The Effects of Combined Virtual Reality Exercises and Robot Assisted Gait Training on Cognitive Functions,Daily Living Activities,and Quality of Life in High Functioning Individuals With Subacute Stroke

Abstract

Stroke is a global health concern causing significant mortality. Survivors face physical, cognitive, and emotional challenges, affecting their life satisfaction and social participation. Robot-assisted gait training with virtual reality, like Lokomat, is a promising rehabilitation tool. We investigated its impact on cognitive status, activities of daily living, and quality of life in individuals with stroke. Between September 2022 and August 2023, we exposed 34 first stroke patients (8 women, 26 men; M age = 59.15, SD = 11.09; M height = 170.47, SD = 8.13 cm; M weight = 75.97; SD = 10.87 kg; M days since stroke = 70.44, SD = 33.65) in the subacute stage (3–6 months post-stroke) to Lokomat exercise. Participant exclusion criteria were Lokamat exercise inability, disabilities incompatible with intended measurements, and any cognitive limitations. The Control Group (CG) received conventional physiotherapy, while the Lokomat Group (LG) received both conventional physiotherapy and robot-assisted gait training with virtual reality, administered by an occupational therapist. Evaluations were conducted by a physiotherapist who was unaware of the participants’ group assignments and included assessments with the Montreal Cognitive Assessment, Lawton Brody Instrumental Activities of Daily Living Scale, and Stroke Specific Quality of Life Scale (SS-QoL). Both groups demonstrated an improved quality of life, but the LG outperformed the CG with regard to SS-QoL (p = .01) on measures of Energy (p = .002) and Mobility (p = .005). Both groups showed improvements in cognitive functioning (p < .001) with no between-group difference, and in activities of daily living (p < .05) for which the LG was superior to the CG (p = .023). Thus, adding robot-assisted gait training with Lokomat and virtual reality improved self-reported quality of life and daily activities at levels beyond conventional physiotherapy for patients in the subacute stroke phase. An incremental impact on cognitive functions was not evident, possibly due to rapid cognitive recovery or this was undetected by limited cognitive testing.

Keywords

cognitive functions subacute stroke robot assisted gait training

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Calabrò

R. S.

Reitano

Leo

De Luca

Melegari

Bramanti

(2014). Can robot-assisted movement training (lokomat) improve functional recovery and psychological well-being in chronic stroke? Promising findings from a case study. Functional Neurology, 29(2), 139–141.

Cumming

Churilov

Linden

Bernhardt

(2013). Montreal cognitive assessment and mini–mental state examination are both valid cognitive tools in stroke. Acta Neurologica Scandinavica, 128(2), 122–129. https://doi.org/10.1111/ane.12084

De Luca

Leonardi

Spadaro

Russo

Aragona

Torrisi

Bramanti

Naro

De Cola

M. C.

Calabrò

R. S.

Maggio

M. G.

(2018). Improving cognitive function in patients with stroke: Can computerized training be the future? Journal of Stroke and Cerebrovascular Diseases: The Official Journal of National Stroke Association, 27(4), 1055–1060. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jstrokecerebrovasdis.2017.11.008

Hakverdioğlu Yönt

Khorshid

(2012). Turkish version of the stroke‐specific quality of life scale. International Nursing Review, 59(2), 274–280. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1466-7657.2011.00962.x

Han

E. Y.

S. H.

Kim

B. R.

Seo

M. J.

Kim

M. O.

(2016). Robot-assisted gait training improves brachial–ankle pulse wave velocity and peak aerobic capacity in subacute stroke patients with totally dependent ambulation: Randomized controlled trial. Medicine, 95(41), Article e5078. https://doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000005078

Hochstenbach

J. B.

den Otter

Mulder

T. W.

(2003). Cognitive recovery after stroke: A 2-year follow-up. Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation, 84(10), 1499–1504. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0003-9993(03)00370-8

Isik

E. I.

Yilmaz

Uysal

Basar

(2020). Adaptation of the Lawton instrumental activities of daily living scale to Turkish: Validity and reliability study. Annals of geriatric medicine and research, 24(1), 35–40. https://doi.org/10.4235/agmr.19.0051

Jezernik

Colombo

Keller

Frueh

Morari

(2003). Robotic orthosis lokomat: A rehabilitation and research tool. Neuromodulation: Journal of the International Neuromodulation Society, 6(2), 108–115. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1525-1403.2003.03017.x

Kalaria

R. N.

Akinyemi

Ihara

(2016). Stroke injury, cognitive impairment and vascular dementia. Biochimica et Biophysica Acta, 1862(5), 915–925. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbadis.2016.01.015

10.

Khaw

Subramaniam

Abd Aziz

N. A.

Ali Raymond

Wan Zaidi

W. A.

Ghazali

S. E.

(2021). Current update on the clinical utility of MMSE and MoCA for stroke patients in Asia: A systematic review. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(17), 8962. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18178962

11.

Koski

(2013). Validity and applications of the montreal cognitive assessment for the assessment of vascular cognitive impairment. Cerebrovascular diseases (Basel, Switzerland), 36(1), 6–18. https://doi.org/10.1159/000352051

12.

Lawton

M. P.

Brody

E. M.

(1969). Assessment of older people: Self-maintaining and instrumental activities of daily living. The Gerontologist, 9(3 Part 1), 179–186. https://doi.org/10.1093/geront/9.3_part_1.179

13.

Lin

K.-c.

C.-y.

Hsieh

C.-j.

(2011). Assessing the stroke-specific quality of life for outcome measurement in stroke rehabilitation: Minimal detectable change and clinically important difference. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 9(1), 5–8. https://doi.org/10.1186/1477-7525-9-5

14.

Manuli

Maggio

M. G.

Latella

Cannavò

Balletta

De Luca

Naro

Calabrò

R. S.

Calabrò

R. S.

(2020). Can robotic gait rehabilitation plus virtual reality affect cognitive and behavioural outcomes in patients with chronic stroke? A randomized controlled trial involving three different protocols. Journal of Stroke and Cerebrovascular Diseases: The Official Journal of National Stroke Association, 29(8), 104994. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jstrokecerebrovasdis.2020.104994

15.

Masiero

Carraro

Ferraro

Gallina

Rossi

Rosati

(2009). Upper limb rehabilitation robotics after stroke: A perspective from the University of Padua, Italy. Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine, 41(12), 981–985. https://doi.org/10.2340/16501977-0404

16.

Moafmashhadi

Koski

(2013). Limitations for interpreting failure on individual subtests of the montreal cognitive assessment. Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry and Neurology, 26(1), 19–28. https://doi.org/10.1177/0891988712473802

17.

Muren

M. A.

Hütler

Hooper

(2008). Functional capacity and health-related quality of life in individuals post stroke. Topics in Stroke Rehabilitation, 15(1), 51–58. https://doi.org/10.1310/tsr1501-51

18.

Mustafaoglu

Erhan

Yeldan

Gunduz

Tarakci

(2020). Does robot-assisted gait training improve mobility, activities of daily living and quality of life in stroke? A single-blinded, randomized controlled trial. Acta Neurologica Belgica, 120(2), 335–344. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13760-020-01276-8

19.

Nasreddine

Z. S.

Phillips

N. A.

Bédirian

Charbonneau

Whitehead

Collin

Cummings

J. L.

Chertkow

(2005). The montreal cognitive assessment, MoCA: A brief screening tool for mild cognitive impairment. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 53(4), 695–699. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-5415.2005.53221.x

20.

Park

Chung

(2018). The effects of robot-assisted gait training using virtual reality and auditory stimulation on balance and gait abilities in persons with stroke. NeuroRehabilitation, 43(2), 227–235. https://doi.org/10.3233/NRE-172415

21.

Seshadri

Wolf

P. A.

(2007). Lifetime risk of stroke and dementia: Current concepts, and estimates from the Framingham study. The Lancet Neurology, 6(12), 1106–1114. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1474-4422(07)70291-0

22.

Snaphaan

de Leeuw

F.-E.

(2007). Poststroke memory function in nondemented patients: A systematic review on frequency and neuroimaging correlates. Stroke, 38(1), 198–203. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.STR.0000251842.34322.8f

23.

Ursin

M. H.

Bergland

Fure

Tørstad

Tveit

Ihle-Hansen

(2015). Balance and mobility as predictors of post-stroke cognitive impairment. Dementia and Geriatric Cognitive Disorders Extra, 5(2), 203–211. https://doi.org/10.1159/000381669

24.

Van Mierlo

M. L.

Van Heugten

C. M.

Post

M. W.

Hajos

T. R.

Kappelle

L. J.

Visser-Meily

J. M.

(2016). Quality of life during the first two years post stroke: The Restore4Stroke cohort study. Cerebrovascular Diseases, 41(2), 19–26. https://doi.org/10.1159/000441197

25.

van Nunen

M. P.

Gerrits

K. H.

Konijnenbelt

Janssen

T. W.

de Haan

(2015). Recovery of walking ability using a robotic device in subacute stroke patients: A randomized controlled study. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology, 10(2), 141–148. https://doi.org/10.3109/17483107.2013.873489

26.

Veerbeek

J. M.

Kwakkel

van Wegen

E. E.

Ket

J. C.

Heymans

M. W.

(2011). Early prediction of outcome of activities of daily living after stroke: A systematic review. Stroke, 42(5), 1482–1488. https://doi.org/10.1161/STROKEAHA.110.604090

27.

Virani

S. S.

Alonso

Aparicio

H. J.

Benjamin

E. J.

Bittencourt

M. S.

Callaway

C. W.

Carson

A. P.

Chamberlain

A. M.

Cheng

Delling

F. N.

Elkind

M. S. V.

Evenson

K. R.

Ferguson

J. F.

Gupta

D. K.

Khan

S. S.

Kissela

B. M.

Knutson

K. L.

Lee

C. D.

Lewis

T. T.

Tsao

C. W.

(2021). Heart disease and stroke statistics-2021 update: A report from the American heart association. Circulation, 143(8), e254–e743. https://doi.org/10.1161/cir.0000000000000950