Benefits of Telerehabilitation for Patients With Severe Acquired Brain Injury: Promising Results From a Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial Using Nonimmersive Virtual Reality (Preprint)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND In neurorehabilitation, the use of innovative technologies offers many opportunities to monitor and improve the health status of patients with severe acquired brain injury (SABI). Telerehabilitation allows for continuity of service through the entire rehabilitation cycle, including assessment, intervention, consultation, and education, affording early reintegration and positively enhancing the quality of life (QoL). OBJECTIVE The main purpose of this multicenter randomized controlled trial was to test the effectiveness of advanced training provided using a nonimmersive virtual reality rehabilitation system (ie, the VRRS HomeKit device) in improving functional outcomes in patients with SABI. METHODS In total, 40 patients with SABI and their 40 caregivers visiting 2 Italian rehabilitation centers were enrolled in the study protocol and randomized into 2 groups. Of the 40 patients, 20 (50%) underwent the experimental training using the VRRS HomeKit (teleneuro-VRRS group), whereas the other 20 (50%) were administered usual territorial rehabilitative treatments (UTRTs; control group). To investigate motor and neuropsychological functioning, patients with SABI were evaluated before (T0) and at the end of (T1) each training session by a multispecialist team through a complete clinical and psychometric battery: the Barthel Index (BI), the Tinetti Scale (TS), the Modified Ashworth Scale (MAS), the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCa), the Frontal Assessment Battery (FAB), the Beck Depression Inventory II (BDI-II), the Short Form Health Survey 36 (SF-36), and the Psychological General Well-Being Index (PGWBI). In addition, the Caregiver Burden Inventory (CBI) was administered to each caregiver to investigate the emotional burden status. RESULTS The teleneuro-VRRS group achieved a statistically significant improvement in both general and motor outcomes, as well as psychological well-being and QoL, compared to the control group. In particular, the BI (P<.001), FAB (P<.001), and BDI-II (P<.001) were the outcome scales with the best improvement. The burden of caregivers also significantly improved in the teleneuro-VRRS group (CBI; P<.004). Between-group analysis showed statistical differences in the anxiety (effect size [ES]=0.85, P<.02) and self-control (ES=0.40, P<.03) subtests of the PGWBI and in the social role functioning (ES=0.85, P<.02) subtest of the SF-36, confirmed by quite medium and large ESs. CONCLUSIONS Our results suggest that the VRRS is a suitable alternative tool or complementary tool or both to improve motor (level of functional independence) and cognitive (frontal/executive abilities) outcomes, reducing behavioral alterations (anxiety and depression symptoms) in patients with SABI, with a beneficial impact also on the caregivers’ burden distress management, mitigating distress and promoting positive aspects of caring. CLINICALTRIAL ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03709875; https://classic.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03709875
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".