M Roosink1, C Mercier1. 1. 1] Centre Interdisciplinaire de Recherche en Réadaptation et Intégration Sociale (CIRRIS), Québec, Québec, Canada [2] Département de réadaptation, Faculté de médecine, Université Laval, Québec, Québec, Canada.
Abstract
STUDY DESIGN: Interventions using virtual feedback (VF) impact on motor functions and pain and may be relevant for neurorehabilitation after spinal cord injury (SCI) in which motor dysfunctions and (concomitant) pain are frequently observed. Potential mechanisms underlying VF include a modulation of cortical sensorimotor integration, increased therapy engagement and distraction from effort and pain. Still, the optimal parameters for VF and their technical implementation are currently unknown. OBJECTIVES: To provide an overview of interventions that have used VF to improve motor functions or to reduce pain after SCI. METHODS: Literature review. RESULTS: A total number of 17 studies were identified. VF interventions commonly focused on improving motor functions (n=12) or reducing pain (n=4). Only one study assessed both motor functions and pain. Studies generally report beneficial effects. However, the evidence is of low-level quality and many practical as well as theoretical issues remain unclear. Remaining knowledge gaps include: (1) optimal VF system characteristics, (2) the impact of different VF modalities and tasks, (3) dose-response relationships and (4) the identification of patients that are likely to benefit from VF. Future work should start by closing these knowledge gaps using systematic and controlled multi-session interventions and by assessing the underlying mechanisms involved. CONCLUSION: These results provide an important incentive to further assess the potential of VF interventions to simultaneously improve motor functions and reduce pain after SCI, which could contribute to better neurorehabilitation outcomes after SCI.
STUDY DESIGN: Interventions using virtual feedback (VF) impact on motor functions and pain and may be relevant for neurorehabilitation after spinal cord injury (SCI) in which motor dysfunctions and (concomitant) pain are frequently observed. Potential mechanisms underlying VF include a modulation of cortical sensorimotor integration, increased therapy engagement and distraction from effort and pain. Still, the optimal parameters for VF and their technical implementation are currently unknown. OBJECTIVES: To provide an overview of interventions that have used VF to improve motor functions or to reduce pain after SCI. METHODS: Literature review. RESULTS: A total number of 17 studies were identified. VF interventions commonly focused on improving motor functions (n=12) or reducing pain (n=4). Only one study assessed both motor functions and pain. Studies generally report beneficial effects. However, the evidence is of low-level quality and many practical as well as theoretical issues remain unclear. Remaining knowledge gaps include: (1) optimal VF system characteristics, (2) the impact of different VF modalities and tasks, (3) dose-response relationships and (4) the identification of patients that are likely to benefit from VF. Future work should start by closing these knowledge gaps using systematic and controlled multi-session interventions and by assessing the underlying mechanisms involved. CONCLUSION: These results provide an important incentive to further assess the potential of VF interventions to simultaneously improve motor functions and reduce pain after SCI, which could contribute to better neurorehabilitation outcomes after SCI.