PTPilotJournal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation2017

Balancing the playing field: collaborative gaming for physical training.

Michael Mace, Nawal Kinany, Paul Rinne and 3 others

PMID 29151360

WHAT IT FOUND

Stroke patients paired with a healthy expert had better game performance together than alone, especially in stability, and preferred it.

Healthy pairs did not improve overall and had lower accuracy.

Key findings

01Stroke patients improved star collection and stability during dual-player mode compared with single-player mode.

02In healthy pairs, dual-player mode did not improve stars or stability, but accuracy decreased from 15.1±7.9% to 13.0±5.3%.

03Stroke patients preferred dual-player mode (88% vs 6%) and rated it less difficult (4.5±3 vs 7±2.5 out of 10).

STILL TO COME

How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for PTs

Read the rest of this summary

You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.

Already have one?

What it does not show

This was a short proof-of-concept study, not a trial of long-term motor learning or motor transfer. Only 16 stroke patients participated, and all were paired with the same healthy expert, so results may not generalise to other partners or settings. Patients were screened within 2 weeks of presentation and had arm weakness, so findings may not apply to all stroke populations. The number of trials was limited to reduce fatigue, so motivation over longer training times was not explored. The single-player mode had no reactive agent, which may have made it less engaging than the dual-player mode. The game used visual coupling only, not haptic or physical assistance. Verbal communication was allowed in patient-expert play but not in healthy-healthy play, and social factors such as conversation were not analysed.

The easy way to misread this

Do not read this as evidence that collaborative gaming improves stroke recovery or arm disability. The study measured game performance in 16 patients over short trials, and it did not test long-term motor learning or motor transfer.

Read it on PubMed →