Compliance with Upper Limb Home-Based Exergaming Interventions for Stroke Patients: A Narrative Review.
Journal
Journal of rehabilitation medicine
ISSN: 1651-2081
Titre abrégé: J Rehabil Med
Pays: Sweden
ID NLM: 101088169
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
24 Nov 2022
24 Nov 2022
Historique:
pubmed:
18
8
2022
medline:
26
11
2022
entrez:
17
8
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Telerehabilitation and follow-up techniques have been developed in recent years to assess the effectiveness of diverse intervention programmes that include exergaming technologies. For patients with upper limb impairment after stroke, motion-gaming technologies can provide effective and amusing training. Beyond efficiency, professionals must analyse patient compliance with the system for self-use at home, because patients may or may not independently perform the exercises prescribed by the therapist. Questions on the sustainable use of this type of home exercise also arise. This review examines user compliance with exercise programmes, measured according to the training rate (percentage of prescribed sessions and minutes completed) and completion rate (number of drop-outs and discontinued interventions) reported or calculable according to the data collected. Rates of compliance with training were relatively high. No group effect on compliance was found. Drop-out and discontinued intervention rates were either due to external causes or directly related to the technologies. Some studies have reported the use of supervision, most of them through home visits and remote support. Few studies performed long-term follow-up, which could provide information to help broaden practices. This narrative review considers how this field of research may evolve in the future.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Telerehabilitation and follow-up techniques have been developed in recent years to assess the effectiveness of diverse intervention programmes that include exergaming technologies. For patients with upper limb impairment after stroke, motion-gaming technologies can provide effective and amusing training. Beyond efficiency, professionals must analyse patient compliance with the system for self-use at home, because patients may or may not independently perform the exercises prescribed by the therapist. Questions on the sustainable use of this type of home exercise also arise.
OBJECTIVE
OBJECTIVE
This review examines user compliance with exercise programmes, measured according to the training rate (percentage of prescribed sessions and minutes completed) and completion rate (number of drop-outs and discontinued interventions) reported or calculable according to the data collected.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
CONCLUSIONS
Rates of compliance with training were relatively high. No group effect on compliance was found. Drop-out and discontinued intervention rates were either due to external causes or directly related to the technologies. Some studies have reported the use of supervision, most of them through home visits and remote support. Few studies performed long-term follow-up, which could provide information to help broaden practices. This narrative review considers how this field of research may evolve in the future.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35976767
doi: 10.2340/jrm.v54.2270
pmc: PMC9706874
doi:
Types de publication
Review
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
jrm00325Références
Games Health J. 2015 Feb;4(1):58-62
pubmed: 26181682
Disabil Rehabil. 2017 Apr;39(8):727-735
pubmed: 27108475
Phys Ther. 2015 Mar;95(3):350-9
pubmed: 25212521
J Telemed Telecare. 2008;14(5):257-60
pubmed: 18633001
Top Stroke Rehabil. 2011 May-Jun;18(3):277-84
pubmed: 21642065
Clin Rehabil. 2013 Jan;27(1):75-81
pubmed: 22801472
J Rehabil Assist Technol Eng. 2019 Mar 18;6:2055668319831631
pubmed: 31245031
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2015 Mar;96(3):418-425.e2
pubmed: 25448245
Top Stroke Rehabil. 2007 Mar-Apr;14(2):52-61
pubmed: 17517575
Lancet Neurol. 2021 Oct;20(10):795-820
pubmed: 34487721
Stroke. 2016 Jun;47(6):e98-e169
pubmed: 27145936
Assist Technol. 2016 Fall;28(3):175-82
pubmed: 26852630
Nurs Sci Q. 2020 Oct;33(4):358-360
pubmed: 32940158
Br J Health Psychol. 2013 May;18(2):296-309
pubmed: 23480428
Games Health J. 2019 Dec;8(6):432-438
pubmed: 31769724
J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2016 Feb 27;13:18
pubmed: 26921185
Top Stroke Rehabil. 2020 Jul;27(5):321-336
pubmed: 31875775
JAMA. 2006 Nov 1;296(17):2095-104
pubmed: 17077374
Technol Health Care. 2015;23(2):143-51
pubmed: 25425584
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2020 Feb;101(2):196-203
pubmed: 31715140
Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2019 Nov;33(11):959-969
pubmed: 31674274
Clin Rehabil. 2017 Feb;31(2):207-216
pubmed: 26869596
Ann Phys Rehabil Med. 2019 Sep;62(5):366-378
pubmed: 31078706
Clin Rehabil. 2015 Mar;29(3):295-305
pubmed: 25125442
J Rehabil Med. 2018 Jul 17;50(7):598-606
pubmed: 30003268
Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2020 Jul;99(7):582
pubmed: 32404640
Top Stroke Rehabil. 2011 Jan-Feb;18(1):30-4
pubmed: 21371977
J Med Internet Res. 2018 Oct 26;20(10):e10867
pubmed: 30368437
Int J Telerehabil. 2017 Nov 20;9(2):63-68
pubmed: 29238450
JAMA Neurol. 2019 Sep 01;76(9):1079-1087
pubmed: 31233135
J Med Internet Res. 2005 Mar 31;7(1):e11
pubmed: 15829473
Med Biol Eng Comput. 2020 Jul;58(7):1529-1547
pubmed: 32405968
J Rehabil Res Dev. 2016;53(3):321-34
pubmed: 27271199
Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2017 Oct-Nov;31(10-11):923-933
pubmed: 29072556
J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2016 Aug 11;13(1):75
pubmed: 27515583
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2002 Aug;83(8):1035-42
pubmed: 12161823
Behav Res Ther. 2018 May;104:14-33
pubmed: 29477890
J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2018 Oct 5;15(1):88
pubmed: 30290777
Int J Stroke. 2015 Dec;10(8):1253-60
pubmed: 26332338
J Telemed Telecare. 2011;17(1):1-6
pubmed: 21097560
Lancet Neurol. 2009 Aug;8(8):741-54
pubmed: 19608100
Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2019 Feb;33(2):112-129
pubmed: 30700224
Biomed Tech (Berl). 2011 Feb;56(1):5-9
pubmed: 21117891
Top Stroke Rehabil. 2020 Mar;27(2):81-92
pubmed: 31682789
Stroke. 2004 Nov;35(11):2529-39
pubmed: 15472114