A non-immersive virtual reality-based intervention to enhance lower-extremity motor function and gait in patients with subacute cerebral infarction: A pilot randomized controlled trial with 1-year follow-up

Minjie Bian; Yuxian Shen; Yijie Huang; Lishan Wu; Yueyan Wang; Suyue He; Dongfeng Huang; Yurong Mao

doi:10.3389/fneur.2022.985700

A non-immersive virtual reality-based intervention to enhance lower-extremity motor function and gait in patients with subacute cerebral infarction: A pilot randomized controlled trial with 1-year follow-up

Front Neurol. 2022 Oct 4:13:985700. doi: 10.3389/fneur.2022.985700. eCollection 2022.

Authors

Minjie Bian¹, Yuxian Shen¹, Yijie Huang¹, Lishan Wu¹, Yueyan Wang¹, Suyue He¹, Dongfeng Huang^{1

2}, Yurong Mao^{1

2}

Affiliations

¹ Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, The Seventh Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University, Shenzhen, China.
² Guangdong Engineering and Technology Research Center for Rehabilitation Medicine and Translation, Guangzhou, China.

Abstract

Introduction: This study was conducted to evaluate whether a non-immersive virtual reality (VR)-based intervention can enhance lower extremity movement in patients with cerebral infarction and whether it has greater short-term and long-term effectiveness than conventional therapies (CTs).

Materials and methods: This was a single-blinded, randomized clinical controlled trial. Forty-four patients with subacute cerebral infarction were randomly allocated to the VR or CT group. All intervention sessions were delivered in the inpatient unit for 3 weeks. Outcomes were measured before (baseline) and after the interventions and at 3-month, 6-month and 1-year follow-ups. The outcomes included clinical assessments of movement and balance function using the Fugl-Meyer Assessment of Lower Extremity (FMA-LE) and Berg Balance Scale (BBS), and gait parameters in the sagittal plane.

Results: In the VR group, the walking speed after intervention, at 3-month, 6-month, and 1-year follow-ups were significantly greater than baseline (p = 0.01, <0.001, 0.007, and <0.001, respectively). Compared with baseline, BBS scores after intervention, at 3-month, 6-month, and 1-year follow-ups were significantly greater in both the VR group (p = 0.006, 0.002, <0.001, and <0.001, respectively) and CT group (p = <0.001, 0.002, 0.001, and <0.001, respectively), while FMA-LE scores after intervention, at 3-month, 6-month, and 1-year follow-ups were significant increased in the VR group (p = 0.03, <0.001, 0.003, and <0.001, respectively), and at 3-month, 6-month, and 1-year follow-ups in the CT group (p = 0.02, 0.004 and <0.001, respectively). In the VR group, the maximum knee joint angle in the sagittal plane enhanced significantly at 6-month follow-up from that at baseline (p = 0.04).

Conclusion: The effectiveness of the non-immersive VR-based intervention in our study was observed after the intervention and at the follow-ups, but it was not significantly different from that of CTs. In sum, our results suggest that non-immersive VR-based interventions may thus be a valuable addition to conventional physical therapies to enhance treatment efficacy.

Clinical trial registration: http://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.aspx?proj=10541, ChiCTR-IOC-15006064.

Keywords: gait analysis; ischemic stroke; motor activity; rehabilitation; virtual reality.