Neurorehabilitation and neural repair · 2012
Adaptive mixed reality rehabilitation improves quality of reaching movements more than traditional reaching therapy following stroke.
Клиническое исследованиеСравнительное исследованиеСтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАПоддержка правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Duff Margaret, Chen Yinpeng, Cheng Long, Liu Sheng-Min, Blake Paul, Wolf Steven L, Rikakis Thanassis
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Adaptive mixed reality rehabilitation (AMRR) is a novel integration of motion capture technology and high-level media computing that provides precise kinematic measurements and engaging multimodal feedback for self-assessment during a therapeutic task.
OBJECTIVE: We describe the first proof-of-concept study to compare outcomes of AMRR and traditional upper-extremity physical therapy.
METHODS: Two groups of participants with chronic stroke received either a month of AMRR therapy (n = 11) or matched dosing of traditional repetitive task therapy (n = 10). Participants were right handed, between 35 and 85 years old, and could independently reach to and at least partially grasp an object in front of them. Upper-extremity clinical scale scores and kinematic performances were measured before and after treatment.
RESULTS: Both groups showed increased function after therapy, demonstrated by statistically significant improvements in Wolf Motor Function Test and upper-extremity Fugl-Meyer Assessment (FMA) scores, with the traditional therapy group improving significantly more on the FMA. However, only participants who received AMRR therapy showed a consistent improvement in kinematic measurements, both for the trained task of reaching to grasp a cone and the untrained task of reaching to push a lighted button.
CONCLUSIONS: AMRR may be useful in improving both functionality and the kinematics of reaching. Further study is needed to determine if AMRR therapy induces long-term changes in movement quality that foster better functional recovery.
OBJECTIVE: We describe the first proof-of-concept study to compare outcomes of AMRR and traditional upper-extremity physical therapy.
METHODS: Two groups of participants with chronic stroke received either a month of AMRR therapy (n = 11) or matched dosing of traditional repetitive task therapy (n = 10). Participants were right handed, between 35 and 85 years old, and could independently reach to and at least partially grasp an object in front of them. Upper-extremity clinical scale scores and kinematic performances were measured before and after treatment.
RESULTS: Both groups showed increased function after therapy, demonstrated by statistically significant improvements in Wolf Motor Function Test and upper-extremity Fugl-Meyer Assessment (FMA) scores, with the traditional therapy group improving significantly more on the FMA. However, only participants who received AMRR therapy showed a consistent improvement in kinematic measurements, both for the trained task of reaching to grasp a cone and the untrained task of reaching to push a lighted button.
CONCLUSIONS: AMRR may be useful in improving both functionality and the kinematics of reaching. Further study is needed to determine if AMRR therapy induces long-term changes in movement quality that foster better functional recovery.