Effectiveness of virtual reality training compared to balance-specific training and conventional training on balance and gross motor functions of children with cerebral palsy: A double blinded randomized controlled trial
Hussein Ziab,Soha Saleh,Saeed Talebian,Golamreza Olyaei,Rami Mazbouh,Ahmad Rifai Sarraj,Mohamad Reza Hadian
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3233/PRM-220120
2024-08-16
Abstract:Purpose: The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical efficacy of a virtual reality rehabilitation-based training (VRT) with balance-specific training (BST) and conventional training (CT) on the balance and gross motor functions (GMF) of children with cerebral palsy (CwCP). Methods: This study was a double blinded, randomized controlled trial. Participants were recruited from different CP rehabilitation centers and clinics and were then randomly allocated using the block randomization method into three groups: (1) group 1 (VRT using a set of Xbox 360 games that triggered balance), (2) group 2 (BST applying a protocol of 13 exercises to enhance balance in different conditions), and (3) control group 3 (CT using traditional physiotherapy techniques). All groups received 18 sessions over six weeks, three sessions per week, each lasting 60 minutes. Participants were assessed at three timepoints (baseline, post-treatment, and follow-up) using the Pediatric Balance Scale (PBS), the Gross Motor Function Measure (GMFM D & E), the Five Times Sit-To-Stand Test, and upper and lower segments' center of mass (COM) displacement (UCOM and LCOM). Results: A total of 46 CwCP participated in this study. The repeated measures ANOVA revealed a statistically significant difference between groups in the dependent variables, except for the GMFM (D & E) and the PBS (p < 0.05 and partial η2 = 0.473). The post-hoc test showed a statistically significant difference in favor of the VRT group compared to other groups in terms of right UCOM (p < 0.05) with a large effect size of the time*group interaction (partial η2 = 0.87). Moreover, there was a statistically significant effect of time (i.e., baseline to post-treatment and baseline to follow-up) with F (18, 23) = 59.954, p < 0.05, Wilks' lambda = 0.021, partial η2 = 0.979. Conclusion: The findings revealed that VRT was not superior to BST in the rehabilitation of balance and GMF in CwCP aged four to 12 years. However, when compared to CT, better results were reported. Furthermore, it appears that customized programs lead to greater improvements in balance than commercial programs. Future studies are needed to assess the physiological effects of the three types of rehabilitation interventions using more advanced measurement tools, such as functional magnetic resonance imaging, following VRT protocols.