledge of results and motor learning–implications for physical therapy. Phys Ther. 1991;71:140–149.
    1. Todorov E, Shadmehr R, Bizzi E. Augmented feedback presented in a virtual environment accelerates learning of a difficult motor task. J Mot Behav. 1997;29:147–158. doi: 10.1080/00222899709600829.
    1. Macpherson H. Pragmatic clinical trials. Complement Ther Med. 2004;12:136–140. doi: 10.1016/j.ctim.2004.07.043.
    1. Sacco RL, Wolf PA, Bharucha NE, Meeks SL, Kannel WB, Charette LJ, McNamara PM, Palmer EP, D'Agostino R. Subarachnoid and intracerebral hemorrhage: natural history, prognosis, and precursive factors in the Framingham study. Neurology. 1984;34:847–854. doi: 10.1212/WNL.34.7.847.
    1. Pezzella FR, Picconi O, De Luca A, Lyden PD, Fiorelli M. Development of the Italian version of the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale: It-NIHSS. Stroke. 2009;40:2557–2559. doi: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.108.534495.
    1. Folstein MF, Folstein SE, McHugh PR. “Mini-mental state”. A practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. J Psychiatr Res. 1975;12:189–198. doi: 10.1016/0022-3956(75)90026-6.
    1. Huber W, Poeck K, Willmes K. The Aachen Aphasia Test. Adv Neurol. 1984;42:291–303.
    1. Piron L, Cenni F, Tonin P, Dam M. Virtual Reality as an assessment tool for arm motor deficits after brain lesions. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2001;81:386–392.
    1. Piron L, Tonin P, Atzori AM, Zucconi C, Massaro C, Trivello E, Dam M. In: Medicine Meets Virtual Reality 11: Nextmed: Health Horizon. 94. Westwood JD, Hoffman HM, Mogel GT, Phillips R, Robb RA, Stredney D, editor. Studies in Health Technology and Informatics; 2003. The augmented-feed back rehabilitation technique facilitates the arm motor recovery in patients after a recent stroke; pp. 265–267.
    1. Piron L, Tonin P, Piccione F, Iaia V, Trivello E, Dam M. Virtual environment training therapy for arm motor rehabilitation. Presence-Teleoperators and Virtual Environments. 2005;14:732–740. doi: 10.1162/105474605775196580.
    1. Piron L, Turolla A, Agostini M, Zucconi C, Cortese F, Zampolini M, Zannini M, Dam M, Ventura L, Battauz M, Tonin P. Exercises for paretic upper limb after stroke: a combined virtual-reality and telemedicine approach. J Rehabil Med. 2009;41:1016–1102. doi: 10.2340/16501977-0459.
    1. Piron L, Turolla A, Agostini M, Zucconi CS, Ventura L, Tonin P, Dam M. Motor learning principles for rehabilitation: a pilot randomized controlled study in poststroke patients. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2010;24:501–508. doi: 10.1177/1545968310362672.
    1. Davies PM. Steps to follow. 2. Berlin Heidelberg: Springer - Verlag; 2000.
    1. Fugl-Meyer AR, Jaasko L, Leyman I, Olsson S, Steglind S. The post-stroke hemiplegic patient. 1. a method for evaluation of physical performance. Scand J Rehabil Med. 1975;7:13–31.
    1. Keith RA, Granger CV, Hamilton BB, Sherwin FS. The functional independence measure: a new tool for rehabilitation. Adv Clin Rehabil. 1987;1:6–18.
    1. McCullagh P, Nelder JA. Generalized linear models. London: Chapmann and Hall; 1989.
    1. Cook RD, Weisberg S. Residuals and influence in regression. New York: Chapmann and Hall; 1982.
    1. The R project for statistical computing.
    1. Nudo RJ, Wise BM, SiFuentes F, Milliken GW. Neural substrates for the effects of rehabilitative training on motor recovery after ischemic infarct. Science. 1996;272:1791–1794. doi: 10.1126/science.272.5269.1791.
    1. Holden MK. Virtual environments for motor rehabilitation: review. Cyberpsychol Behav. 2005;8:187–211. doi: 10.1089/cpb.2005.8.187.

Source: PubMed

Sponsors and Collaborators

Medical Conditions

Drug Interventions

3
Subscribe