Virtual reality-based interventions enhance functional status, balance and muscle strength in patients with ankle instability: a systematic review with meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Manuel García-Sánchez, Esteban Obrero-Gaitán, M Carmen López-Ruiz and 3 others
PMID 40856380WHAT IT FOUND
Virtual reality training beat conventional therapy or usual care for ankle function and for static and dynamic balance in people with ankle instability, mostly young men.
Strength gains were patchy: plantar flexion and eversion only, and not hopping or jumping.
Key findings
01Virtual reality-based training improved ankle function more than conventional therapy or usual care in people with ankle instability (6 trials, 399 participants). The authors graded this as moderate-quality evidence.
02Both static and dynamic balance improved with virtual reality-based training, and neither analysis showed a sign of publication bias.
03Muscle strength improved only for plantar flexion and eversion. Dorsiflexion, inversion and hopping or jumping performance showed no significant difference between groups.
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.
What it does not show
Only 12 trials were included, and some analyses rested on two trials (muscle strength) or four studies (hopping and jumping), so those estimates are imprecise. The included trials averaged 5.8 out of 10 on the PEDro quality scale. In all of them the patients and the treating therapists knew which treatment was given, and in 7 of 12 the person measuring the outcome knew as well. That kind of unblinding tends to make a treatment look better than it is. 89% of participants were male, the mean age was 21.8 years, and everyone had a previous ankle sprain, so the results may not carry over to older, less active patients or to those with ankle problems from other causes. Outcomes were measured right after the programme in every trial, and only two trials assessed anyone afterwards (4 weeks later), so nothing is known about whether the improvements last. The virtual reality systems and protocols differed (Wii Fit versus head-mounted displays, 3 weeks to 3 months, different outcome tests), so the best device and dose are unknown and gait could not be analysed at all. Possible publication bias was flagged in the ankle function and lower limb performance analyses, and 7 of the 12 included trials received external funding.
Declared interests
The authors state that they have no conflict of interest with any financial organisation regarding the material discussed. Seven of the 12 included trials received external funding to carry out their research, though the review does not say who funded them.
The easy way to misread this
Do not read these large effects as a reason to replace conventional ankle strengthening with games. Patients and therapists in every included trial knew which treatment was being given, which tends to inflate the difference between groups, and the strength results favoured virtual reality only for plantar flexion and eversion, with no improvement in hopping or jumping.
Summarised by AI from the full paper, without a clinician reviewing it. Check it against the source before it changes what you do. Read it on PubMed →