Related Experiment Video
Updated: Apr 22, 2026
06:00
A Rehabilitation Program of Exoskeleton-assisted Body Weight-Supported Treadmill Training with Non-immersive Virtual Reality for Stroke Patients
Published on: May 16, 2025
1.5K
Clinical Effectiveness of Immersive Virtual Reality Exercise Interventions: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of
Riley C C Brown1, Megan H Ross1, Trevor G Russell1
1RECOVER Injury Research Centre, The University of Queensland, Level 7, Surgical Treatment and Rehabilitation Services (STARS), Herston, Queensland, 4029, Australia, 61 33655560.
Journal of Medical Internet Research
|April 20, 2026
Summary
Immersive virtual reality (IVR) exercise shows no significant clinical effectiveness compared to other interventions. More high-quality trials are needed to confirm IVR
Area of Science:
- Exercise science
- Rehabilitation medicine
- Virtual reality applications
Background:
- Physical inactivity is a global health issue, with few adults meeting exercise guidelines.
- Immersive virtual reality (IVR) offers a novel approach to exercise delivery.
- Understanding IVR's clinical effectiveness and feasibility is crucial for healthcare providers.
Purpose of the Study:
- To systematically review and assess the clinical effectiveness of IVR interventions using aerobic or anaerobic exercise.
- To synthesize evidence from randomized controlled trials across diverse populations and health conditions.
Main Methods:
- Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from major databases up to January 2026.
- Included participants with acute/chronic conditions, post-surgery, and older adults.
- Assessed risk of bias and certainty of evidence using established tools.
Main Results:
- Twenty-six trials (846 participants) were included; 23 progressed to meta-analysis.
- No statistically significant differences were found between IVR and comparator interventions for mobility, balance, strength, or quality of life.
- High heterogeneity and risk of bias led to low to very low certainty of evidence for most outcomes.
Conclusions:
- Initial evidence suggests IVR exercise may not differ significantly from comparator interventions in clinical effectiveness.
- High heterogeneity and bias limit confidence in current findings.
- Future trials require robust methodology to verify IVR's applicability for improving health outcomes.
