| Literature DB >> 29230275 |
Shih-Ching Yeh1, Si-Huei Lee2, Rai-Chi Chan2, Yi Wu3, Li-Rong Zheng1, Sheryl Flynn4.
Abstract
Stroke is a leading cause of long-term disability, and virtual reality- (VR-) based stroke rehabilitation is effective in increasing motivation and the functional performance. Although much of the functional reach and grasp capabilities of the upper extremities were regained, the pinch movement remains impaired following stroke. In this study, we developed a haptic-enhanced VR system to simulate haptic pinch tasks to assist the recovery of upper-extremity fine motor function. We recruited 16 adults with stroke to verify the efficacy of this new VR system. Each patient received 30 min VR training sessions 3 times per week for 8 weeks. Outcome measures, Fugl-Meyer assessment (FMA), Test Evaluant les Membres superieurs des Personnes Agees (TEMPA), Wolf motor function test (WMFT), Box and Block test (BBT), and Jamar grip dynamometer, showed statistically significant progress from pretest to posttest and follow-up, indicating that the proposed system effectively promoted fine motor recovery of function. Additionally, our evidence suggests that this system was also effective under certain challenging conditions such as being in the chronic stroke phase or a coside of lesion and dominant hand (nondominant hand impaired). System usability assessment indicated that the participants strongly intended to continue using this VR-based system in rehabilitation.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 29230275 PMCID: PMC5694569 DOI: 10.1155/2017/9840273
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Healthc Eng ISSN: 2040-2295 Impact factor: 2.682
Figure 1System architecture.
Demographic data of each participant.
| ID | Sex | Age | Stroke duration (month) | Hand dominance | Type of stroke | Lesion side | Lesion location | Brunnstrom stage (distal) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | F | 82 | 1 | R | Ischemic | L | MCA | 3 |
| 2 | M | 72 | 15 | R | Ischemic | R | PCA | 3 |
| 3 | M | 68 | 12 | R | Hemorrhage | R | PCA | 4 |
| 4 | M | 53 | 2 | R | Hemorrhage | L | MCA | 2 |
| 5 | M | 59 | 1 | R | Ischemic | L | MCA | 5 |
| 7 | M | 39 | 16 | R | Hemorrhage | R | MCA | 3 |
| 8 | M | 60 | 18 | R | Hemorrhage | R | MCA | 2 |
| 9 | M | 65 | 8 | R | Ischemic | R | MCA | 4 |
| 10 | F | 38 | 5 | R | Hemorrhage | R | PCA | 4 |
| 11 | M | 58 | 4 | R | Ischemic | L | MCA | 5 |
| 13 | F | 44 | 11 | L | Ischemic | R | MCA | 4 |
| 15 | F | 61 | 4 | R | Ischemic | L | MCA | 4 |
| 16 | F | 33 | 6 | R | Ischemic | L | MCA | 2 |
| 33 | M | 28 | 14 | L | Hemorrhage | R | MCA | 3 |
| 34 | M | 69 | 3 | R | Hemorrhage | R | PCA | 6 |
| 35 | F | 60 | 1 | R | Ischemic | L | MCA | 2 |
Results of Wilcoxon rank sum test on clinical measures: pretest versus posttest (N = 16).
| Measure | Pretest mean (SD) | Posttest mean (SD) |
| Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| FMA | 7.69 (5.97) | 10.31 (7.35) | −2.994 | <0.01 |
| TEMPA | −9.63 (2.75) | −8.44 (3.29) | −2.422 | <0.01 |
| WMFT | 9.13 (5.55) | 10.75 (4.77) | −2.283 | <0.05 |
| BBT | 13.00 (13.68) | 16.06 (15.06) | −2.810 | <0.01 |
| JAMAR | 7.71 (6.48) | 10.36 (7.81) | −1.707 | <0.05 |
Results of Wilcoxon rank sum test on clinical measures: pretest versus follow-up (N = 16).
| Measure | Pretest mean (SD) | Follow-up mean (SD) |
| Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| FMA | 7.69 (5.98) | 10.00 (7.29) | −2.455 | <0.01 |
| TEMPA | −9.63 (2.75) | −8.81 (3.47) | −1.916 | <0.05 |
| WMFT | 9.13 (5.55) | 9.68 (4.6) | −0.954 | 0.17 |
| BBT | 13.00 (13.68) | 15.44 (13.93) | −2.242 | <0.05 |
| JAMAR | 7.71 (6.48) | 9.59 (7.42) | −1.733 | <0.05 |
Figure 2Group result: duration since stroke first hit (∗ significance of P value less than 0.05).
Figure 3Group result: combination of lesion side and hand dominance. SS: lesion side and hand-dominance side are the same; DS: lesion side and hand-dominance side are different (∗ significance of P value less than 0.05).
Figure 4Behavior interpretation from synchronized kinematic and kinetic data being changed over time.
Results of user usability evaluation.
| Usefulness | Playfulness | Intention to use | Ease of use | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean (SE) | 4.35 (0.55) | 4.47 (0.61) | 4.85 (0.28) | 4.19 (0.53) |