Effects of a Virtual Reality Cycling Platform on Lower Limb Rehabilitation in Patients With Ataxia and Hemiparesis:
Ana Rojo1,2, Arantxa Castrillo Calvillo3, Cristina López3
1Departamento de Tecnologías de la Información, Escuela Politécnica Superior, Universidad San Pablo-CEU, CEU Universities, Madrid, Spain.
Background:
New interventions based on motor learning principles and neural plasticity have been tested among patients with ataxia and hemiparesis. Therapies of pedaling exercises have also shown their potential to induce improvements in muscle activity, strength, and balance. Virtual reality (VR) has been demonstrated as an effective tool for improving the adherence to physical therapy, but it is still undetermined if it promotes greater improvements than conventional therapy.
Objective:
Our objective was to compare the effect on lower limb range of motion (ROM) when using VR technology for cycling exercise versus not using VR technology.
Methods:
A randomized controlled trial with 20 patients with ataxia and hemiparesis was carried out. The participants were divided into 2 groups: the experimental group (n=10, 50%) performed pedaling exercises using the VR system and the control group (n=10, 50%) performed pedaling exercises without using VR. Measurements of the active and passive ROM of the hip and knee joint were taken before and after a cycling intervention, which consisted of 3 sessions of the same duration but with progressively increasing speeds (4, 5, and 6 km/h). Repeated measures ANOVAs were conducted to compare the preintervention (Ti) and postintervention (Te) assessments within each group. Additionally, the improvement effect of using the VR system was analyzed by comparing the variation coefficient (Δ = 1 - [Te / Ti]) between the preintervention and postintervention assessments for each group. Group comparisons were made using independent 1-tailed t tests.
Results:
Significant improvements were shown in active left hip flexion (P=.03) over time, but there was no group-time interaction effect (P=.67). Passive left hip flexion (P=.93) did not show significant improvements, and similar results were observed for active and passive right hip flexion (P=.39 and P=.83, respectively). Neither assessments of knee flexion (active left: P=.06; passive left: P=.76; active right: P=.34; passive right: P=.06) nor knee extension showed significant changes (active left: P=.66; passive left: P=.92; active right: P=.12; passive right: P=.38). However, passive right knee extension (P=.04) showed a significant improvement over time. Overall, although active and passive ROM of the knee and hip joints showed a general improvement, no statistically significant differences were found between the groups.
Conclusions:
In this study, participants who underwent the cycling intervention using the VR system showed similar improvement in lower limb ROM to the participants who underwent conventional training. Ultimately, the VR system can be used to engage participants in physical activity.
