Home-based virtual reality for upper limb stroke rehabilitation: supervised vs. unsupervised approaches - a systematic review with meta-analysis of unsupervised interventions.
systematic_review · Level I
Where this comes from
- Record sourced from PubMed, PMID 42176703.
- Also identified by DOI 10.1080/09638288.2026.2673294.
- No licence information is recorded for this record.
- Because redistribution is not established, this page shows the abstract only. Follow the links below for the full text.
Abstract
To evaluate the effectiveness of home-based virtual reality (VR) for upper limb recovery in stroke survivors, specifically distinguishing between supervised and unsupervised approaches. We searched PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science for randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Risk of bias was assessed using RoB 2, and certainty of evidence <i>via</i> GRADE. A narrative synthesis included all eligible studies (<i>n</i> = 7), while a meta-analysis focused on a homogeneous subgroup (<i>n</i> = 2) comparing unsupervised home-based VR to unsupervised active controls. Seven RCTs (<i>n</i> = 414) were reviewed. The meta-analysis of unsupervised trials (<i>n</i> = 291) showed no significant difference between home-based VR and active control groups (SMD = -0.06; 95% CI: -0.29 to 0.17; <i>p</i> = 0.62; I<sup>2</sup> = 0%). Conversely, narrative synthesis indicated that interventions incorporating active remote supervision consistently yielded positive outcomes. The overall certainty of evidence was "Very Low." Unsupervised home-based VR does not appear superior to conventional home exercise. though it serves as a comparable alternative when direct supervision is limited. However, interventions involving therapist supervision show promise. The "human factor" of supervision may be more critical than the technology itself, highlighting the need for future trials to clearly define supervision levels.