4.6 Article

Virtual Reality-Enhanced Partial Body Weight-Supported Treadmill Training Poststroke: Feasibility and Effectiveness in 6 Subjects

期刊

出版社

W B SAUNDERS CO-ELSEVIER INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.apmr.2009.09.009

关键词

Gait; Rehabilitation; Stroke

资金

  1. Old Dominion University's Office of Research [572 371]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Walker ML, Ringleb Si, Maihafer GC, Walker R, Crouch JR, Van Lunen B, Morrison S. Virtual reality enhanced partial body weight supported treadmill training post-stroke: feasibility and effectiveness in 6 subjects. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2010;91:1 15-22. Objective: To determine whether the use of a low-cost virtual reality (VR) system used in conjunction with partial body weight supported treadmill training (BWSTT) was feasible and effective in improving the walking and balance abilities of patients poststroke. Design: A before-after comparison of a single group with BWSTT intervention. Setting: University research laboratory. Participants: A convenience sample of 7 adults who were within 1 year poststroke and who had completed traditional rehabilitation but still exhibited gait deficits. Six participants completed the study. Intervention: Twelve treatment sessions of BWSTT with VR. The VR system generated a virtual environment that showed on a television screen in front of the treadmill to give participants the sensation of walking down a city street. A head-mounted position sensor provided postural feedback. Main Outcome Measures: Functional Gait Assessment (FGA) score, Berg Balance Scale (BBS) score, and overground walking speed. Results: One subject dropped out of the study. All other participants made significant improvements in their ability to walk. FGA scores increased from mean of 13.8 to 18. BBS scores increased from mean of 43.8 to 48.8, although a ceiling effect was seen for this test. Overground walking speed increased from mean of .49m/s to .68m/s. Conclusions: A low-cost VR system combined with BWSTT is feasible for improved gait and balance of patients poststroke.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据