Wen-Chieh Yang1, Hsing-Kuo Wang1, Ruey-Meei Wu2, Chien-Shun Lo3, Kwan-Hwa Lin4. 1. School and Graduate Institute of Physical Therapy, College of Medicine, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan. 2. Department of Neurology, National Taiwan University Hospital, College of Medicine, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan. 3. Department of Multimedia Design, National Formosa University, Huwei Township, Yunlin, Taiwan. 4. School and Graduate Institute of Physical Therapy, College of Medicine, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan; Department of Physical Therapy, Tzu Chi University, Hualien, Taiwan. Electronic address: khlin@ntu.edu.tw.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/ PURPOSE: Virtual reality has the advantage to provide rich sensory feedbacks for training balance function. This study tested if the home-based virtual reality balance training is more effective than the conventional home balance training in improving balance, walking, and quality of life in patients with Parkinson's disease (PD). METHODS:Twenty-three patients with idiopathic PD were recruited and underwent twelve 50-minute training sessions during the 6-week training period. The experimental group (n = 11) was trained with a custom-made virtual reality balance training system, and the control group (n = 12) was trained by a licensed physical therapist. Outcomes were measured at Week 0 (pretest), Week 6 (posttest), and Week 8 (follow-up). The primary outcome was the Berg Balance Scale. The secondary outcomes included the Dynamic Gait Index, timed Up-and-Go test, Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire, and the motor score of the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale. RESULTS: The experimental and control groups were comparable at pretest. After training, both groups performed better in the Berg Balance Scale, Dynamic Gait Index, timed Up-and-Go test, and Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire at posttest and follow-up than at pretest. However, no significant differences were found between these two groups at posttest and follow-up. CONCLUSION: This study did not find any difference between the effects of the home-based virtual reality balance training and conventional home balance training. The two training options were equally effective in improving balance, walking, and quality of life among community-dwelling patients with PD.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND/ PURPOSE: Virtual reality has the advantage to provide rich sensory feedbacks for training balance function. This study tested if the home-based virtual reality balance training is more effective than the conventional home balance training in improving balance, walking, and quality of life in patients with Parkinson's disease (PD). METHODS: Twenty-three patients with idiopathic PD were recruited and underwent twelve 50-minute training sessions during the 6-week training period. The experimental group (n = 11) was trained with a custom-made virtual reality balance training system, and the control group (n = 12) was trained by a licensed physical therapist. Outcomes were measured at Week 0 (pretest), Week 6 (posttest), and Week 8 (follow-up). The primary outcome was the Berg Balance Scale. The secondary outcomes included the Dynamic Gait Index, timed Up-and-Go test, Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire, and the motor score of the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale. RESULTS: The experimental and control groups were comparable at pretest. After training, both groups performed better in the Berg Balance Scale, Dynamic Gait Index, timed Up-and-Go test, and Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire at posttest and follow-up than at pretest. However, no significant differences were found between these two groups at posttest and follow-up. CONCLUSION: This study did not find any difference between the effects of the home-based virtual reality balance training and conventional home balance training. The two training options were equally effective in improving balance, walking, and quality of life among community-dwelling patients with PD.
Authors: Grigore C Burdea; Namrata Grampurohit; Nam Kim; Kevin Polistico; Ashwin Kadaru; Simcha Pollack; Mooyeon Oh-Park; A M Barrett; Emma Kaplan; Jenny Masmela; Phalgun Nori Journal: Top Stroke Rehabil Date: 2019-12-25 Impact factor: 2.119
Authors: Jacqueline A Osborne; Rachel Botkin; Cristina Colon-Semenza; Tamara R DeAngelis; Oscar G Gallardo; Heidi Kosakowski; Justin Martello; Sujata Pradhan; Miriam Rafferty; Janet L Readinger; Abigail L Whitt; Terry D Ellis Journal: Phys Ther Date: 2022-04-01
Authors: Edwin Daniel Oña; Carlos Balaguer; Roberto Cano-de la Cuerda; Susana Collado-Vázquez; Alberto Jardón Journal: Comput Intell Neurosci Date: 2018-04-11