194 research outputs found

    Break in volition: a virtual reality study in patients with obsessive-compulsive disorder

    Get PDF
    Research in obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) produced inconsistent results in demonstrating an association between patients' symptom severity and their cognitive impairments. The process involved in volition aspects of behavioral syndromes can be extensively analyzed using specific tests developed in virtual environments, more suitable to manipulate rules and possible breaks of the normal task execution with different, confusing or stopping instructions. The study involved thirty participants (15 OCD patients and 15 controls) during task execution and the relative interferences. At this purpose, the virtual version of Multiple Errands Test was used. Virtual reality setting, with a higher ecological validity respect to a classic neuropsychological battery, allowed us to take into account deficits of volition and the relative dysexecutive functions associated with OCD patients. The proposed paradigm also allows the development of innovative prototypes of coevolving technologies based on new theories and models and deeper understanding of human behavior

    Validation of the Virtual Reality Everyday Assessment Lab (VR-EAL):An immersive virtual reality neuropsychological battery with enhanced ecological validity

    Get PDF
    International audienceObjective: The assessment of cognitive functions such as prospective memory, episodic memory, attention, and executive functions benefits from an ecologically valid approach to better understand how performance outcomes generalize to everyday life. Immersive virtual reality (VR) is considered capable of simulating real-life situations to enhance ecological validity. The present study attempted to validate the Virtual Reality Everyday Assessment Lab (VR-EAL), an immersive VR neuropsychological battery, against an extensive paper-andpencil neuropsychological battery. Methods: Forty-one participants (21 females) were recruited: 18 gamers and 23 non-gamers who attended both an immersive VR and a paper-and-pencil testing session. Bayesian Pearson correlation analyses were conducted to assess construct and convergent validity of the VR-EAL. Bayesian t-tests were performed to compare VR and paper-and-pencil testing in terms of administration time, similarity to real life tasks (i.e., ecological validity), and pleasantness. Results: VR-EAL scores were significantly correlated with their equivalent scores on the paper-and-pencil tests. The participants' reports indicated that the VR-EAL tasks were significantly more ecologically valid and pleasant than the paper-and-pencil neuropsychological battery. The VR-EAL battery also had a shorter administration time. Conclusion: The VR-EAL appears as an effective neuropsychological tool for the assessment of everyday cognitive functions, which has enhanced ecological validity, a highly pleasant testing experience, and does not induce cybersickness

    Comparing adaptive cognitive training in virtual reality and paper-pencil in a sample of stroke patients

    Get PDF
    The growing number of people with cognitive deficits creates an urgent need for new cognitive training solutions. Paper-and-pencil tasks are still widely used for cognitive rehabilitation despite the proliferation of new computer-based methods, like VR-based simulations of ADL’s. The health professionals’ resistance in adopting new tools might be explained by the small number of validation trials. Studies have established construct validity of VR assessment tools with their paper-and-pencil versions by demonstrating significant associations with their traditional construct-driven measures. However, adaptive rehabilitation tools for intervention are mostly not equivalent to their counterpart paper-and-pencil versions, which makes it difficult to carry out comparative studies. Here we present a 12-session intervention study with 31 stroke survivors who underwent different rehabilitation protocols based on the same content and difficulty adaptation progression framework: 17 performed paper-and-pencil training with the Task Generator and 14 performed VR-based training with the Reh@City. Results have shown that both groups performed at the same level and there was not an effect of the training methodology in overall performance. However, the Reh@City enabled more intensive training, which may translate in more cognitive improvements.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

    A comparison of two personalization and adaptive cognitive rehabilitation approaches: a randomized controlled trial with chronic stroke patients

    Get PDF
    Background: Paper-and-pencil tasks are still widely used for cognitive rehabilitation despite the proliferation of new computer-based methods, like VR-based simulations of ADL’s. Studies have established construct validity of VR assessment tools with their paper-and-pencil version by demonstrating significant associations with their traditional construct-driven measures. However, VR rehabilitation intervention tools are mostly developed to include mechanisms such as personalization and adaptation, elements that are disregarded in their paper-and-pencil counterparts, which is a strong limitation of comparison studies. Here we compare the clinical impact of a personalized and adapted paper-and-pencil training and a content equivalent and more ecologically valid VR-based ADL’s simulation. Methods: We have performed a trial with 36 stroke patients comparing Reh@City v2.0 (adaptive cognitive training through everyday tasks VR simulations) with Task Generator (TG: content equivalent and adaptive paper-and-pencil training). The intervention comprised 12 sessions, with a neuropsychological assessment pre, post-intervention and follow-up, having as primary outcomes: general cognitive functioning (assessed by the Montreal Cognitive Assessment - MoCA), attention, memory, executive functions and language specific domains. Results: A within-group analysis revealed that the Reh@City v2.0 improved general cognitive functioning, attention, visuospatial ability and executive functions. These improvements generalized to verbal memory, processing speed and self-perceived cognitive deficits specific assessments. TG only improved in orientation domain on the MoCA, and specific processing speed and verbal memory outcomes. However, at follow-up, processing speed and verbal memory improvements were maintained, and a new one was revealed in language. A between-groups analysis revealed Reh@City v2.0 superiority in general cognitive functioning, visuospatial ability, and executive functions on the MoCA. Conclusions: The Reh@City v2.0 intervention with higher ecological validity revealed higher effectiveness with improvements in different cognitive domains and self-perceived cognitive deficits in everyday life, and the TG intervention retained fewer cognitive gains for longer.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio
    • 

    corecore