使用虚拟现实的认知训练:可用性和不良影响的评估。

IF 1.9 Q2 REHABILITATION
Myeonghwan Bang, Min A Kim, Sung Shin Kim, Hyoung Seop Kim
{"title":"使用虚拟现实的认知训练:可用性和不良影响的评估。","authors":"Myeonghwan Bang, Min A Kim, Sung Shin Kim, Hyoung Seop Kim","doi":"10.1016/j.arrct.2024.100378","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To evaluate the usability and adverse effects associated with virtual reality (VR) cognitive training and identify factors influencing them.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Survey-based observational study.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Department of Rehabilitation Medicine in the hospital.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>Twenty rehabilitation professionals (mean [standard deviation] age; 30.0[4.8] years, men 8[40%], and women 12[60%]) and 10 patients with stroke (mean [SD] age; 64.1[13.6] years, men 2[20%] and women 8[80%]).</p><p><strong>Interventions: </strong>The participants wore a head-mounted display (Meta Quest2) and consecutively underwent 5 custom-designed cognitive training.</p><p><strong>Main outcome measures: </strong>After the training, participants completed 3 questionnaires: the systemic usability scale, user experience questionnaire (UEQ), and cybersickness in VR questionnaire.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The mean systemic usability scale score was 55.1 and 52.3 for rehabilitation professionals and patients, respectively. For the UEQ, the mean score for each item, including attractiveness, perspicuity, efficiency, dependability, stimulation, and novelty, were 0.9/0.2, 0.6/0.2, 0.5/-0.5, 1.2/0.8, 0.9/0.4, and 0.6/0.8 for rehabilitation professionals/patients, respectively. Rehabilitation professionals had slightly higher scores in most UEQ items. The mean cybersickness in VR questionnaire scores were 18.6 and 19.0 for rehabilitation professionals and patients, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Participants reported moderate usability and a generally below-average user experience, with mild-to-moderate VR sickness during VR cognitive training. The rehabilitation professionals rated usability higher than the patient group, while patients experienced more severe VR sickness. These findings may serve as a significant insight for developing VR cognitive training for application to patients in the future.</p>","PeriodicalId":72291,"journal":{"name":"Archives of rehabilitation research and clinical translation","volume":"6 4","pages":"100378"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11734004/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Cognitive Training Using Virtual Reality: An Assessment of Usability and Adverse Effects.\",\"authors\":\"Myeonghwan Bang, Min A Kim, Sung Shin Kim, Hyoung Seop Kim\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.arrct.2024.100378\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To evaluate the usability and adverse effects associated with virtual reality (VR) cognitive training and identify factors influencing them.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Survey-based observational study.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Department of Rehabilitation Medicine in the hospital.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>Twenty rehabilitation professionals (mean [standard deviation] age; 30.0[4.8] years, men 8[40%], and women 12[60%]) and 10 patients with stroke (mean [SD] age; 64.1[13.6] years, men 2[20%] and women 8[80%]).</p><p><strong>Interventions: </strong>The participants wore a head-mounted display (Meta Quest2) and consecutively underwent 5 custom-designed cognitive training.</p><p><strong>Main outcome measures: </strong>After the training, participants completed 3 questionnaires: the systemic usability scale, user experience questionnaire (UEQ), and cybersickness in VR questionnaire.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The mean systemic usability scale score was 55.1 and 52.3 for rehabilitation professionals and patients, respectively. For the UEQ, the mean score for each item, including attractiveness, perspicuity, efficiency, dependability, stimulation, and novelty, were 0.9/0.2, 0.6/0.2, 0.5/-0.5, 1.2/0.8, 0.9/0.4, and 0.6/0.8 for rehabilitation professionals/patients, respectively. Rehabilitation professionals had slightly higher scores in most UEQ items. The mean cybersickness in VR questionnaire scores were 18.6 and 19.0 for rehabilitation professionals and patients, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Participants reported moderate usability and a generally below-average user experience, with mild-to-moderate VR sickness during VR cognitive training. The rehabilitation professionals rated usability higher than the patient group, while patients experienced more severe VR sickness. These findings may serve as a significant insight for developing VR cognitive training for application to patients in the future.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":72291,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Archives of rehabilitation research and clinical translation\",\"volume\":\"6 4\",\"pages\":\"100378\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11734004/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Archives of rehabilitation research and clinical translation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arrct.2024.100378\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/12/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"REHABILITATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archives of rehabilitation research and clinical translation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arrct.2024.100378","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/12/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:评价虚拟现实(VR)认知训练的可用性和不良影响,并找出影响因素。设计:基于调查的观察性研究。单位:医院康复医学科。参与者:20名康复专业人员(平均[标准差]年龄;30.0[4.8]岁,男性8[40%],女性12[60%])和10例卒中患者(平均[SD]年龄;64.1[13.6]岁,男性2[20%],女性8[80%])。干预措施:参与者佩戴头戴式显示器(Meta Quest2),并连续接受5次定制设计的认知训练。主要结果测量:培训结束后,参与者完成了3份问卷:系统可用性量表、用户体验问卷(UEQ)和虚拟现实中的晕动症问卷。结果:康复专业人员和患者的系统可用性量表平均得分分别为55.1分和52.3分。在UEQ中,康复专业人员/患者的吸引力、清晰度、效率、可靠性、刺激和新颖性各项目的平均得分分别为0.9/0.2、0.6/0.2、0.5/-0.5、1.2/0.8、0.9/0.4和0.6/0.8。康复专业人员在大多数UEQ项目上得分略高。康复专业人员和患者的VR问卷平均晕屏得分分别为18.6分和19.0分。结论:参与者报告了中度可用性和一般低于平均水平的用户体验,在VR认知训练期间出现了轻度至中度的VR疾病。康复专业人员对可用性的评价高于患者组,而患者则经历了更严重的VR疾病。这些发现可能为未来开发VR认知训练应用于患者提供重要见解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Cognitive Training Using Virtual Reality: An Assessment of Usability and Adverse Effects.

Objective: To evaluate the usability and adverse effects associated with virtual reality (VR) cognitive training and identify factors influencing them.

Design: Survey-based observational study.

Setting: Department of Rehabilitation Medicine in the hospital.

Participants: Twenty rehabilitation professionals (mean [standard deviation] age; 30.0[4.8] years, men 8[40%], and women 12[60%]) and 10 patients with stroke (mean [SD] age; 64.1[13.6] years, men 2[20%] and women 8[80%]).

Interventions: The participants wore a head-mounted display (Meta Quest2) and consecutively underwent 5 custom-designed cognitive training.

Main outcome measures: After the training, participants completed 3 questionnaires: the systemic usability scale, user experience questionnaire (UEQ), and cybersickness in VR questionnaire.

Results: The mean systemic usability scale score was 55.1 and 52.3 for rehabilitation professionals and patients, respectively. For the UEQ, the mean score for each item, including attractiveness, perspicuity, efficiency, dependability, stimulation, and novelty, were 0.9/0.2, 0.6/0.2, 0.5/-0.5, 1.2/0.8, 0.9/0.4, and 0.6/0.8 for rehabilitation professionals/patients, respectively. Rehabilitation professionals had slightly higher scores in most UEQ items. The mean cybersickness in VR questionnaire scores were 18.6 and 19.0 for rehabilitation professionals and patients, respectively.

Conclusions: Participants reported moderate usability and a generally below-average user experience, with mild-to-moderate VR sickness during VR cognitive training. The rehabilitation professionals rated usability higher than the patient group, while patients experienced more severe VR sickness. These findings may serve as a significant insight for developing VR cognitive training for application to patients in the future.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
8 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信