Patients poststroke utilized the Home Virtual Rehabilitation System (HoVRS) to perform home-based, gamified upper extremity rehabilitation over 12 weeks. Outcomes related to adherence and clinical improvement were collected, and semistructured interviews were conducted to assess intrinsic and extrinsic motivators that impacted engagement with the system.
Methods:
Subjects performed between 299 and 2020 minutes of self-scheduled, sparsely supervised hand rehabilitation activities in their homes.
Results:
As a group, the subjects demonstrated statistically significant improvements at the structure/function, activity, and activities of daily living levels of function. Qualitative analysis generated seven themes that both positively and negatively influenced each subject's experience with HoVRS, including challenge as a primary intrinsic motivator and pursuing additional therapy and/or a return to higher functional status as a key extrinsic motivator. Subjects' ratings of the system using the Intrinsic Motivation Inventory before and after treatment were uniformly positive, but interview-based feedback was more balanced between positive and negative.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
QiuQ, CronceA, PatelJ, et al.Development of the Home based Virtual Rehabilitation System (HoVRS) to remotely deliver an intense and customized upper extremity training. J Neuroeng Rehabil, 2020; 17(1):155; doi: 10.1186/s12984-020-00789-w
2.
JurkiewiczMT, MarzoliniS, OhP. Adherence to a home-based exercise program for individuals after stroke. Top Stroke Rehabil, 2011; 18(3):277–284; doi: 10.1310/tsr1803-277
3.
RimmerJH, WangE, SmithD. Barriers associated with exercise and community access for individuals with stroke. J Rehabil Res Dev, 2008; 45(2):315–322; doi: 10.1682/jrrd.2007.02.0042
4.
LohseK, ShirzadN, VersterA, et al.Video games and rehabilitation: Using design principles to enhance engagement in physical therapy. J Neurol Phys Ther, 2013; 37(4):166–175; doi: 10.1097/NPT.0000000000000017
5.
RohrbachN, ChicklisE, LevacDE. What is the impact of user affect on motor learning in virtual environments after stroke? A scoping review. J NeuroEngineering Rehabil, 2019; 16:79; doi: 10.1186/s12984-019-0546-4
6.
BurkeJW, McNeillMDJ, CharlesDK, et al.Optimising engagement for stroke rehabilitation using serious games. Vis Comput, 2009; 25:1085–1099; doi: 10.1007/s00371-009-0387-4
7.
EsseryR, GeraghtyAW, KirbyS, et al.Predictors of adherence to home-based physical therapies: A systematic review. Disabil Rehabil, 2017; 39(6):519–534; doi: 10.3109/09638288.2016.1153160
8.
KleimJA, JonesTA. Principles of experience-dependent neural plasticity: Implications for rehabilitation after brain damage. J Speech Lang Hear Res, 2008; 51(1):S225–S239; doi: 10.1044/1092-4388(2008/018)
9.
FluetGG, QiuQ, PatelJ, et al.Autonomous use of the home virtual rehabilitation system: A feasibility and pilot study. Games Health J, 2019; 8(6):432–438; doi: 10.1089/g4h.2019.0012
10.
FluetGG, QiuQ, CronceA, et al.Participant adherence to a video game-based tele-rehabilitation program: A mixed-methods case series. In: Virtual Reality in Health and Rehabilitation (Hayre CM, Muller DJ, Scherer MJ. eds.). CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA; 2020; pp. 169–184.
11.
MerriamSB, TisdellEJ. Qualitative Research: A Guide to Design and Implementation, 4th Edition. John Wiley & Sons: Hoboken, NJ, USA; 2015.
MonardoG, PaveseC, GiorgiI, et al.Evaluation of patient motivation and satisfaction during technology-assisted rehabilitation: An experiential review. Games Health J, 2021; 10(1):13–27; doi: 10.1089/g4h.2020.0024
14.
McAuleyE, DuncanT, TammenVV. Psychometric properties of the Intrinsic Motivation Inventory in a competitive sport setting: A confirmatory factor analysis. Res Q Exerc Sport, 1989; 60(1):48–58; doi: 10.1080/02701367.1989.10607413
15.
SpilkerJ, KongableG, BarchC, et al.Using the NIH Stroke Scale to assess stroke patients. The NINDS rt-PA Stroke Study Group. J Neurosci Nurs, 1997; 29(6):384–392; doi: 10.1097/01376517-199712000-00008
16.
DuncanPW, LaiSM, BodeRK, et al.Stroke Impact Scale-16: A brief assessment of physical function. Neurology, 2003; 60(2):291–296; doi: 10.1212/01.wnl.0000041493.65665.d6
17.
DeakinA, HillH, PomeroyVM. Rough guide to the Fugl-Meyer Assessment: Upper limb section. Physiotherapy, 2003; 89(12):751–763; doi: 10.1016/S0031-9406(05)60502-0
18.
YozbatiranN, Der-YeghiaianL, CramerSC. A standardized approach to performing the action research arm test. Neurorehabil Neural Repair, 2008; 22(1):78–90; doi: 10.1177/1545968307305353
19.
MathiowetzV, VollandG, KashmanN, et al.Adult norms for the Box and Block Test of manual dexterity. Am J Occup Ther, 1985; 39(6):386–391; doi: 10.5014/ajot.39.6.386
20.
DeciEL, OlafsenAH, RyanRM. Self-determination theory in work organizations: The state of a science. Annu Rev Organ Psychol Organ Behav, 2017; 4:19–43; doi: 10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-032516-113108
21.
MaiettaR, MihasP, SwartoutK, et al.Sort and sift, think and shift: Let the data be your guide an applied approach to working with, learning from, and privileging qualitative data. Qual Rep, 2021; 26(6):2045–2060; doi: 10.46743/2160-3715/2021.5013
22.
MorseJM.Critical analysis of strategies for determining rigor in qualitative inquiry. Qual Health Res, 2015; 25(9):1212–1222; doi: 10.1177/1049732315588501
23.
CohenJ.A power primer. In: Methodological Issues and Strategies in Clinical Research, 4th Edition (Kazdin AE. ed.). American Psychological Association: Washington, DC, USA; 2016; pp. 279–284.
24.
PageSJ, FulkGD, BoyneP. Clinically important differences for the upper-extremity Fugl-Meyer Scale in people with minimal to moderate impairment due to chronic stroke. Phys Ther, 2012; 92(6):791–798; doi: 10.2522/ptj.20110009
25.
Van Der LeeJ.H., et al., The responsiveness of the Action Research Arm test and the Fugl-Meyer Assessment scale in chronic stroke patients. J Rehabil Med, 2001; 33(3):110–113.
26.
ChenHM, ChenCC, HsuehIP, et al.Test-retest reproducibility and smallest real difference of 5 hand function tests in patients with stroke. Neurorehabil Neural Repair, 2009; 23(5):435–440; doi: 10.1177/1545968308331146
27.
GuidettiS, YtterbergC, EkstamL, et al.Changes in the impact of stroke between 3 and 12 months post-stroke, assessed with the Stroke Impact Scale. J Rehabil Med, 2014; 46(10):963–968; doi: 10.2340/16501977-1865
28.
HenninkMM, KaiserBN, MarconiVC. Code saturation versus meaning saturation: How many interviews are enough?. Qual Health Res, 2017; 27(4):591–608; doi: 10.1177/1049732316665344
29.
ChenY, AbelKT, JanecekJT, et al.Home-based technologies for stroke rehabilitation: A systematic review. Int J Med Inform, 2019; 123:11–22; doi: 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2018.12.001
30.
NeiblingBA, JacksonSM, HaywardKS, et al.Perseverance with technology-facilitated home-based upper limb practice after stroke: A systematic mixed studies review. J Neuroeng Rehabil, 2021; 18(1):43; doi: 10.1186/s12984-021-00819-1
31.
KilbrideC, ScottDJM, ButcherT, et al.Safety, feasibility, acceptability and preliminary effects of the Neurofenix platform for Rehabilitation via HOMe Based gaming exercise for the Upper-limb post Stroke (RHOMBUS): Results of a feasibility intervention study. BMJ Open, 2022; 12(2):e052555; doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-052555
32.
BellA, GrampurohitN, KainsG, et al.Developing guiding principles for technology-based rehabilitation program by engaging people with motor incomplete tetraplegia. J Neuroeng Rehabil, 2022; 19(1):128; doi: 10.1186/s12984-022-01096-2
33.
RosenbaumJR, WellsCK, ViscoliCM, et al.Altruism as a reason for participation in clinical trials was independently associated with adherence. J Clin Epidemiol, 2005; 58(11):1109–1114; doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2005.03.014
34.
WilliamsB, EntwistleV, HaddowG, WellsM. Promoting research participation: why not advertise altruism?. Soc Sci Med, 2008; 66(7):1451–1456; doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2007.12.013
35.
ThreapletonK, DrummondA, StandenP. Virtual rehabilitation: What are the practical barriers for home-based research?. Digit Health, 2016; 2:2055207616641302; doi: 10.1177/2055207616641302
36.
StandenPJ, ThreapletonK, ConnellL, et al.Patients' use of a home-based virtual reality system to provide rehabilitation of the upper limb following stroke. Phys Ther, 2015; 95(3):350–359; doi: 10.2522/ptj.20130564
37.
LambercyO, LehnerR, ChuaK, et al.Neurorehabilitation from a distance: Can intelligent technology support decentralized access to quality therapy?. Front Robot AI, 2021; 8:612415; doi: 10.3389/frobt.2021.612415
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
