3.8 Article

Clinical usefulness of the virtual reality-based postural control training on the gait ability in patients with stroke

期刊

JOURNAL OF EXERCISE REHABILITATION
卷 9, 期 5, 页码 489-494

出版社

KOREAN SOC EXERCISE REHABILITATION
DOI: 10.12965/jer.130066

关键词

Virtual reality; Gait ability; Postural control; Stroke

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study is a single blind randomized controlled trial to determine the effect of virtual reality-based postural control training on the gait ability in patients with chronic stroke. Sixteen subjects were randomly assigned to either experimental group (VR, n=8) or control group (CPT, n=8). Subjects in both groups received conventional physical therapy for 60 min per day, five days per week during a period of four weeks. Subjects in the VR group received additional augmented reality-based training for 30 min per day, three days per week during a period of four weeks. The subjects were evaluated one week before and after participating in a four week training and follow-up at one month post-training. Data derived from the gait analyses included spatiotemporal gait parameters, 10 meters walking test (10 mWT). In the gait parameters, subjects in the VR group showed significant improvement except for cadence at post- training and follow-up within the experimental group. However, no obvious significant improvement was observed within the control group. In between group comparisons, the experimental group (VR group) showed significantly greater improvement only in stride length compared with the control group (P< 0.05), however, no significant difference was observed in other gait parameters. In conclusion, we demonstrate significant improvement in gait ability in chronic stroke patients who received virtual reality based postural control training. These findings suggest that virtual reality (VR) postural control training using real-time information may be a useful approach for enhancement of gait ability in patients with chronic stroke.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据