Changing stroke rehab and research worldwide now.Time is Brain! trillions and trillions of neurons that DIE each day because there are NO effective hyperacute therapies besides tPA(only 12% effective). I have 523 posts on hyperacute therapy, enough for researchers to spend decades proving them out. These are my personal ideas and blog on stroke rehabilitation and stroke research. Do not attempt any of these without checking with your medical provider. Unless you join me in agitating, when you need these therapies they won't be there.

What this blog is for:

My blog is not to help survivors recover, it is to have the 10 million yearly stroke survivors light fires underneath their doctors, stroke hospitals and stroke researchers to get stroke solved. 100% recovery. The stroke medical world is completely failing at that goal, they don't even have it as a goal. Shortly after getting out of the hospital and getting NO information on the process or protocols of stroke rehabilitation and recovery I started searching on the internet and found that no other survivor received useful information. This is an attempt to cover all stroke rehabilitation information that should be readily available to survivors so they can talk with informed knowledge to their medical staff. It lays out what needs to be done to get stroke survivors closer to 100% recovery. It's quite disgusting that this information is not available from every stroke association and doctors group.

Tuesday, August 4, 2015

Clinical feasibility of interactive motion-controlled games for stroke rehabilitation

Well shit, video games have written about being used for stroke rehab for years. We just need someone with some innovation to actually writeup a series of stroke protocols for using these.
I've written 35 posts on video games, something in there might be useful.
http://www.jneuroengrehab.com/content/12/1/63
Kelly J. Bower123*, Julie Louie1, Yoseph Landesrocha4, Paul Seedy4, Alexandra Gorelik5 and Julie Bernhardt2
1 Department of Physiotherapy, Royal Melbourne Hospital, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
2 The Florey Institute of Neuroscience and Mental Health, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
3 Australian Catholic University, School of Exercise Science, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
4 Current Circus, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
5 Royal Melbourne Hospital, Melbourne Epicentre, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
For all author emails, please log on.

Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation 2015, 12:63  doi:10.1186/s12984-015-0057-x
The electronic version of this article is the complete one and can be found online at: http://www.jneuroengrehab.com/content/12/1/63

Received:27 January 2015
Accepted:27 July 2015
Published:2 August 2015
© 2015 Bower et al.

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

Abstract

Background

Active gaming technologies, including the Nintendo Wii and Xbox Kinect, have become increasingly popular for use in stroke rehabilitation. However, these systems are not specifically designed for this purpose and have limitations. The aim of this study was to investigate the feasibility of using a suite of motion-controlled games in individuals with stroke undergoing rehabilitation.

Methods

Four games, which utilised a depth-sensing camera (PrimeSense), were developed and tested. The games could be played in a seated or standing position. Three games were controlled by movement of the torso and one by upper limb movement. Phase 1 involved consecutive recruitment of 40 individuals with stroke who were able to sit unsupported. Participants were randomly assigned to trial one game during a single session. Sixteen individuals from Phase 1 were recruited to Phase 2. These participants were randomly assigned to an intervention or control group. Intervention participants performed an additional eight sessions over four weeks using all four game activities. Feasibility was assessed by examining recruitment, adherence, acceptability and safety in both phases of the study.

Results

Forty individuals (mean age 63 years) completed Phase 1, with an average session time of 34 min. The majority of Phase 1 participants reported the session to be enjoyable (93 %), helpful (80 %) and something they would like to include in their therapy (88 %). Sixteen individuals (mean age 61 years) took part in Phase 2, with an average of seven 26-min sessions over four weeks. Reported acceptability was high for the intervention group and improvements over time were seen in several functional outcome measures. There were no serious adverse safety events reported in either phase of the study; however, a number of participants reported minor increases in pain.

Conclusions

A post-stroke intervention using interactive motion-controlled games shows promise as a feasible and potentially effective treatment approach. This paper presents important recommendations for future game development and research to further explore long-term adherence, acceptability, safety and efficacy.

Trial registration

Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12613000220763)

No comments:

Post a Comment