A feature and conjunction visual search immersive virtual reality serious game for measuring spatial and distractor inhibition attention using response time and action kinematics

BACKGROUND

Treisman (1980) proposed that visual-spatial attention to targets presented with distractors involves parallel and serial cognition. When the target is different from distractors by a single feature, the number of distractors does not influence search speed (parallel). However, when the target is different from the distractor by a conjunction of features, increased numbers of distractors increase task difficulty (serial). Here, we developed a serious game in immersive virtual reality (IVR) for evaluating spatial and distractor inhibition attention.

METHODS

We tested 60 healthy participants. They performed the serious game in which they had to find a target mole wearing a red miner's helmet. In the single feature parallel conditions, the distractor moles wore blue (miner's or horned) helmets, and in the conjunction feature serial conditions, the distractor moles wore blue miner's helmets or red horned helmets. There were 11-17-23 distractors. Responses were made with the dominant hand by hitting the target with a virtual hammer. We measured mean response time (RT), mean velocity (MV) and coefficient of variance of speed (CV).

RESULTS

Participants were significantly slower (RT and MV) and showed greater CV when responding to targets in conjunction compared to single feature search tasks. Further, participants were slower (RT and MV) and showed greater CV when the number of distractors increased. A significant interaction between search tasks and distractors showed that RT and CV only increased with distractor number for the conjunction search tasks. MV decreased with distractor number for both single and conjunction tasks, with a stronger decrease for conjunction relative to single feature search.

CONCLUSION

The results replicated previous findings, providing support for the use of immersive virtual reality technology for the simultaneous evaluation of spatial and distractor inhibition attention using complex 3D objects.

Performing a shortened version of the Action Research Arm Test in immersive virtual reality to assess post-stroke upper limb activity

BACKGROUND

To plan treatment and measure post-stroke recovery, frequent and time-bounded functional assessments are recommended. With increasing needs for neurorehabilitation advances, new technology based methods, such as virtual reality (VR) have emerged. Here, we developed an immersive VR version of the Action Research Arm Test (ARAT-VR) to complement neurorehabilitation.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to assess the validity, usability and test-retest reliability of the ARAT-VR among individuals with stroke, healthcare professionals and healthy control subjects (HCS).

METHODS

Among the 19 items of the ARAT, 13 items were selected and developed in immersive VR. 11 healthcare professionals, 30 individuals with stroke, and 25 HCS were recruited. Content validity was assessed by asking healthcare professionals to rate the difficulty of performing each item of the ARAT-VR in comparison to the classical Action Research Arm Test (ARAT-19). Concurrent validity was first measured using correlation (Spearman tests) between the ARAT-VR and ARAT-19 scores for the individuals with stroke, and second through correlation and comparison between the scores of the ARAT-VR and the reduced version of the ARAT (ARAT-13) for both individuals with stroke and HCS (Wilcoxon signed rank tests and Bland-Altman plots). Usability was measured using the System Usability Scale. A part of individuals with stroke and HCS were re-tested following a convenient delay to measure test-retest reliability (Intra-class correlation and Wilcoxon tests).

RESULTS

Regarding the content validity, median difficulty of the 13 ARAT-VR items (0[0 to - 1] to 0[0-1]) evaluated by healthcare professionals was rated as equivalent to the classical ARAT for all tasks except those involving the marbles. For these, the difficulty was rated as superior to the real tasks (1[0-1] when pinching with the thumb-index and thumb-middle fingers, and 1[0-2] when pinching with thumb-ring finger). Regarding the concurrent validity, for paretic hand scores, there were strong correlations between the ARAT-VR and ARAT-13 (r = 0.84), and between the ARAT-VR and ARAT-19 (r = 0.83). Usability (SUS = 82.5[75-90]) and test-retest reliability (ICC = 0.99; p < 0.001) were excellent.

CONCLUSION

The ARAT-VR is a valid, usable and reliable tool that can be used to assess upper limb activity among individuals with stroke, providing potential to increase assessment frequency, remote evaluation, and improve neurorehabilitation. Trial registration https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04694833 ; Unique identifier: NCT04694833, Date of registration: 11/24/2020.

Concurrent validity of an immersive virtual reality version of the Box and Block Test to assess manual dexterity among patients with stroke

Background

After a stroke, experts recommend regular monitoring and kinematic assessments of patients to objectively measure motor recovery. With the rise of new technologies and increasing needs for neurorehabilitation, an interest in virtual reality has emerged. In this context, we have developed an immersive virtual reality version of the Box and Block Test (BBT-VR). The aim of this study was to assess the concurrent validity of the BBT-VR among patients with stroke and healthy participants.

Methods

Twenty-three healthy participants and 22 patients with stroke were asked to perform the classical Box and Block Test (BBT) and BBT-VR three times with both hands. Concurrent validity was assessed through correlations between these two tests and reliability of the BBT-VR through correlation on test–retest. Usability of the BBT-VR was also evaluated with the System Usability Scale. Hand kinematic data extracted from controller’s 3D position allowed to compute mean velocity (V_mean), peak velocity (V_peak) and smoothness (SPARC).

Results

Results showed strong correlations between the number of blocks displaced with the BBT and the BBT-VR among patients with stroke for affected (r = 0.89; p < 0.001) and less-affected hands (r = 0.76; p < 0.001) and healthy participants for dominant (r = 0.58; p < 0.01) and non-dominant hands (r = 0.68; p < 0.001). Reliability for test–retest was excellent (ICC > 0.8; p < 0.001) and usability almost excellent (System Usability Scale = 79 ± 12.34%). On average participants moved between 30 and 40% less blocks during the BBT-VR than during the BBT. Healthy participants demonstrated significantly higher kinematic measures (V_mean = 0.22 ± 0.086 ms⁻¹; V_peak = 0.96 ± 0.341 ms⁻¹; SPARC = − 3.31 ± 0.862) than patients with stroke (V_mean = 0.12 ± 0.052 ms⁻¹; V_peak = 0.60 ± 0.202 ms⁻¹; SPARC = − 5.04[− 7.050 to − 3.682]).

Conclusion

The BBT-VR is a usable, valid and reliable test to assess manual dexterity, providing kinematic parameters, in a population of patients with stroke and healthy participants.

Trial registration http://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT04694833, Date of registration: 11/24/2020

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12984-022-00981-0.

Self-Rehabilitation for Post-Stroke Motor Function and Activity-A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background. Due to an increasing stroke incidence, a lack of resources to implement effective rehabilitation and a significant proportion of patients with remaining impairments after treatment, there is a rise in demand for effective and prolonged rehabilitation. Development of self-rehabilitation programs provides an opportunity to meet these increasing demands.Objective. The primary aim of this meta-analysis was to determine the effect of self-rehabilitation on motor outcomes, in comparison to conventional rehabilitation, among patients with stroke. The secondary aim was to assess the influence of trial location (continent), technology, time since stroke (acute/subacute vs chronic), dose (total training duration > vs ≤ 15 hours), and intervention design (self-rehabilitation in addition/substitution to conventional therapy) on effect of self-rehabilitation.Methods. Studies were selected if participants were adults with stroke; the intervention consisted of a self-rehabilitation program defined as a tailored program where for most of the time, the patient performed rehabilitation exercises independently; the control group received conventional therapy; outcomes included motor function and activity; and the study was a randomized controlled trial with a PEDro score ≥5.Results. Thirty-five trials were selected (2225 participants) and included in quantitative synthesis regarding motor outcomes. Trials had a median PEDro Score of 7 [6-8]. Self-rehabilitation programs were shown to be as effective as conventional therapy. Trial location, use of technology, stroke stage, and intervention design did not appear to have a significant influence on outcomes.Conclusion. This meta-analysis showed low to moderate evidence that self-rehabilitation and conventional therapy efficacy was equally valuable for post-stroke motor function and activity.