Virtual reality for post-stroke limb rehabilitation:an overview of systematic reviews
10.3761/j.issn.0254-1769.2025.17.017
- VernacularTitle:虚拟现实技术对脑卒中患者肢体康复干预效果的系统评价再评价
- Author:
Hongwei YANG
1
;
Juan WANG
;
Hui JI
;
Zhongjian LI
;
Binghua LAN
;
Xueying LI
Author Information
1. 671000 云南省大理市大理大学护理学院
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
Stroke;
Virtual Reality;
Limb Rehabilitation;
Overview of Systematic Reviews;
Evidence-Based Nursing
- From:
Chinese Journal of Nursing
2025;60(17):2150-2157
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective To re-evaluate systematic reviews on the application of virtual reality(VR)technology in limb rehabilitation for stroke patients,providing evidence to support the implementation of VR.Methods Systematic searches were conducted in Web of Science,PubMed,CINAHL,Cochrane Library,Embase,CNKI,CBM,WanFang,and VIP databases from their inception until March 2025,identifying systematic reviews/meta-analyses investigating VR for limb rehabilitation in stroke patients.2 researchers independently screened the literature.Methodological quality was evaluated using the Assessment of Mutiple System Reviews 2(AMSTAR 2)tool;reporting quality was evaluated according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses(PRISMA)guidelines;evidence quality was graded using the Grades of Recommendations Assessment,Development,and Evaluation(GRADE)system;literature overlap was assessed using the Corrected Covered Area(CCA)method.Results A total of 15 articles were included.According to AMSTAR 2,totally 3 reviews were of moderate quality,while the remainder were rated as low or very low quality.PRISMA scores ranged from 19.5 to 27.0 points.Based on GRADE,a review was classified as high quality,6 as moderate quality,and the remainder as low or very low quality.The CCA was 5.3％,indicating slight overlap.Conclusion VR contributes to the improvement of indicators such as upper limb motor function/mobility and lower limb balance in stroke patients.However,methodological limitations,including weak control of bias and inadequate handling of heterogeneity among included studies,restrict the overall quality of evidence.Further standardized,high-quality studies are needed to provide more reliable evidence to support clinical decision-making.
