A Systematic Review on the Usability of Robotic and Virtual Reality Devices in Neuromotor Rehabilitation: Patients' and Healthcare Professionals' Perspective

Overview

Journal BMC Health Serv Res

Publisher Biomed Central

Specialty Health Services

Date 2022 Apr 21

PMID 35443710

Authors

Francesco Zanatta

Anna Giardini

Antonia Pierobon

Marco DAddario

Patrizia Steca

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Background: The application of virtual reality (VR) and robotic devices in neuromotor rehabilitation has provided promising evidence in terms of efficacy, so far. Usability evaluations of these technologies have been conducted extensively, but no overviews on this topic have been reported yet.

Methods: A systematic review of the studies on patients' and healthcare professionals' perspective through searching of PubMed, Medline, Scopus, Web of Science, CINAHL, and PsychINFO (2000 to 2021) was conducted. Descriptive data regarding the study design, participants, technological devices, interventions, and quantitative and qualitative usability evaluations were extracted and meta-synthetized.

Results: Sixty-eight studies were included. VR devices were perceived as having good usability and as a tool promoting patients' engagement and motivation during the treatment, as well as providing strong potential for customized rehabilitation sessions. By contrast, they suffered from the effect of learnability and were judged as potentially requiring more mental effort. Robotics implementation received positive feedback along with high satisfaction and perceived safety throughout the treatment. Robot-assisted rehabilitation was considered useful as it supported increased treatment intensity and contributed to improved patients' physical independence and psychosocial well-being. Technical and design-related issues may limit the applicability making the treatment difficult and physically straining. Moreover, cognitive and communication deficits were remarked as potential barriers.

Conclusions: Overall, VR and robotic devices have been perceived usable so far, reflecting good acceptance in neuromotor rehabilitation programs. The limitations raised by the participants should be considered to further improve devices applicability and maximise technological rehabilitation effectiveness.

Trial Registration: PROSPERO registration ref. CRD42021224141 .

Citing Articles

Design and usability evaluation of an immersive virtual reality mirrored hand system for upper limb stroke rehabilitation.

Hsieh Y, Howe T, Lee M, Tai R, Chen C Sci Rep. 2025; 15(1):5781.

PMID: 39962160 PMC: 11832774. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-025-90698-6.

Exergame (ExerG)-Based Physical-Cognitive Training for Rehabilitation in Adults With Motor and Balance Impairments: Usability Study.

Herren S, Seebacher B, Mildner S, Riederer Y, Pachmann U, Bockler N JMIR Serious Games. 2025; 13:e66515.

PMID: 39951650 PMC: 11844876. DOI: 10.2196/66515.

Exploring New Tools in Upper Limb Rehabilitation After Stroke Using an Exoskeletal Aid: A Pilot Randomized Control Study.

Syringas P, Potsika V, Tachos N, Pardalis A, Papaioannou C, Mitsis A Healthcare (Basel). 2025; 13(1.

PMID: 39791698 PMC: 11719926. DOI: 10.3390/healthcare13010091.

Virtual Obstacle Avoidance Strategy: Navigating through a Complex Environment While Interacting with Virtual and Physical Elements.

Machado F, Loureiro M, Bezerra M, Zimerer C, Mello R, Frizera A Sensors (Basel). 2024; 24(19).

PMID: 39409252 PMC: 11479164. DOI: 10.3390/s24196212.

Digital technologies for pediatric rehabilitation: current access and use in the European Rehatech4child survey.

Mensah-Gourmel J, Bekteshi S, Brochard S, Monbaliu E, Grigoriu A, Newman C Eur J Phys Rehabil Med. 2024; 60(6):970-979.

PMID: 39387853 PMC: 11729705. DOI: 10.23736/S1973-9087.24.08559-9.

References

Van Den Berg M, Sherrington C, Killington M, Smith S, Bongers B, Hassett L . Video and computer-based interactive exercises are safe and improve task-specific balance in geriatric and neurological rehabilitation: a randomised trial. J Physiother. 2015; 62(1):20-8. DOI: 10.1016/j.jphys.2015.11.005. View

Vaughan-Graham J, Brooks D, Rose L, Nejat G, Pons J, Patterson K . Exoskeleton use in post-stroke gait rehabilitation: a qualitative study of the perspectives of persons post-stroke and physiotherapists. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2020; 17(1):123. PMC: 7488039. DOI: 10.1186/s12984-020-00750-x. View

Tousignant M, Boissy P, Moffet H, Corriveau H, Cabana F, Marquis F . Patients' satisfaction of healthcare services and perception with in-home telerehabilitation and physiotherapists' satisfaction toward technology for post-knee arthroplasty: an embedded study in a randomized trial. Telemed J E Health. 2011; 17(5):376-82. DOI: 10.1089/tmj.2010.0198. View

Thomas J, Harden A . Methods for the thematic synthesis of qualitative research in systematic reviews. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2008; 8:45. PMC: 2478656. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2288-8-45. View

Maier M, Ballester B, Duff A, Duarte Oller E, Verschure P . Effect of Specific Over Nonspecific VR-Based Rehabilitation on Poststroke Motor Recovery: A Systematic Meta-analysis. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2019; 33(2):112-129. PMC: 6376608. DOI: 10.1177/1545968318820169. View

Eicher C, Haesner M, Spranger M, Kuzmicheva O, Graser A, Steinhagen-Thiessen E . Usability and acceptability by a younger and older user group regarding a mobile robot-supported gait rehabilitation system. Assist Technol. 2017; 31(1):25-33. DOI: 10.1080/10400435.2017.1352051. View

Radder B, Prange-Lasonder G, Kottink A, Holmberg J, Sletta K, van Dijk M . The effect of a wearable soft-robotic glove on motor function and functional performance of older adults. Assist Technol. 2018; 32(1):9-15. DOI: 10.1080/10400435.2018.1453888. View

Resquin F, Gonzalez-Vargas J, Ibanez J, Brunetti F, Dimbwadyo I, Carrasco L . Adaptive hybrid robotic system for rehabilitation of reaching movement after a brain injury: a usability study. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2017; 14(1):104. PMC: 5639749. DOI: 10.1186/s12984-017-0312-4. View

Cieza A, Causey K, Kamenov K, Wulf Hanson S, Chatterji S, Vos T . Global estimates of the need for rehabilitation based on the Global Burden of Disease study 2019: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019. Lancet. 2020; 396(10267):2006-2017. PMC: 7811204. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)32340-0. View

10.

Glasgow R, Lichtenstein E, Marcus A . Why don't we see more translation of health promotion research to practice? Rethinking the efficacy-to-effectiveness transition. Am J Public Health. 2003; 93(8):1261-7. PMC: 1447950. DOI: 10.2105/ajph.93.8.1261. View

11.

Luker J, Lynch E, Bernhardsson S, Bennett L, Bernhardt J . Stroke Survivors' Experiences of Physical Rehabilitation: A Systematic Review of Qualitative Studies. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2015; 96(9):1698-708.e10. DOI: 10.1016/j.apmr.2015.03.017. View

12.

McCambridge A, Elkins M . If we can't see race and ethnicity in research, how will we see racial inequality?. J Physiother. 2021; 67(2):82-83. DOI: 10.1016/j.jphys.2021.02.016. View

13.

Calabro R, Muller-Eising C, Diliberti M, Manuli A, Parrinello F, Rao G . Who Will Pay for Robotic Rehabilitation? The Growing Need for a Cost-effectiveness Analysis. Innov Clin Neurosci. 2021; 17(10-12):14-16. PMC: 7819581. View

14.

Simkins M, Fedulow I, Kim H, Abrams G, Byl N, Rosen J . Robotic Rehabilitation Game Design for Chronic Stroke. Games Health J. 2015; 1(6):422-30. DOI: 10.1089/g4h.2012.0044. View

15.

Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman D . Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med. 2009; 6(7):e1000097. PMC: 2707599. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097. View

16.

Baus O, Bouchard S . Moving from virtual reality exposure-based therapy to augmented reality exposure-based therapy: a review. Front Hum Neurosci. 2014; 8:112. PMC: 3941080. DOI: 10.3389/fnhum.2014.00112. View

17.

Guidali M, Duschau-Wicke A, Broggi S, Klamroth-Marganska V, Nef T, Riener R . A robotic system to train activities of daily living in a virtual environment. Med Biol Eng Comput. 2011; 49(10):1213-23. DOI: 10.1007/s11517-011-0809-0. View

18.

Valdes B, Van der Loos H . Biofeedback vs. game scores for reducing trunk compensation after stroke: a randomized crossover trial. Top Stroke Rehabil. 2017; 25(2):96-113. DOI: 10.1080/10749357.2017.1394633. View

19.

Yeh S, Lee S, Chan R, Wu Y, Zheng L, Flynn S . The Efficacy of a Haptic-Enhanced Virtual Reality System for Precision Grasp Acquisition in Stroke Rehabilitation. J Healthc Eng. 2017; 2017:9840273. PMC: 5694569. DOI: 10.1155/2017/9840273. View

20.

Lledo L, Diez J, Bertomeu-Motos A, Ezquerro S, Badesa F, Sabater-Navarro J . A Comparative Analysis of 2D and 3D Tasks for Virtual Reality Therapies Based on Robotic-Assisted Neurorehabilitation for Post-stroke Patients. Front Aging Neurosci. 2016; 8:205. PMC: 4999455. DOI: 10.3389/fnagi.2016.00205. View