Immersive VR for upper-extremity rehabilitation in patients with neurological disorders: a scoping review.
Matteo Ceradini, Elena Losanno, Silvestro Micera and 2 others
PMID 38734690WHAT IT FOUND
Most studies of immersive VR for arm rehabilitation reported improvements, but all were small, uncontrolled trials.
Cybersickness was rarely measured. Treat this as evidence of feasibility, not proof that VR works better than standard therapy.
Key findings
0112 of the 13 included studies reported improvement in at least one clinical metric after immersive VR treatment.
02Only 4 of the 13 studies formally assessed cybersickness, though none reported significant symptoms among those that did.
03The review highlights a lack of randomized controlled trials, limiting the ability to compare VR benefits against traditional rehabilitation.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for PTsWhat it means for OTsWhat it means for SLPs
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.
What it does not show
All included studies were uncontrolled and non-randomized, preventing causal conclusions about VR's effectiveness. Sample sizes were very small (ranging from 1 to 19 participants per study), reducing statistical power. Cybersickness was not systematically measured in 9 of the 13 studies, so its true prevalence and impact are unknown. There was significant heterogeneity in VR setups, tasks, and outcome measures, making direct comparisons between studies difficult. The review excluded conference papers and non-English articles, potentially missing relevant data.
Declared interests
The paper acknowledges support from non-U.S. government sources but does not list specific commercial funding or author conflicts of interest in the provided text.
The easy way to misread this
Do not interpret the reported improvements as proof that VR is more effective than conventional therapy. Since the studies were uncontrolled, these gains could reflect natural recovery, placebo effects, or the concurrent standard care patients received.