| Literature DB >> 35103608 |
Hector Beltran-Alacreu1,2, Gonzalo Navarro-Fernández2,3, Daniela Godia-Lledó4, Lucas Graell-Pasarón4, Álvaro Ramos-González4, Rafael Raya5,6, Aitor Martin-Pintado Zugasti7, Josue Fernandez-Carnero8,9.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There is sparse research on the effectiveness of therapeutic exercise for the treatment of neck pain in older adult populations. Moreover, there is a lack of research on the use of serious games or virtual reality for the treatment of neck pain in this population.Entities:
Keywords: aged; exercise therapy; neck pain; physical therapy modalities; technology; video games; virtual reality
Year: 2022 PMID: 35103608 PMCID: PMC8848226 DOI: 10.2196/31404
Source DB: PubMed Journal: JMIR Serious Games Impact factor: 4.143
Figure 1Participant flowchart.
Baseline descriptive data and normality test.
| Variable | Value (N=14) | |
| Sex (women), n (%) | 9 (64) | N/Ab |
| Age (years), mean (SD) | 81.85 (6.82) | .31 |
| Weight (kg), mean (SD) | 68.16 (8.38) | .82 |
| Height (cm), mean (SD) | 1.54 (0.07) | .12 |
| BMI, mean (SD) | 28.65 (3.58) | >.99 |
| Mini–Mental State Examination scorec | 31.08 (3.01) | .13 |
| Neck Disability Index scored | 15.77 (8.19) | .98 |
aP values are based on the Shapiro-Wilk test, which measures the distribution of variables; variables showed a normal distribution.
bN/A: not applicable; the Shapiro-Wilk test cannot be performed on categorical data.
cThe classification brackets for this scale are as follows: 30 to 35 (normal), 24 to 29 (borderline), 19 to 23 (mild), 14 to 18 (moderate), and less than 14 (severe).
dThe minimum detectable change for this index is 5 out of 50 points, and a change of 7 points is recommended for achieving a clinically relevant difference.
Suitability of the technology based on results from the Suitability Evaluation Questionnaire (SEQ).
| Question | SEQ score, mean (SD)a |
| Q1. How much did you enjoy your experience with the system? | 4.92 (0.277) |
| Q2. How much did you sense being in the environment of the system? | 3.92 (1.115) |
| Q3. How successful were you in the system? | 3.85 (1.214) |
| Q4. To what extent were you able to control the system? | 3.62 (1.261) |
| Q5. How real is the virtual environment of the system? | 4.62 (0.961) |
| Q6. Is the information provided by the system clear? | 4.31 (0.947) |
| Q7. Did you feel discomfort during your experience with the system? | 1.00 (0.000) |
| Q8. Did you experience dizziness or nausea during your practice with the system? | 1.54 (1.330) |
| Q9. Did you experience eye discomfort during your practice with the system? | 1.54 (1.330) |
| Q10. Did you feel confused or disoriented during your experience with the system? | 1.23 (0.832) |
| Q11. Do you think that this system will be helpful for your rehabilitation? | 4.69 (0.630) |
| Q12. Did you find the task difficult? | 4.69 (0.855) |
| Q13. Did you find the devices of the system difficult to use? | 4.77 (0.599) |
| Total for all questions | 50.38 (5.35) |
aQuestions were scored on a 5-point Likert scale, ranging from 1 (“not at all”) to 5 (“very much”). Reverse scoring was performed for Q7-Q10, Q12, and Q13, ranging from 1 (“very easy”) to 5 (“very difficult”).
Success in the serious game during each treatment session.
| Session | Success (%), mean (SD)a |
| 1 | 68.86 (24.87) |
| 2 | 71.06 (24.63) |
| 3 | 82.05 (19.50) |
| 4 | 82.96 (21.14) |
| 5 | 85.16 (15.25) |
| 6 | 83.51 (13.31) |
| 7 | 86.44 (16.02) |
| 8 | 89.74 (12.95) |
| Percentage change from session 1 to 8 | 24.90 (20.85) |
aThe serious game software only returns the percentage of success in the game.
Comparison between treatments, intratreatment changes, and residual effect.
| Treatmenta | Baseline VASb score, mean (SD) | Posttreatment VAS score, mean (SD) | Washout period VAS score (residual effect), mean (SD) | ||
| Serious game | 4.92 (1.88) | 3.77 (1.92) | <.001 | 3.69 (2.13) | .01 |
| Conventional exercise | 4.92 (1.88) | 3.46 (2.22) | <.001 | 3.69 (2.13) | .01 |
aNo statistically significant differences between treatments were detected in the measurement after the intervention (serious game vs conventional exercise).
bVAS: Visual Analog Scale.
cP values are based on the Student t test.
Sequence effect analysis.
| Treatment and sequencea | VASb score, mean difference (SD)c | ||||
|
| |||||
|
| A-B | –0.58 (0.49) | .01 | ||
|
| B-A | –1.64 (0.75) |
| ||
|
| |||||
|
| A-B | –2.08 (1.02) | .04 | ||
|
| B-A | –0.93 (0.45) |
| ||
aSequence A-B is serious game followed by conventional exercise; sequence B-A is conventional exercise followed by serious game.
bVAS: Visual Analog Scale.
cThis value represents the mean difference between baseline and posttreatment measures.
dP values are based on the Student t test. P values for each group are reported in the top row of that group.