PTOTNarrative ReviewFrontiers in rehabilitation sciences2021

Neuroplasticity at Home: Improving Home-Based Motor Learning Through Technological Solutions. A Review.

Christian Riis Forman, Jens Bo Nielsen, Jakob Lorentzen

PMID 36188793

WHAT IT FOUND

Home tech aids neuroplasticity but forces a trade-off.

Simple sensory or game-based training allows high repetition but lacks precise feedback. Videoconferencing offers expert guidance but limits dose. Choose the tool based on whether the patient needs volume or correction.

Key findings

01Simple sensory training (e.g., metronomes, videos) facilitates high repetition but offers no live feedback, requiring the patient to self-assess performance, which can be difficult for complex tasks.

02Digital exchange training (e.g., exergaming) provides automated performance scores and progression but may lack the specificity to ensure correct movement quality without trainer oversight.

03Telerehabilitation via videoconferencing allows for precise, live feedback and tailored progression but is resource-intensive, limiting the ability to achieve the high training volume often needed for neuroplasticity.

STILL TO COME

How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for PTsWhat it means for OTs

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 is a narrative review of 28 studies, not a meta-analysis, so it does not quantify effect sizes or provide a pooled estimate of benefit. The included studies varied widely in population (children and adults) and condition (stroke, CP, MS, etc.), making it difficult to apply general conclusions to specific patient groups. The review relies on the authors' categorization of technologies, which may not perfectly align with commercial or clinical terminology used in practice. Many included studies were small or pilot trials, limiting the certainty of the evidence regarding the efficacy of these specific technological solutions.

Declared interests

The study was funded by a personal grant from the Elsass Foundation. The authors declare no commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

The easy way to misread this

Do not assume that adding technology to home exercises guarantees better outcomes. The review highlights a trade-off: technologies that allow high repetition often lack the precise feedback needed for complex motor learning, while those offering expert feedback are too resource-intensive for high-volume training. Select the tool based on the specific learning need, not just availability.

Read it on PubMed →