Positive effects of the immersive VR program for far space neglect are suggested by the results of the present pilot study. However, further studies with rigorous designs are needed to validate its clinical effectiveness.

In clinical practice, therapists often encounter cases of unilateral spatial neglect (USN) observed in far and near space. In this case report, immersive virtual reality (VR) technology was adopted as a therapy tool in a patient with stroke with severe near and far space neglect. Neuropsychological tests in near and far space as well as the Catherine Bergego Scale (CBS), as an index of neglect in daily living, were measured preintervention and postintervention. Improvement of neuropsychological tests, particularly in far space, was clearly demonstrated postintervention. However, CBS score did not change postintervention. This may be because the patient unsuccessfully translated these visual search task skills used in far space to activities of daily living. Our findings suggest the potential use of immersive VR technology in patients with USN and highlight the VR programme's limited ability to fully recover a patient's disability in natural settings.

No abstract

ObjectiveWalking through a narrow aperture requires unique postural configurations, i.e., body rotation in the yaw dimension. Stroke individuals may have difficulty performing the body rotations due to motor paralysis on one side of their body. The present study was therefore designed to investigate how successfully such individuals walk through apertures and how they perform body rotation behavior.MethodStroke fallers (n = 10), stroke non-fallers (n = 13), and healthy controls (n = 23) participated. In the main task, participants walked for 4 m and passed through apertures of various widths (0.9–1.3 times the participant’s shoulder width). Accidental contact with the frame of an aperture and kinematic characteristics at the moment of aperture crossing were measured. Participants also performed a perceptual judgment task to measure the accuracy of their perceived aperture passability.Results and DiscussionStroke fallers made frequent contacts on their paretic side; however, the contacts were not frequent when they penetrated apertures from their paretic side. Stroke fallers and non-fallers rotated their body with multiple steps, rather than a single step, to deal with their motor paralysis. Although the minimum passable width was greater for stroke fallers, the body rotation angle was comparable among groups. This suggests that frequent contact in stroke fallers was due to insufficient body rotation. The fact that there was no significant group difference in the perceived aperture passability suggested that contact occurred mainly due to locomotor factors rather than perceptual factors. Two possible explanations (availability of vision and/or attention) were provided as to why accidental contact on the paretic side did not occur frequently when stroke fallers penetrated the apertures from their paretic side.

ObjectivesTo accumulate evidence that obstacle avoidance training alone is effective in improving the locomotor ability of individuals with stroke.DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis.SettingMEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, ICTRP and PEDro were searched for related information until December 2018. Two independent reviewers extracted data. Outcome measurement data were subjected to meta-analyses using random-effects models. Data syntheses were conducted using RevMan V.5.3, and the certainty of evidence was determined using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach.ParticipantsParticipants with various types and phases of stroke were included.InterventionThe usual gait training including obstacle avoidance training (interventions of any type, intensity, duration and frequency).Primary and secondary outcome measuresPrimary outcomes were gait speed, composite gait ability and objective balance ability. Secondary outcomes were subjective balance ability, gait endurance and fall incidence.ResultsTwo randomised controlled trials with a total of 49 participants were used as data sources for this study. The obstacle avoidance training (training) group had lower gait speed than the control group (mean difference (MD) 0.03, 95% CI −0.11 to 0.16, p=0.51). Further, the certainty of evidence was very low. The subjective balance ability (Activities-specific Balance Confidence scale) was not significantly different between the training and control groups (MD 6.65, 95% CI −7.59 to 20.89, p=0.36), and it showed very low certainty of evidence.ConclusionsObstacle avoidance training may have little or no effect on individuals with stroke. The failure to find the effectiveness of obstacle avoidance training alone is possibly attributable to the insufficient amount of training in the intervention and the lack of well-designed studies that measured relevant outcomes.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42017060691.