Computerised mirror therapy with Augmented Reflection Technology for early stroke rehabilitation: clinical feasibility and integration as an adjunct therapy.

PURPOSE: New rehabilitation strategies for post-stroke upper limb rehabilitation employing visual stimulation show promising results, however, cost-efficient and clinically feasible ways to provide these interventions are still lacking. An integral step is to translate recent technological advances, such as in virtual and augmented reality, into therapeutic practice to improve outcomes for patients. This requires research on the adaptation of the technology for clinical use as well as on the appropriate guidelines and protocols for sustainable integration into therapeutic routines. Here, we present and evaluate a novel and affordable augmented reality system (Augmented Reflection Technology, ART) in combination with a validated mirror therapy protocol for upper limb rehabilitation after stroke. METHOD: We evaluated components of the therapeutic intervention, from the patients' and the therapists' points of view in a clinical feasibility study at a rehabilitation centre. We also assessed the integration of ART as an adjunct therapy for the clinical rehabilitation of subacute patients at two different hospitals. RESULTS: The results showed that the combination and application of the Berlin Protocol for Mirror Therapy together with ART was feasible for clinical use. This combination was integrated into the therapeutic plan of subacute stroke patients at the two clinical locations where the second part of this research was conducted. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings pave the way for using technology to provide mirror therapy in clinical settings and show potential for the more effective use of inpatient time and enhanced recoveries for patients. Implications for Rehabilitation Computerised Mirror Therapy is feasible for clinical use Augmented Reflection Technology can be integrated as an adjunctive therapeutic intervention for subacute stroke patients in an inpatient setting Virtual Rehabilitation devices such as Augmented Reflection Technology have considerable potential to enhance stroke rehabilitation.

Movement visualisation in virtual reality rehabilitation of the lower limb: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Virtual reality (VR) based applications play an increasing role in motor rehabilitation. They provide an interactive and individualized environment in addition to increased motivation during motor tasks as well as facilitating motor learning through multimodal sensory information. Several previous studies have shown positive effect of VR-based treatments for lower extremity motor rehabilitation in neurological conditions, but the characteristics of these VR applications have not been systematically investigated. The visual information on the user's movement in the virtual environment, also called movement visualisation (MV), is a key element of VR-based rehabilitation interventions. The present review proposes categorization of Movement Visualisations of VR-based rehabilitation therapy for neurological conditions and also summarises current research in lower limb application. METHODS: A systematic search of literature on VR-based intervention for gait and balance rehabilitation in neurological conditions was performed in the databases namely; MEDLINE (Ovid), AMED, EMBASE, CINAHL, and PsycInfo. Studies using non-virtual environments or applications to improve cognitive function, activities of daily living, or psychotherapy were excluded. The VR interventions of the included studies were analysed on their MV. RESULTS: In total 43 publications were selected based on the inclusion criteria. Seven distinct MV groups could be differentiated: indirect MV (N = 13), abstract MV (N = 11), augmented reality MV (N = 9), avatar MV (N = 5), tracking MV (N = 4), combined MV (N = 1), and no MV (N = 2). In two included articles the visualisation conditions included different MV groups within the same study. Additionally, differences in motor performance could not be analysed because of the differences in the study design. Three studies investigated different visualisations within the same MV group and hence limited information can be extracted from one study. CONCLUSIONS: The review demonstrates that individuals' movements during VR-based motor training can be displayed in different ways. Future studies are necessary to fundamentally explore the nature of this VR information and its effect on motor outcome.