Naturalistic visualization of reaching movements using head-mounted displays improves movement quality compared to conventional computer screens and proves high usability

Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation

Research

René M. Müri¹  Nicolas Wenk²  Joaquin Penalver-Andres²  Karin A. Buetler²  Laura Marchal-Crespo³ 

[1] Gerontechnology and Rehabilitation, ARTORG Center for Biomedical Engineering Research, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland;Department of Neurology, University Neurorehabilitation, University Hospital Bern (Inselspital), University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland;Motor Learning and Neurorehabilitation Laboratory, ARTORG Center for Biomedical Engineering Research, University of Bern, Freiburgstrasse 3, 3010, Bern, Switzerland;Motor Learning and Neurorehabilitation Laboratory, ARTORG Center for Biomedical Engineering Research, University of Bern, Freiburgstrasse 3, 3010, Bern, Switzerland;Department of Cognitive Robotics, Delft University of Technology, Mekelweg 2, 2628 CD, Delft, The Netherlands;

关键词: Virtual reality;    Augmented reality;    Head-mounted display;    Neurorehabilitation;    Movement quality;    Cognitive load;    Motivation;    Usability;    Stroke;   

DOI  :  10.1186/s12984-022-01101-8

 received in 2022-06-12, accepted in 2022-10-25,  发布年份 2022

来源: Springer

【 摘 要 】

BackgroundThe relearning of movements after brain injury can be optimized by providing intensive, meaningful, and motivating training using virtual reality (VR). However, most current solutions use two-dimensional (2D) screens, where patients interact via symbolic representations of their limbs (e.g., a cursor). These 2D screens lack depth cues, potentially deteriorating movement quality and increasing cognitive load. Head-mounted displays (HMDs) have great potential to provide naturalistic movement visualization by incorporating improved depth cues, reduce visuospatial transformations by rendering movements in the space where they are performed, and preserve eye-hand coordination by showing an avatar—with immersive VR (IVR)—or the user’s real body—with augmented reality (AR). However, elderly populations might not find these novel technologies usable, hampering potential motor and cognitive benefits.MethodsWe compared movement quality, cognitive load, motivation, and system usability in twenty elderly participants (>59 years old) while performing a dual motor-cognitive task with different visualization technologies: IVR HMD, AR HMD, and a 2D screen. We evaluated participants’ self-reported cognitive load, motivation, and usability using questionnaires. We also conducted a pilot study with five brain-injured patients comparing the visualization technologies while using an assistive device.ResultsElderly participants performed straighter, shorter duration, and smoother movements when the task was visualized with the HMDs than screen. The IVR HMD led to shorter duration movements than AR. Movement onsets were shorter with IVR than AR, and shorter for both HMDs than the screen, potentially indicating facilitated reaction times due to reduced cognitive load. No differences were found in the questionnaires regarding cognitive load, motivation, or usability between technologies in elderly participants. Both HMDs proved high usability in our small sample of patients.ConclusionsHMDs are a promising technology to be incorporated into neurorehabilitation, as their more naturalistic movement visualization improves movement quality compared to conventional screens. HMDs demonstrate high usability, without decreasing participants’ motivation, and might potentially lower cognitive load. Our preliminary clinical results suggest that brain-injured patients may especially benefit from more immersive technologies. However, larger patient samples are needed to draw stronger conclusions.**

【 授权许可】

CC BY   
© The Author(s) 2022

【 图 表 】

Fig. 3

Fig. 3

Fig. 3

Fig. 2

Fig. 2

Fig. 3

13731_2022_257_Article_IEq12.gif

13731_2022_257_Article_IEq9.gif

13731_2022_257_Article_IEq7.gif

Fig. 2

Fig. 1

13731_2022_257_Article_IEq4.gif

Fig. 3

13731_2022_257_Article_IEq2.gif

Fig. 3

Fig. 1

Fig. 6

Fig. 5

Fig. 2

Fig. 2

Fig. 5

Fig. 1

Fig. 1

Fig. 1

Fig. 1

40708_2022_178_Article_IEq64.gif

Fig. 2

Fig. 1

Fig. 1

Fig.5

Fig. 5

Fig. 4

Fig. 2

Fig. 5

Fig. 3

40708_2022_178_Article_IEq39.gif

Fig. 2

Fig. 2

Fig. 2