虚拟现实在成人中风后上肢康复中的应用及其对功能的影响:系统回顾和荟萃分析。

IF 3.3 4区 医学 Q1 ORTHOPEDICS
Yordanis Enríquez-Canto, Rafael Pizarro-Mena, Katherine Ludueña-Hernández, Katherine Alexandre-Vergara, Gloria Riveros-Basoalto, Alejandro Dresdner-Figueroa
{"title":"虚拟现实在成人中风后上肢康复中的应用及其对功能的影响:系统回顾和荟萃分析。","authors":"Yordanis Enríquez-Canto, Rafael Pizarro-Mena, Katherine Ludueña-Hernández, Katherine Alexandre-Vergara, Gloria Riveros-Basoalto, Alejandro Dresdner-Figueroa","doi":"10.1093/ptj/pzaf103","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Importance: </strong>Virtual reality (VR) is increasingly used in patients after stroke upper limb rehabilitation, but the comparative effectiveness of VR-Only versus hybrid VR combined with conventional therapy (CT) remains unclear.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>The objective of this review was to systematically review and meta-analyze the effectiveness of 2 distinct VR intervention approaches for patients undergoing hemiparetic upper limb rehabilitation after stroke: VR-Only versus CT, and hybrid interventions combining VR with CT versus CT alone.</p><p><strong>Data sources: </strong>A PROSPERO protocol (CRD 42022349259) for a comprehensive search was conducted across 7 databases, focusing on studies published in English and Spanish.</p><p><strong>Study selection: </strong>Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing VR-Only or hybrid VR interventions to CT were included.</p><p><strong>Data extraction and synthesis: </strong>Study characteristics, participant demographics, intervention specifics, and outcome measures were extracted. The risk of bias was assessed using the Risk of Bias 2 (RoB 2) tool. Meta-analyses used a random-effects model to estimate standardized mean differences (SMDs) with 95% confidence intervals.</p><p><strong>Main outcome(s) and measure(s): </strong>Primary outcomes included motor function, motor capacity, hand dexterity, and functional capacity, measured by validated instruments such as the Fugl-Meyer Assessment and Box and Block Test.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Twenty-seven RCTs (1156 participants) were included. Hybrid VR + CT interventions significantly improved motor function (SMD = 0.44) and manual dexterity (SMD = 0.33) compared to CT alone. VR-Only interventions showed positive trends but were not statistically significant. Hybrid interventions maintained benefits at follow-up (SMD = 0.63, 95% CI = 0.11-1.15). Optimal improvements were observed with hybrid sessions of 31 to 59 minutes daily.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Hybrid VR + CT interventions are more effective than CT alone, improving motor function and manual dexterity after stroke, with sustained benefits over time. VR-Only interventions showed less consistent effects.</p><p><strong>Relevance: </strong>These results suggest that integrating VR into CT enhances rehabilitation outcomes of stroke survivors. Future research should focus on optimizing hybrid protocols and exploring long-term outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":20093,"journal":{"name":"Physical Therapy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Use of Virtual Reality in Upper Extremity Rehabilitation of Adults After Stroke and Its Effect on Functionality: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Yordanis Enríquez-Canto, Rafael Pizarro-Mena, Katherine Ludueña-Hernández, Katherine Alexandre-Vergara, Gloria Riveros-Basoalto, Alejandro Dresdner-Figueroa\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/ptj/pzaf103\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Importance: </strong>Virtual reality (VR) is increasingly used in patients after stroke upper limb rehabilitation, but the comparative effectiveness of VR-Only versus hybrid VR combined with conventional therapy (CT) remains unclear.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>The objective of this review was to systematically review and meta-analyze the effectiveness of 2 distinct VR intervention approaches for patients undergoing hemiparetic upper limb rehabilitation after stroke: VR-Only versus CT, and hybrid interventions combining VR with CT versus CT alone.</p><p><strong>Data sources: </strong>A PROSPERO protocol (CRD 42022349259) for a comprehensive search was conducted across 7 databases, focusing on studies published in English and Spanish.</p><p><strong>Study selection: </strong>Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing VR-Only or hybrid VR interventions to CT were included.</p><p><strong>Data extraction and synthesis: </strong>Study characteristics, participant demographics, intervention specifics, and outcome measures were extracted. The risk of bias was assessed using the Risk of Bias 2 (RoB 2) tool. Meta-analyses used a random-effects model to estimate standardized mean differences (SMDs) with 95% confidence intervals.</p><p><strong>Main outcome(s) and measure(s): </strong>Primary outcomes included motor function, motor capacity, hand dexterity, and functional capacity, measured by validated instruments such as the Fugl-Meyer Assessment and Box and Block Test.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Twenty-seven RCTs (1156 participants) were included. Hybrid VR + CT interventions significantly improved motor function (SMD = 0.44) and manual dexterity (SMD = 0.33) compared to CT alone. VR-Only interventions showed positive trends but were not statistically significant. Hybrid interventions maintained benefits at follow-up (SMD = 0.63, 95% CI = 0.11-1.15). Optimal improvements were observed with hybrid sessions of 31 to 59 minutes daily.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Hybrid VR + CT interventions are more effective than CT alone, improving motor function and manual dexterity after stroke, with sustained benefits over time. VR-Only interventions showed less consistent effects.</p><p><strong>Relevance: </strong>These results suggest that integrating VR into CT enhances rehabilitation outcomes of stroke survivors. Future research should focus on optimizing hybrid protocols and exploring long-term outcomes.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20093,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Physical Therapy\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Physical Therapy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/ptj/pzaf103\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ORTHOPEDICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Physical Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/ptj/pzaf103","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

重要性:虚拟现实(VR)越来越多地用于中风后上肢康复患者,但VR- only与混合VR联合常规治疗(CT)的比较效果尚不清楚。目的:本综述的目的是系统回顾和荟萃分析两种不同的VR干预方法对卒中后偏瘫上肢康复患者的有效性:VR- only与CT, VR与CT结合的混合干预与单独CT。数据来源:在7个数据库中进行了一个全面搜索的PROSPERO协议(CRD 42022349259),重点是用英语和西班牙语发表的研究。研究选择:纳入比较VR- only或混合VR干预与CT的随机对照试验(RCTs)。数据提取和综合:提取研究特征、参与者人口统计、干预细节和结果测量。使用RoB2工具评估偏倚风险。meta分析采用随机效应模型估计标准化平均差异(SMD),置信区间为95%。主要结果和测量方法:主要结果包括运动功能、运动能力、手灵巧性、功能能力,通过Fugl Meyer评估和盒块测试等有效工具测量。结果:纳入27项随机对照试验(1156名受试者)。与单独使用CT相比,VR + CT混合干预显著改善了运动功能(SMD = 0.44,)和手灵巧性(SMD = 0.33,)。仅虚拟现实干预显示出积极趋势,但没有统计学意义。混合干预在随访中保持了疗效(SMD = 0.63, 95% CI = 0.11至1.15)。在每天31到59分钟的混合训练中观察到最佳的改善。结论:混合VR + CT干预比单独CT干预更有效地改善脑卒中后的运动功能和手灵巧性,并随着时间的推移持续获益。仅虚拟现实干预的效果不太一致。相关性:这些结果表明,将VR纳入常规治疗可提高脑卒中幸存者的康复效果。未来的研究应侧重于优化混合协议和探索长期效果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Use of Virtual Reality in Upper Extremity Rehabilitation of Adults After Stroke and Its Effect on Functionality: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Importance: Virtual reality (VR) is increasingly used in patients after stroke upper limb rehabilitation, but the comparative effectiveness of VR-Only versus hybrid VR combined with conventional therapy (CT) remains unclear.

Objective: The objective of this review was to systematically review and meta-analyze the effectiveness of 2 distinct VR intervention approaches for patients undergoing hemiparetic upper limb rehabilitation after stroke: VR-Only versus CT, and hybrid interventions combining VR with CT versus CT alone.

Data sources: A PROSPERO protocol (CRD 42022349259) for a comprehensive search was conducted across 7 databases, focusing on studies published in English and Spanish.

Study selection: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing VR-Only or hybrid VR interventions to CT were included.

Data extraction and synthesis: Study characteristics, participant demographics, intervention specifics, and outcome measures were extracted. The risk of bias was assessed using the Risk of Bias 2 (RoB 2) tool. Meta-analyses used a random-effects model to estimate standardized mean differences (SMDs) with 95% confidence intervals.

Main outcome(s) and measure(s): Primary outcomes included motor function, motor capacity, hand dexterity, and functional capacity, measured by validated instruments such as the Fugl-Meyer Assessment and Box and Block Test.

Results: Twenty-seven RCTs (1156 participants) were included. Hybrid VR + CT interventions significantly improved motor function (SMD = 0.44) and manual dexterity (SMD = 0.33) compared to CT alone. VR-Only interventions showed positive trends but were not statistically significant. Hybrid interventions maintained benefits at follow-up (SMD = 0.63, 95% CI = 0.11-1.15). Optimal improvements were observed with hybrid sessions of 31 to 59 minutes daily.

Conclusions: Hybrid VR + CT interventions are more effective than CT alone, improving motor function and manual dexterity after stroke, with sustained benefits over time. VR-Only interventions showed less consistent effects.

Relevance: These results suggest that integrating VR into CT enhances rehabilitation outcomes of stroke survivors. Future research should focus on optimizing hybrid protocols and exploring long-term outcomes.

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
Physical Therapy
Physical Therapy Multiple-
CiteScore
7.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
187
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Physical Therapy (PTJ) engages and inspires an international readership on topics related to physical therapy. As the leading international journal for research in physical therapy and related fields, PTJ publishes innovative and highly relevant content for both clinicians and scientists and uses a variety of interactive approaches to communicate that content, with the expressed purpose of improving patient care. PTJ"s circulation in 2008 is more than 72,000. Its 2007 impact factor was 2.152. The mean time from submission to first decision is 58 days. Time from acceptance to publication online is less than or equal to 3 months and from acceptance to publication in print is less than or equal to 5 months.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信