Clinical perceptions and feasibility analysis of a virtual reality game for Post-ACV rehabilitation

 Who gives a fuck about perceptions of PTs? Does it work?

Clinical perceptions and feasibility analysis of a virtual reality game for Post-ACV rehabilitation

•          Julian Felipe Villada Castillo Universidad Tecnológica de Pereira, Colombia https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2694-1429
• José Fernando López Universidad Tecnológica de Pereira, Colombia https://orcid.org/0009-0001-7184-9840
• John Edison Muñoz University of Waterloo, Canada https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6161-9443
• Oscar Henao Gallo Universidad Tecnológica de Pereira, Colombia https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6735-3458

DOI: https://doi.org/10.22430/22565337.3180

Summary

The increasing prevalence of stroke (ACV) has driven the search for innovative rehabilitation methods. Immersive virtual reality (RV), especially custom games, offers an interactive and motivating approach to adherence to therapy. The perception and acceptance of physiotherapists(Survivors don't fucking care about your perceptions! Does it work?) are crucial to their implementation and require further research. The objective of this research was to evaluate the attitudes and perceptions of physiotherapists regarding the feasibility and effectiveness of a personalized virtual reality game called Motion Health VR for post-CVA rehabilitation. The methodology used was to use three strategies to collect subjective data. First, a multiple-choice questionnaire was administered to 73 doctors and physiothers during the ISPRM 2023 (International Society of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation) Conference to obtain quantitative data on the usefulness and viability of Motion Health VR. Then, a discussion group was conducted with 4 physiotherapists to obtain qualitative information about the usability, accessibility and profitability of the game. A feasibility and cost-effectiveness analysis was then conducted to assess the potential long-term benefits and financial implications of the implementation of Motion Health VR in Colombia. The results obtained were a wide acceptance of VR as a complementary tool in post-ACV rehabilitation and the recognition of personalized games as motivators for patient participation. Physiotherapists highlighted their playability and immersion, although they pointed to limitations related to the patient's costs and spasticity. The analysis indicated that initial, while significant costs, can be justified by long-term savings and better outcomes for patients. Finally, it is concluded that Motion Health VR showed significant potential to complement post-ACV rehabilitation, and is well received by physiotherapists. Key challenges include improving access, reducing costs and providing VR training to optimize rehabilitation outcomes.     

RecoverNow: A mobile tablet-based therapy platform for early stroke rehabilitation - raw data

Sounds good but NO factual results are mentioned. DOES IT WORK OR NOT?

RecoverNow: A mobile tablet-based therapy platform for early stroke rehabilitation - raw data

Title:	RecoverNow: A mobile tablet-based therapy platform for early stroke rehabilitation - raw data
Authors:	Pugliese, Michael Ramsay, Tim Shamloul, Rany Mallet, Karen Zakutney, Lise Corbett, Dale Dukelow, Sean Stotts, Grant Shamy, Michel Wilson, Kumanan Guerinet, Julien Dowlatshahi, Dar
Date:	2019
Abstract:	Stroke survivors frequently experience a range of post-stroke deficits. Specialized stroke rehabilitation improves recovery, especially if it is started early post-stroke. However, resource limitations often preclude early rehabilitation. Mobile technologies may provide a platform for stroke survivors to begin recovery when they might not be able to otherwise. The study objective was to demonstrate the feasibility of RecoverNow, a tablet-based stroke recovery platform aimed at delivering speech and cognitive therapy. We recruited a convenience sample of 30 acute stroke patients to use RecoverNow for up to 3 months. Allied health professionals assigned specific applications based on standard of care assessments. Participants were encouraged to take home the RecoverNow tablets upon discharge from acute care. The study team contacted participants to return for a follow-up interview 3 months after enrollment. The primary outcome of interest was feasibility, defined using 5 facets: recruitment rate, adherence rate, retention rate, the proportion of successful follow-up interventions, and protocol deviations. We tracked barriers to tablet-based care as a secondary outcome. We successfully recruited 30 of 62 eligible patients in 15 weeks (48% recruitment rate). Participants were non-adherent to tablet-based therapy inside and outside of acute care, using RecoverNow for a median of 12 minutes a day. Retention was high with 23 of 30 patients participating in follow-up interviews (77% retention rate) and all but 3 of the 23 interviews (87%) were successfully completed. Only 2 major protocol deviations occurred: one enrollment failure and one therapy protocol violation. Barriers to tablet-based care were frequently encountered by study participants with many expressing the assigned applications were either too easy or too difficult. Acute stroke patients are interested in attempting tablet-based stroke rehabilitation and are easily recruited early post-stroke. However, tablet-based therapy may be challenging due to patient, device and system-related barriers. Reducing the frequency of common barriers will be essential to keeping patients engaged in tablet-based therapy.
URL:	http://hdl.handle.net/10393/38663
Collection	Epidemiology and Community Medicine