Crosbie 2008
| Methods | RCT | |
| Participants | Recruited from 2 hospital stroke units and members of Stroke Association Clubs in Northern Ireland 18 participants: 9 intervention, 9 control Inclusion criteria: within 2 years of first stroke, medically stable, can follow 2‐stage commands, score of ≥ 25 on the upper limb Motricity Index Exclusion criteria: mental score < 7/10, neglect (star cancellation < 48/52), comorbid conditions impacting on rehabilitation potential, cardiac pacemaker, severe arm pain reported on visual analogue scale Mean (SD) age: intervention group 56 (15) years, control group 65 (7) years 55% male Stroke details: 39% right hemiparesis Timing post stroke: intervention group mean (SD) 10 (6) months, control group 12 (8) months |
|
| Interventions | Virtual reality intervention: the participant chooses from a variety of activities involving reaching and grasping of virtual objects at a variety of heights, speeds and with varied number of targets; the participant wears a head‐mounted device and data glove Control intervention: therapy provided is based on the Bobath approach Sessions were 35 to 45 minutes, 3 times a week over 3 weeks (approximately 6 hours total) |
|
| Outcomes | Outcomes recorded at baseline, post‐intervention and at 6 weeks Upper limb function and activity outcomes: Action Research Arm Test, Upper Limb Motricity Index Adverse events were reported Other outcome measures: an exit questionnaire including questions about enjoyment and perception of improvement |
|
| Notes | — | |
| Risk of bias | ||
| Bias | Authors' judgement | Support for judgement |
| Random sequence generation (selection bias) | Low risk | An independent colleague generated the sequence using a computer random number generator |
| Allocation concealment (selection bias) | Low risk | Group allocation cards were concealed in sealed, opaque envelopes |
| Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes | Low risk | Masked to allocation |
| Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes | Low risk | An intention‐to treat analysis was completed. Missing data points were dealt with using the simple mean imputation method |
| Selective reporting (reporting bias) | Low risk | No other outcomes were collected |