Literature DB >> 25547112

Effects of interactive visual feedback training on post-stroke pusher syndrome: a pilot randomized controlled study.

Yea-Ru Yang1, Yi-Hua Chen2, Heng-Chih Chang1, Rai-Chi Chan3, Shun-Hwa Wei1, Ray-Yau Wang4.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: We investigated the effects of a computer-generated interactive visual feedback training program on the recovery from pusher syndrome in stroke patients.
DESIGN: Assessor-blinded, pilot randomized controlled study. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 12 stroke patients with pusher syndrome were randomly assigned to either the experimental group (N = 7, computer-generated interactive visual feedback training) or control group (N = 5, mirror visual feedback training). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The scale for contraversive pushing for severity of pusher syndrome, the Berg Balance Scale for balance performance, and the Fugl-Meyer assessment scale for motor control were the outcome measures. Patients were assessed pre- and posttraining.
RESULTS: A comparison of pre- and posttraining assessment results revealed that both training programs led to the following significant changes: decreased severity of pusher syndrome scores (decreases of 4.0 ± 1.1 and 1.4 ± 1.0 in the experimental and control groups, respectively); improved balance scores (increases of 14.7 ± 4.3 and 7.2 ± 1.6 in the experimental and control groups, respectively); and higher scores for lower extremity motor control (increases of 8.4 ± 2.2 and 5.6 ± 3.3 in the experimental and control groups, respectively). Furthermore, the computer-generated interactive visual feedback training program produced significantly better outcomes in the improvement of pusher syndrome (p < 0.01) and balance (p < 0.05) compared with the mirror visual feedback training program.
CONCLUSIONS: Although both training programs were beneficial, the computer-generated interactive visual feedback training program more effectively aided recovery from pusher syndrome compared with mirror visual feedback training.
© The Author(s) 2014.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Pusher syndrome; balance; computer-generated interactive visual feedback; stroke

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25547112     DOI: 10.1177/0269215514564898

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Rehabil        ISSN: 0269-2155            Impact factor:   3.477


  10 in total

1.  Improvements of Physical Activity Performance and Motivation in Adult Men through Augmented Reality Approach: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Authors:  Daekook M Nekar; Hye Yun Kang; Jae Ho Yu
Journal:  J Environ Public Health       Date:  2022-07-09

2.  Generalizability of Results from Randomized Controlled Trials in Post-Stroke Physiotherapy.

Authors:  Matteo Paci; Claudia Prestera; Francesco Ferrarello
Journal:  Physiother Can       Date:  2020-11-01       Impact factor: 1.037

3.  Prone positioning reduces severe pushing behavior: three case studies.

Authors:  Yuji Fujino; Kazu Amimoto; Satoshi Sugimoto; Kazuhiro Fukata; Masahide Inoue; Hidetoshi Takahashi; Shigeru Makita
Journal:  J Phys Ther Sci       Date:  2016-09-29

Review 4.  Do Robotics and Virtual Reality Add Real Progress to Mirror Therapy Rehabilitation? A Scoping Review.

Authors:  Nelly Darbois; Albin Guillaud; Nicolas Pinsault
Journal:  Rehabil Res Pract       Date:  2018-08-19

5.  Recovery of an injured medial lemniscus with concurrent recovery of pusher syndrome in a stroke patient: a case report.

Authors:  Sung Ho Jang; Han Do Lee
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2018-06       Impact factor: 1.889

Review 6.  Mirror Therapy in Stroke Rehabilitation: Current Perspectives.

Authors:  Dorcas Bc Gandhi; Albert Sterba; Himani Khatter; Jeyaraj D Pandian
Journal:  Ther Clin Risk Manag       Date:  2020-02-07       Impact factor: 2.423

7.  Providing low-dimensional feedback of a high-dimensional movement allows for improved performance of a skilled walking task.

Authors:  Kevin A Day; Amy J Bastian
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2019-12-24       Impact factor: 4.996

8.  Individualized feedback to change multiple gait deficits in chronic stroke.

Authors:  Kevin A Day; Kendra M Cherry-Allen; Amy J Bastian
Journal:  J Neuroeng Rehabil       Date:  2019-12-23       Impact factor: 5.208

9.  rTMS for poststroke pusher syndrome: study protocol for a randomised, patient-blinded controlled clinical trial.

Authors:  Lijiao Meng; Raymond C C Tsang; Yanlei Ge; Qifan Guo; Qiang Gao
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2022-08-10       Impact factor: 3.006

10.  Analysis of motor control strategy for frontal and sagittal planes of circular tracking movements using visual feedback noise from velocity change and depth information.

Authors:  Geonhui Lee; Woong Choi; Hanjin Jo; Wookhyun Park; Jaehyo Kim
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-11-11       Impact factor: 3.240

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.