Effects of mirror therapy preceding augmented reality in stroke rehabilitation: a randomized controlled trial.

The sample size (44 participants) was small, close to the lower limit of the estimated requirement, which may have limited the ability to detect differences in secondary outcomes like functional arm use. Conventional therapy outside the study protocol was not standardized during the follow-up period, potentially introducing variability in patient activity. Interventions were partially individualized to patient goals, leading to minor variations in treatment content across participants. Participants were excluded if they had recent botulinum toxin injections or acute inflammatory conditions, limiting generalizability to patients with these common clinical features. The study did not measure the actual volume of upper-limb movement practice across groups, so it is unclear if differences were due to the specific techniques or simply more repetitive movement.

Funded by the Ministry of Science and Technology, Taiwan and National Health Research Institutes. No specific commercial conflicts of interest were declared in the provided text.

Do not assume that augmented reality alone is superior to conventional therapy for upper limb motor impairment. The study found that AR alone was not significantly better than conventional therapy for the primary outcome (FMA-UE); the motor benefit was seen specifically when mirror therapy was added as a primer. AR alone was primarily better for balance and proprioception.