BackgroundVirtual reality-based training has found increasing use in neurorehabilitation to improve upper limb training and facilitate motor recovery.ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to directly compare virtual reality-based training with conventional therapy.MethodsIn a multi-center, parallel-group randomized controlled trial, patients at least 6 months after stroke onset were allocated either to an experimental group (virtual reality-based training) or a control group receiving conventional therapy (16x45 minutes within 4 weeks). The virtual reality-based training system replicated patients´ upper limb movements in real-time to manipulate virtual objects.Blinded assessors tested patients twice before, once during, and twice after the intervention up to 2-month follow-up for dexterity (primary outcome: Box and Block Test), bimanual upper limb function (Chedoke-McMaster Arm and Hand Activity Inventory), and subjective perceived changes (Stroke Impact Scale).Results54 eligible patients (70 screened) participated (15 females, mean age 61.3 years, range 20–81 years, time since stroke 3.0±SD 3 years). 22 patients were allocated to the experimental group and 32 to the control group (3 drop-outs). Patients in the experimental and control group improved: Box and Block Test mean 21.5±SD 16 baseline to mean 24.1±SD 17 follow-up; Chedoke-McMaster Arm and Hand Activity Inventory mean 66.0±SD 21 baseline to mean 70.2±SD 19 follow-up. An intention-to-treat analysis found no between-group differences.ConclusionsPatients in the experimental and control group showed similar effects, with most improvements occurring in the first two weeks and persisting until the end of the two-month follow-up period. The study population had moderate to severely impaired motor function at entry (Box and Block Test mean 21.5±SD 16). Patients, who were less impaired (Box and Block Test range 18 to 72) showed higher improvements in favor of the experimental group. This result could suggest that virtual reality-based training might be more applicable for such patients than for more severely impaired patients.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT01774669.

BackgroundProprioceptive training (PrT) is popularly applied as preventive or rehabilitative exercise method in various sports and rehabilitation settings. Its effect on pain and function is only poorly evaluated. The aim of this systematic review was to summarise and analyse the existing data on the effects of PrT on pain alleviation and functional restoration in patients with chronic (≥3 months) neck- or back pain.MethodsRelevant electronic databases were searched from their respective inception to February 2014. Randomised controlled trials comparing PrT with conventional therapies or inactive controls in patients with neck- or low back pain were included. Two review authors independently screened articles and assessed risk of bias (RoB). Data extraction was performed by the first author and crosschecked by a second author. Quality of findings was assessed and rated according to GRADE guidelines. Pain and functional status outcomes were extracted and synthesised qualitatively and quantitatively.ResultsIn total, 18 studies involving 1380 subjects described interventions related to PrT (years 1994–2013). 6 studies focussed on neck-, 12 on low back pain. Three main directions of PrT were identified: Discriminatory perceptive exercises with somatosensory stimuli to the back (pPrT, n = 2), multimodal exercises on labile surfaces (mPrT, n = 13), or joint repositioning exercise with head-eye coordination (rPrT, n = 3). Comparators entailed usual care, home based training, educational therapy, strengthening, stretching and endurance training, or inactive controls. Quality of studies was low and RoB was deemed moderate to high with a high prevalence of unclear sequence generation and group allocation (>60%). Low quality evidence suggests PrT may be more effective than not intervening at all. Low quality evidence suggests that PrT is no more effective than conventional physiotherapy. Low quality evidence suggests PrT is inferior to educational and behavioural approaches.ConclusionsThere are few relevant good quality studies on proprioceptive exercises. A descriptive summary of the evidence suggests that there is no consistent benefit in adding PrT to neck- and low back pain rehabilitation and functional restoration.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/1471-2474-15-382) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Background: Proprioceptive training (PrT) is popularly applied as preventive or rehabilitative exercise method in various sports and rehabilitation settings. Its effect on pain and function is only poorly evaluated. The aim of this systematic review was to summarise and analyse the existing data on the effects of PrT on pain alleviation and functional restoration in patients with chronic (≥3 months) neck-or back pain.

Sensorimotor training (SMT) is popularly applied as exercise in rehabilitation settings, particularly for musculoskeletal pain. With insufficient evidence on its effect on pain and function, this exploratory randomised controlled trial investigated the potential effects of SMT in rehabilitation of chronic non-specific low back pain. Two arms received 9x30 minutes physiotherapy with added interventions: The experimental arm received 15 minutes of postural SMT while the comparator arm performed 15 minutes of added sub-effective low-intensity training. A treatment blinded tester assessed outcomes at baseline 2–4 days prior to intervention, pre- and post-intervention, and at 4-week follow-up. Main outcomes were pain and functional status assessed with a 0–100mm visual analogue scale and the Oswestry Disability Questionnaire. Additionally, postural control was analysed using a video-based tracking system and a pressure plate during perturbed stance. Robust, nonparametric multivariate hypothesis testing was performed. 22 patients (11 females, aged 32 to 75 years) with mild to moderate chronic pain and functional limitations were included for analysis (11 per arm). At post-intervention, average values of primary outcomes improved slightly, but not to a clinically relevant or statistically significant extent. At 4-week follow-up, there was a significant improvement by 12 percentage points (pp) on the functional status questionnaire in the SMT-group (95% confidence intervall (CI) = 5.3pp to 17.7pp, p < 0.001) but not in the control group (4 pp improvement, CI = 11.8pp to 19.2pp). However, group-by-time interaction effects for functional status (Q = 3.3, 19 p = 0.07) and pain (Q = 0.84, p = 0.51) were non-significant. Secondary kinematic outcomes did not change over time in either of the groups. Despite significant improvement of functional status after SMT, overall findings of this exploratory study suggest that SMT provides no added benefit for pain reduction or functional improvement in patients with moderate chronic non-specific low back pain.Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02304120 and related study protocol, DOI: 10.1186/1471-2474-15-382.

Although the health benefits of physical activity and exercise for older people are well established, a largely sedentary lifestyle still prevails in ageing western societies. Finding new ways to make exercise more accessible and acceptable for older adults must be developed to fully unleash its potential in preventing and weakening age-related physical and cognitive decline. Existing barriers to implement effective exercise-based treatment plans include motivational reservations on both the clinician's and patient's side, but also physical limitations caused by disease or deconditioning. Particularly in the more senior population, debilitating conditions do not allow adherence to currently recommended exercise regimes. A major rethinking of age- and user-adapted exercise is overdue. The high intensities required for physical and mental adaptations must be modifiable and personalized according to the functional status of each patient. Emerging information and communication technologies (ICT) have brought forward a plethora of attractive solutions for smart and adapted exercise, but there remains a vast gap between technological advancement and clinical relevance. Where in the beginning ICT for active ageing mainly focussed on aspects of usability and user experience, the current status of IT as applied in ageing populations noticeably shifted toward new services, applications, and devices that can be offered with the aim to prevent, compensate, care, and/or enhance daily life functioning of senior citizens. In this perspective paper, we aim to summarize the current state of the art in ICT-based interventions aimed at improved motor-cognitive control and make suggestions about how these could be combined with high-intensive interval exercise regimes to make rehabilitation for the impaired older adults more effective, and more fun.

BackgroundA majority of stroke survivors present with cognitive impairments. Attention disturbance, which leads to impaired concentration and overall reduced cognitive functions, is strongly associated with stroke. The clinical efficacy of acupuncture with Baihui (GV20) and Shenting (GV24) as well as computer-assisted cognitive training in stroke and post-stroke cognitive impairment have both been demonstrated in previous studies. To date, no systematic comparison of these exists and the potential beneficial effects of a combined application are yet to be examined. The main objective of this pilot study is to evaluate the effects of computer-assisted cognitive training compared to acupuncture on the outcomes of attention assessments. The second objective is to test the effects of a combined cognitive intervention that incorporates computer-assisted cognitive training and acupuncture (ACoTrain).Methods/DesignAn international multicentre, single-blinded, randomised controlled pilot trial will be conducted. In a 1:1:1 ratio, 60 inpatients with post-stroke cognitive dysfunction will be randomly allocated into either the acupuncture group, the computer-assisted cognitive training group, or the ACoTrain group in addition to their individual rehabilitation programme. The intervention period of this pilot trial will last 4 weeks (30 minutes per day, 5 days per week, Monday to Friday). The primary outcome is the test battery for attentional performance. The secondary outcomes include the Trail Making Test, Test des Deux Barrages, National Institute of Health Stroke Scale, and Modified Barthel Index for assessment of daily life competence, and the EuroQol Questionnaire for health-related quality of life.DiscussionThis trial mainly focuses on evaluating the effects of computer-assisted cognitive training compared to acupuncture on the outcomes of attention assessments. The results of this pilot trial are expected to provide new insights on how Eastern and Western medicine can complement one another and improve the treatment of cognitive impairments in early stroke rehabilitation. Including patients with different cultural backgrounds allows a more generalisable interpretation of the results but also poses risks of performance bias. Using standardised and well-described assessments, validated for each region, is pivotal to allow pooling of the data.Trial registrationClinical Trails.gov ID: NCT02324959 (8 December 2014)

BackgroundIn recent years, virtual reality has been introduced to neurorehabilitation, in particular with the intention of improving upper-limb training options and facilitating motor function recovery.Methods/DesignThe proposed study incorporates a quantitative part and a qualitative part, termed a mixed-methods approach: (1) a quantitative investigation of the efficacy of virtual reality training compared to conventional therapy in upper-limb motor function are investigated, (2a) a qualitative investigation of patients’ experiences and expectations of virtual reality training and (2b) a qualitative investigation of therapists’ experiences using the virtual reality training system in the therapy setting. At three participating clinics, 60 patients at least 6 months after stroke onset will be randomly allocated to an experimental virtual reality group (EG) or to a control group that will receive conventional physiotherapy or occupational therapy (16 sessions, 45 minutes each, over the course of 4 weeks). Using custom data gloves, patients’ finger and arm movements will be displayed in real time on a monitor, and they will move and manipulate objects in various virtual environments. A blinded assessor will test patients’ motor and cognitive performance twice before, once during, and twice after the 4-week intervention. The primary outcome measure is the Box and Block Test. Secondary outcome measures are the Chedoke-McMaster Stroke Assessments (hand, arm and shoulder pain subscales), the Chedoke-McMaster Arm and Hand Activity Inventory, the Line Bisection Test, the Stroke Impact Scale, the MiniMentalState Examination and the Extended Barthel Index. Semistructured face-to-face interviews will be conducted with patients in the EG after intervention finalization with a focus on the patients’ expectations and experiences regarding the virtual reality training. Therapists’ perspectives on virtual reality training will be reviewed in three focus groups comprising four to six occupational therapists and physiotherapists.DiscussionThe interviews will help to gain a deeper understanding of the phenomena under investigation to provide sound recommendations for the implementation of the virtual reality training system for routine use in neurorehabilitation complementing the quantitative clinical assessments.Trial registrationCliniclatrials.gov Identifier: NCT01774669 (15 January 2013)Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/1745-6215-15-350) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Reduced postural control is thought to contribute to the development and persistence of chronic non-specific low back pain (CNLBP). It is therefore frequently assessed in affected patients and commonly reported as the average amount of postural sway while standing upright under a variety of sensory conditions. These averaged linear outcomes, such as mean centre of pressure (CP) displacement or mean CP surface areas, may not reflect the true postural status. Adding nonlinear outcomes and multi-segmental kinematic analysis has been reported to better reflect the complexity of postural control and may detect subtler postural differences. In this cross-sectional study, a combination of linear and nonlinear postural parameters were assessed in patients with CNLBP (n = 24, 24-75 years, 9 females) and compared to symptom-free controls (CG, n = 34, 22-67 years, 11 females). Primary outcome was postural control measured by variance of joint configurations (uncontrolled manifold index, UI), confidence ellipse surface areas (CEA) and approximate entropy (ApEn) of CP dispersion during the response phase of a perturbed postural control task on a swaying platform. Secondary outcomes were segment excursions and clinical outcome correlates for pain and function. Non-parametric tests for group comparison with P-adjustment for multiple comparisons were conducted. Principal component analysis was applied to identify patterns of segmental contribution in both groups. CNLBP and CG performed similarly with respect to the primary outcomes. Comparison of joint kinematics revealed significant differences of hip (P < .001) and neck (P < .025) angular excursion, representing medium to large group effects (r′s = .36 − .51). Significant (P′s < .05), but moderate correlations of ApEn (r = -.42) and UI (r = -.46) with the health-related outcomes were observed. These findings lend further support to the notion that averaged linear outcomes do not suffice to describe subtle postural differences in CNLBP patients with low to moderate pain status.