Jump to content

Virtual Reality for Individuals Affected by Stroke

Original Editor - Avery Michels, Sarah Kelly, Kaitlin Proksch and Dayna Webster Top Contributors - Winrose Windsor, Avery Michels, Malisha van der Berg, Vidya Acharya, Kim Jackson, Kaitlin Proksch, Alexandra Stead, Rucha Gadgil, Dayna Webster, Arnold Fredrick D'Souza, Joseph Ayotunde Aderonmu, Dinu Dixon and Farah Al Dweik


Introduction

Stroke remains a leading cause of death and disability worldwide, with an estimated 93.8 million prevalent cases and 11.9 million new cases recorded in 2021.[1] The risk of stroke has increased by 50% over the past 20 years, with one in four adults now predicted to experience a stroke in their lifetime.[1] Many survivors are left with lasting motor deficits that affect independence and quality of life.

Virtual reality (VR) has emerged as a technology-assisted approach to support motor recovery after stroke. It is defined as a computer-based technology that allows a person to interact with a simulated multisensory environment and receive real-time feedback on performance.[2] Rehabilitative VR games reflect real-life scenarios and activities of daily living (ADL),[3] and the software allows several variables to be controlled independently:

  • Frequency: how often the individual practises a movement or task.
  • Intensity: how demanding the task is on the affected limb or system.
  • Repetition: how many times a movement is performed within a session.
  • Task-oriented training: whether the exercise mimics a real, functional activity rather than an isolated movement.

Because these variables can be adjusted independently, VR allows a degree of control over dosage that is difficult to replicate with conventional, therapist-led exercise alone.[2]

Historical Development of VR in Rehabilitation

Early research into conventional stroke rehabilitation approaches, including neurodevelopmental techniques and motor relearning strategies, demonstrated only modest gains in motor function.[4][5] This prompted researchers to explore alternative methods, including VR.

Interest in VR as a rehabilitation tool grew from research in the 1990s examining its use in sport, where practising a golf swing within a VR environment was found to improve subsequent real-world performance.[6] This early work laid the foundation for VR’s later application in clinical and rehabilitation settings.[7]

VR use in rehabilitation has broadly developed across four periods:

  • 1996 to 2005: early clinical trials of VR in stroke, motor disorders and kinematic analysis, that had high cost and technical complexity limiting clinical adoption.[8]
  • 2006 to 2014: development of more clinically accessible applications at lower cost.[4]
  • 2015 to 2018: significant advancement driven by wider access to cameras, sensors, haptics and wearable devices.[9]
  • 2019 to present: the COVID-19 pandemic accelerated adoption of home-based VR, with further developments in haptic feedback and AI-driven personalisation.[9]

Neuroplasticity and Motor Learning in VR Rehabilitation

Recovery after stroke relies on neuroplasticity and reorganisation of the central nervous system (CNS), a process that continues well beyond the acute recovery phase and can be measured using tools such as electroencephalogram (EEG).[10][11] This can be broken down into several mechanisms:

  1. Reorganisation, not regeneration: The brain does not grow new neurons to replace what is lost; undamaged connections are instead adjusted to form new functional pathways around the site of injury, driven by task-oriented training.[10]
  2. Cortical remapping: As a movement is relearned, the area of motor cortex representing it tends to expand, and targeted protocols engaging secondary motor areas can help optimise this process.[12]
  3. Compensatory recruitment: Movement of the affected limb tends to recruit the unaffected hemisphere, secondary motor areas in the affected hemisphere, and tissue around the lesion edges, reflecting the brain finding alternative routes to produce the same movement.[10]
  4. Adaptive versus maladaptive plasticity: Adaptive plasticity restores original motor patterns, while maladaptive plasticity can reinforce compensatory strategies that limit recovery of normal motor control. Effective rehabilitation prioritises the former.[10]
  5. Timing and intensity: Early, intensive rehabilitation delivered in a stimulating, complex environment is consistently associated with enhanced adaptive plasticity and better outcomes.[10]

VR aligns with these principles by delivering therapy that is intensive, repetitive, goal oriented and set within a stimulating environment.[10]

Some systems manipulate visual feedback directly, for example showing the affected hand moving when the unaffected hand is actually performing the movement. This kind of mirror visual feedback has produced measurable activation changes in the ipsilateral motor cortex and parietal lobe of people with chronic stroke.[13]

Some VR systems go further by providing discordant visual feedback, where the therapist manipulates the patient’s perceived movement through up-scaling, down-scaling, or altering what is seen relative to the movement actually executed. Discordant feedback has been shown to cause greater activation of primary motor regions than non-discordant feedback, and in stroke patients specifically, discordant feedback involving the affected hand recruits the contralateral, affected primary motor region.[14]

VR Device Type

Rather than treating VR as a single intervention, it is more useful to consider it by device type, since this largely determines the level of immersion, where it can be used, and the cost. The table below describes the different types of VR devices, examples of each and clinical evidence:[2][15][16]

Type Description Examples
Non-immersive User views and interacts with themselves or an avatar on a standard screen, tracked by a camera, sensor or controller, while remaining fully aware of the surrounding room. Nintendo Wii, Xbox Kinect, Sony PlayStation Move
Semi-immersive Uses larger, curved or projection-based screens, sometimes with a motion platform or force plate, creating a stronger sense of presence while the room remains visible either side of the display. Computer-Assisted Rehabilitation Environment (CAREN); Immersive Rehabilitation and Exercise (IREX), C-Mill VR+
Fully immersive Uses a head-mounted display, sometimes with hand controllers, gloves or vibrotactile equipment, blocking out the physical environment so the user experiences the virtual world as an avatar. Meta/Oculus Quest, Oculus Rift S, HTC Vive
Haptic-enhanced Adds tactile or force feedback via gloves, exoskeletons or robotic interfaces so resistance or texture can be felt during interaction with virtual objects. Cyberglove and Cybergrasp, YouGrabber
Home-based and telerehabilitation Cuts across the categories above; designed for unsupervised or remotely supervised use, typically combining a headset or sensor with a companion app monitored asynchronously by a clinician GRASP, RecoveryFun

Fully immersive systems create the strongest sense of presence and engagement, but this is typically weighed against the risk of cybersickness and variable tolerance of the headset among older or more cognitively impaired individuals.[16]

A systematic review of twelve randomised controlled trials found fully immersive VR provided additional benefit over standard rehabilitation for upper limb dexterity, gait and dynamic balance.[16] A review comparing immersion levels directly found positive results in 88% of studies using semi-immersive VR compared with 67% for non-immersive systems, though direct head-to-head comparisons remain limited.[15] Haptic-enhanced systems are typically used to target precision grasp and fine motor control, and combining them with non-invasive brain stimulation has shown cumulative effects on upper limb function through multiple pathways acting together.[10] A systematic review of home-based VR training involving 392 participants across eight trials found a positive effect on upper extremity recovery, particularly motor control.[17]

Application of VR Across the Stroke Rehabilitation Continuum

Evidence and appropriate use of VR differ across recovery timelines.

Acute setting and intensive care

Evidence for VR use specifically with stroke patients in intensive care remains limited, with much of the existing literature drawn from general critically ill populations rather than stroke-specific cohorts.[18] A feasibility study at a stroke unit in Essen, Germany, found VR-guided upper extremity therapy could be integrated into stroke unit care, though the authors noted most clinical evidence on VR-guided neurorehabilitation has emerged from post-acute rather than acute studies.[19]

Subacute phase

Generally considered to span from around one week to six months post-stroke. This period has received particular attention as a window of opportunity, since motor recovery is understood to peak within the first one to three months.[9] VR delivered during this phase is thought to align well with periods of heightened neuroplasticity.[9]

Chronic phase  

The majority of VR stroke rehabilitation research continues to focus on chronic stroke survivors, generally defined as more than six months post-stroke, with consistent benefit reported for upper limb function, gait, balance and lower limb recovery when VR is combined with conventional therapy.[9]

Evidence Base for VR in Individuals Affected by Stroke

Several large syntheses have strengthened confidence in VR as an adjunct therapy. The table below summarises some of the evidence found chronologically by study type, sample size and key findings.

Year Study type Type of VR / focus Sample Key findings Reference
2011 Meta-analysis VR as adjunctive therapy for arm motor recovery (mixed immersion) 12 studies (5 RCTs, 7 observational); ages 26–88 Significant benefit for arm strength, motor impairment and motor function [4]
2017 Systematic review VR interventions, primarily upper limb (mixed immersion) 72 studies Significant benefit for upper limb function and activities of daily living when combined with usual care; other outcomes not significant. [14]
2020 Case series Immersive VR for balance and falls risk 3 chronic ischaemic stroke patients Greater improvement in balance and reduced fall risk with immersive VR compared with conventional therapy and no intervention [20]
2024 Umbrella review VR across all immersion levels 78 systematic reviews and meta-analyses Consistent benefit for upper limb, lower limb, gait and balance; limited evidence for cognitive outcomes [21]
2024 Meta-review VR across all immersion levels Multiple systematic reviews (meta-review methodology) Recommended VR be used routinely as an adjunct to conventional therapy [9]
2024 Systematic review and meta-analysis Upper limb VR, stratified by immersion level 55 studies, 2,142 patients Benefit found across all immersion levels compared with conventional occupational therapy [22]
2024 Systematic review and meta-analysis Immersive VR, upper limb 23 studies, 395 patients Statistically significant improvement on the Fugl-Meyer Assessment Upper Extremity scale [23]
2025 Scoping review VR exergaming, all device types 66 studies Commercial off-the-shelf and camera-based systems most consistent; head-mounted displays showed mixed findings; functional outcome met in 41% of trials; effects more consistent in supervised, clinic-based programmes [24]



The research shows positive outcomes in improving upper limb function, lower limb function, gait and balance with the use of standard physiotherapy and VR as compared to receiving only standard physiotherapy among stroke survivors.

VR and Treadmill Training in Stroke Rehabilitation

Integrating VR and augmented reality with treadmill training is an emerging approach for improving gait and balance, allowing therapists to simulate everyday walking challenges in a controlled and safe environment.[25]

  • C-Mill VR+ uses force plate technology to assess and train balance and gait while providing objective, real-time feedback during task-specific training.[25]
  • Split-belt treadmills feature two independently controlled belts, allowing the affected and unaffected legs to move at different speeds, something not possible with conventional single-belt training; this targets gait asymmetry directly by promoting interlimb coordination and motor adaptation.[26] (see page on Split-belt treadmill training)

A systematic review of VR combined with treadmill training, including ten randomised controlled trials and 266 participants, found significant improvements in gait speed, stride length and balance compared with conventional training. Effects on quality of life and participation remained inconsistent and most included studies were relatively short, ranging from four to eight weeks.[25]

Ongoing research combining split-belt treadmills with VR in the subacute phase continues to investigate whether this combination improves motor, visual and cognitive recovery beyond either intervention alone.[26]

Examples of VR Devices and Systems Used in Stroke Rehabilitation

The following table offers examples of different VR devices, including videos demonstrating how they are used:[24]

Device or system Manufacturer Video Description
Oculus Quest Meta (formerly Oculus VR)
[27] 		Immersive head-mounted display with 3D positional audio and six degrees of freedom head tracking; wireless
Oculus Rift S Meta (formerly Oculus VR)
[28] 		Immersive head-mounted display requiring PC connection
HTC Vive HTC Corporation
[29] 		Immersive head-mounted display used in several rehabilitation research settings; The new VIVE tracker 3.0 add on can be useful tool in stroke rehabilitation.
CAREN Motek Technologies
[30] 		Integrated system combining real-time motion and force capture with a moving platform and 360-degree projection screen
C-Mill VR+ Motek Technologies
[31] 		Treadmill-based system combining force plate technology with VR for gait adaptability training
Samsung Gear VR Samsung Electronics
[32] 		Portable, lightweight VR system using a smartphone as the display
Nintendo Wii Nintendo Co., Ltd
[33] 		Non-immersive VR using a handheld motion controller and infrared sensors
Xbox Kinect Microsoft Corporation
[34] 		Non-immersive, camera-based system tracking whole-body movement without a handheld controller
Leap Motion Controller Ultraleap
[35] 		Motion sensor used to track fine hand and finger movement within VR environments
YouGrabber YouRehab
[36] 		System combining VR gaming with hand and arm rehabilitation exercises

Examples of Games and Applications Used in VR Stroke Rehabilitation

The following table presents game applications used in VR systems for stroke rehabilitation and the skills they target:[24]

Game or application Platform Skill targeted
Football or goal-based games Non-immersive (e.g. Nintendo Wii, Xbox Kinect) Bilateral lower limb movement, reaching and weight shifting
Kinect Sports Xbox Kinect Whole-body movement, coordination, balance
Joy Ride Xbox Kinect Trunk and lower limb movement, balance
Road scene walking tasks CAREN Dynamic balance while walking and completing a secondary task
Grasp and release tasks; Airplane pitch YouGrabber Fine motor control, grip strength, hand function

New and Emerging Innovations

Recent developments have moved beyond standalone VR systems towards integrated, adaptive platforms combining artificial intelligence (AI), robotics and neurotechnology.[37]

Artificial Intelligence (AI)

Increasingly combined with VR and robotics to personalise therapy, with AI-augmented environments able to adjust task difficulty in real time based on the patients performance. Machine learning models also being explored to help predict functional recovery.[37]

Robotic Exoskeletons

Exoskeletons integrated with VR environments to provide precise, adaptive physical assistance during task practice, particularly for patients with more severe motor impairment who cannot generate sufficient movement independently.[38]

Brain-Computer Interfaces (BCIs)

Convert neural signals into actions within a virtual environment, with motor imagery able to drive an on-screen action and the resulting multisensory feedback intended to reinforce the neural pathways associated with the intended movement. BCIs are considered a promising adjunct in post-stroke rehabilitation, particularly for patients with persistent motor deficits.[39]

Omnidirectional Treadmills

Pairing VR with unrestricted, multidirectional walking rather than forward-only movement. A feasibility study found an omni-VR walking and balance game usable with chronic stroke patients and physiotherapists,[40] and a pilot randomised controlled trial is now underway comparing this approach with traditional exercise for chronic stroke survivors.[41] Separate biomechanical research found gait speed was slower on an omnidirectional treadmill than overground, a factor requiring further study in stroke populations.[42]

Most of these innovations remain in early-stage feasibility or pilot research, and further high-quality trials are needed before they can be considered standard practice.[37]

The table below summarises example devices and systems across these emerging categories, with video demonstrating each in use:

Device or system Description Video
AI-augmented VR systems VR software that uses machine learning to adjust task difficulty in real time and help predict functional recovery.[37]
[43]
Robotic exoskeletons integrated with VR Wearable robotic devices combined with a VR environment to provide adaptive physical assistance during task practice.[38]
[44]

[45]

BCI-controlled soft robotic gloves Devices that convert neural or motor imagery signals into hand movement within a virtual environment, offering a more comfortable alternative to rigid exoskeletons.[39]
[46]

[47]

Virtuix Omni Bowl-shaped, low-friction platform where the user walks in place while a harness detects direction
[48]
Cyberith Virtualizer Flat-based, low-friction omnidirectional treadmill, smaller and more portable than the Omni
[49]
Infinadeck Active, motorised treadmill that physically drives the user’s feet in the intended direction
[50]
Disney HoloTile Modular floor of independently rotating tiles allowing multiple users to walk in different directions on one surface
[51]

Considerations for Physiotherapists

Before incorporating VR into a stroke rehabilitation programme, several factors should be considered.

Type of VR system  

Immersive systems may offer greater engagement but carry a risk of cybersickness and require more equipment and cost, whereas non-immersive systems are more accessible but may produce less engagement.[16]

Stage of Recovery

Current evidence suggests potential benefit across acute, subacute and chronic phases, though the majority of high-quality evidence relates to chronic stroke populations.[9]

Location

Effects appear more consistent in supervised, clinic-based programmes than in home-based implementations, which should be factored into the choice of delivery model.[24]

Patient Safety and Monitoring

Particularly important in acute and critical care settings, where medical stability, lines and equipment must be considered before mobilisation-based VR tasks are introduced.[18]

Individualisation

VR systems allow grading of difficulty and targeting of specific extremities or tasks, which should be tailored to each patient’s goals and abilities.[24]

Individualisation through data

VR systems can record more granular performance data than standard physical therapy measures, and this data can be used to tailor difficulty and task selection to each patient, though validated VR-specific outcome measures are still needed.[2]

Equipment and setup

Delivering VR requires a computer with an appropriate graphics system, with hardware and software programmed to create the environment and provide feedback.[8]

Summary

VR has moved from a novelty explored in the 1990s to a well-evidenced adjunct in stroke rehabilitation, with meaningful differences in outcome depending on the device category used.

  • Evidence consistently supports benefit for upper limb function when VR is used alongside conventional therapy.[9][22]
  • There is growing evidence for gait and balance outcomes, particularly when VR is combined with treadmill training.[25]
  • Application in the acute phase and intensive care setting remains an emerging and comparatively under-researched area, with genuine stroke-specific evidence still scarce.[18]
  • Innovations in AI, robotics and BCI represent the next stage of development in this field.[37] [39]
  • Further high-quality research is needed to guide best practice recommendations for physiotherapists across all stages of stroke recovery.[24]

References

  1. ↑ 1.0 1.1 World Health Organisation. Newsroom. Fact Sheet. Detail. Stroke. December 2025. Last Accessed August 19, 2026. Available from: https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/stroke
  2. ↑ 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.3 Capriotti A, Moret S, Del Bello E, Federici A, Lucertini F. Virtual Reality: A New Frontier of Physical Rehabilitation. Sensors. 2025;25(10):3080.
  3. ↑ Laver KE, Lange B, George S, et al. Virtual reality for stroke rehabilitation - Laver, KE - 2025 | Cochrane Library. Accessed August 22, 2026.
  4. ↑ 4.0 4.1 4.2 Saposnik G, Levin M, for the Stroke Outcome Research Canada (SORCan) Working Group. Virtual Reality in Stroke Rehabilitation. Stroke. 2011;42(5):1380-1386.
  5. ↑ Winstein CJ, Stein J, Arena R, Bates B, Cherney LR, Cramer SC, Deruyter F, Eng JJ, Fisher B, Harvey RL, Lang CE. Guidelines for adult stroke rehabilitation and recovery: a guideline for healthcare professionals from the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association. Stroke. 2016 Jun;47(6):e98-169
  6. ↑ Todorov E, Shadmehr R, Bizzi E. Augmented Feedback Presented in a Virtual Environment Accelerates Learning of a Difficult Motor Task. Journal of Motor Behavior. 1997;29(2):147-158.
  7. ↑ Holden, MK, Dyar, T. (PDF) Virtual Environment Training: A New Tool for Neurorehabilitation. ResearchGate. 2002;26(2). Accessed August 22, 2026.
  8. ↑ 8.0 8.1 Aderinto N, Olatunji G, Abdulbasit MO, Edun M, Aboderin G, Egbunu E. Exploring the efficacy of virtual reality-based rehabilitation in stroke: a narrative review of current evidence. Annals of Medicine. 2023;55(2):2285907.
  9. ↑ 9.0 9.1 9.2 9.3 9.4 9.5 9.6 9.7 Khan A, Imam YZ, Muneer M, Al Jerdi S, Gill SK. Virtual reality in stroke recovery: a meta-review of systematic reviews. Bioelectron Med. 2024;10(1):23.
  10. ↑ 10.0 10.1 10.2 10.3 10.4 10.5 10.6 Cheng R, Xu H, Wang X. Neuroplasticity Mechanism of Stroke Rehabilitation Training System Based on Virtual Reality: A Review. Sensors. 2026;26(6):1753.
  11. ↑ Gangemi A, De Luca R, Fabio RA, et al. Effects of Virtual Reality Cognitive Training on Neuroplasticity: A Quasi-Randomized Clinical Trial in Patients with Stroke. Biomedicines. 2023;11(12):3225.
  12. ↑ Norman SL, Wolpaw JR, Reinkensmeyer DJ. Targeting neuroplasticity to improve motor recovery after stroke: an artificial neural network model. Brain Commun. 2022;4(6):fcac264.
  13. ↑ Chang WK, Lim H, Park SH, et al. Effect of immersive virtual mirror visual feedback on Mu suppression and coherence in motor and parietal cortex in stroke. Sci Rep. 2023;13:12514.
  14. ↑ 14.0 14.1 Laver KE, Lange B, George S, Deutsch JE, Saposnik G, Crotty M. Virtual reality for stroke rehabilitation. Stroke. 2018 Apr;49(4):e160-1.
  15. ↑ 15.0 15.1 Cardile D, Arena C, Corallo F, et al. A systematic review on the use of virtual reality in post-stroke patients: exploring when modalities make the difference in executive and motor recovery. Front Virtual Real. 2025;6.
  16. ↑ 16.0 16.1 16.2 16.3 Demeco A, Zola L, Frizziero A, et al. Immersive Virtual Reality in Post-Stroke Rehabilitation: A Systematic Review. Sensors. 2023;23(3):1712.
  17. ↑ Huang J, Wei Y, Zhou P, He X, Li H, Wei X. Effect of Home-Based Virtual Reality Training on Upper Extremity Recovery in Patients With Stroke: Systematic Review. Journal of Medical Internet Research. 2025;27(1):e69003.
  18. ↑ 18.0 18.1 18.2 Kanschik D, Bruno RR, Wolff G, Kelm M, Jung C. Virtual and augmented reality in intensive care medicine: a systematic review. Annals of Intensive Care. 2023;13(1):81.
  19. ↑ Kühne Escolà J, Demirdas R, Schulze M, et al. Virtual reality-guided therapy on a stroke unit: a feasibility study. Neurol Res Pract. 2024;6(1):60.
  20. ↑ Cortés-Pérez I, Nieto-Escamez FA, Obrero-Gaitán E. Immersive Virtual Reality in Stroke Patients as a New Approach for Reducing Postural Disabilities and Falls Risk: A Case Series. Brain Sci. 2020 May 15;10(5):296.
  21. ↑ Hao J, Crum G, Siu KC. Effects of virtual reality on stroke rehabilitation: An umbrella review of systematic reviews. Health Science Reports. 2024;7(9):e70082.
  22. ↑ 22.0 22.1 Soleimani M, Ghazisaeedi M, Heydari S. The efficacy of virtual reality for upper limb rehabilitation in stroke patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2024;24(1):135.
  23. ↑ Kiper P, Godart N, Cavalier M, et al. Effects of Immersive Virtual Reality on Upper-Extremity Stroke Rehabilitation: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis. Journal of Clinical Medicine. 2024;13(1):146.
  24. ↑ 24.0 24.1 24.2 24.3 24.4 24.5 Cieślik B. Virtual Reality Exergaming in Outpatient Stroke Rehabilitation: A Scoping Review and Clinician Roadmap. Journal of Clinical Medicine. 2025;14(20):7227.
  25. ↑ 25.0 25.1 25.2 25.3 Kim M, Thawisuk C, Kaneko F, Kim HD. Effectiveness of VR Intervention Coupled with Treadmill Training on Gait Function for Stroke Patients: A Systematic Review. NeuroRehabilitation. 2025;57(1):3-13.
  26. ↑ 26.0 26.1 Understanding motor recovery in subacute stroke using split-belt treadmill and virtual reality. | Research at UCalgary | University of Calgary. Accessed August 22, 2026. https://research.ucalgary.ca/participate/understanding-motor-recovery-subacute-stroke-using-split-belt-treadmill-and-virtual-reality-reb21-1576
  27. ↑ Meta Developers. Introducing Oculus Quest Available from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tbVin753yLU [last accessed 26/8/2026]
  28. ↑ Meta Quest. Introducing Oculus Rift S Available from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3vPz9KFXWTk [last accessed 25/8/2026]
  29. ↑ HTC VIVE. VIVE Education - VIVE Pro 2 x VIVE Tracker (3.0): Go Beyond Controllers. Available from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l-JN7wD7OP0 [last accessed 25/8/2026]
  30. ↑ Cleveland Clinic. CAREN Virtual Reality Treadmill: Take a Video Tour. Available from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TntXjlTUhII [last accessed 25/8/2026]
  31. ↑ Motek Medical. Motek - C-Mill. Available from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OSbEi8vW3XU [last accessed 25/8/2026]
  32. ↑ Samsung US. Gear VR Demonstration. Available from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-gnvQS2xhRg [last accessed 25/8/2026]
  33. ↑ ProMedica Senior Care. Wii System - Road to Recovery. Available from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ytStYVN_2I [last accessed 25/8/2026]
  34. ↑ Microsoft Research. Stroke Recovery with Kinect. Available from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PVgiEtDbsQM [last accessed 25/8/2026]
  35. ↑ Leap Motion. Introducing the Leap Motion. Available from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_d6KuiuteIA [last accessed 25/8/2026]
  36. ↑ YouRehab. YouGrabber - Finger + Hand Applications. Available from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nAyKXnR4C5s [last accessed 25/8/2026]
  37. ↑ 37.0 37.1 37.2 37.3 37.4 Kopalli SR, Shukla M, Jayaprakash B, et al. Artificial intelligence in stroke rehabilitation: From acute care to long-term recovery. Neuroscience. 2025;572:214-231.
  38. ↑ 38.0 38.1 Rashid A, Mukhtar T, Najam S, et al. Advancing Neurorehabilitation Through Virtual Reality and Robotics: A Critical Narrative Review of Motor Recovery Technologies. JHWCR. Published online August 27, 2025:e601.
  39. ↑ 39.0 39.1 39.2 Ali E, Kamran S, Cheema AAA. Brain–computer interfaces in post-stroke rehabilitation: a neurotechnological leap toward functional recovery. Ann Med Surg (Lond). 2025;87(11):7828-7829.
  40. ↑ Quigley A, Pierson D, Jeong J, et al. Feasibility and Usability of an Omnidirectional Treadmill–Based Virtual Reality Rehabilitation Game: A Mixed–Methods Feasibility Study. Phys Ther. 2025;105(12):pzaf137.
  41. ↑ Quigley A. PROVE-VR: A Pilot Randomized Trial Using Omnidirectional Virtual Reality and Treadmill Training for Chronic Stroke Survivors. clinicaltrials.gov; 2025. Accessed August 23, 2026.
  42. ↑ Lewis MM, Waltz C, Scelina L, et al. Gait patterns during overground and virtual omnidirectional treadmill walking. J NeuroEngineering Rehabil. 2024;21(1):29.
  43. ↑ Royal Academy of Engineering. Virtual physiotherapy at home - using AI and VR to enable independence for stroke-recovery patients. Available from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JuzfQs3RaKQ [last accessed 26/08/2026]
  44. ↑ Icaro. Exoskeleton Motion Capture and Virtual Reality Embodiment. Available from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BPqQfkpYx1k [last accessed 26/08/2026]
  45. ↑ Eyal Ofek. GroundedReach ISMAR 2026. Available from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kP6oUKKZEA [last accessed 26/08/2026]
  46. ↑ Paul DB. Hand Exoskeleton for Motor Imagery Brain-Computer Interface in Virtual Reality. Available from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QjwgobOIzso [last accessed 26/08/2026]
  47. ↑ Antonio Frisoli. Motor imagery control of Alex exoskeleton by BCI. Available from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=novBtUKMPeE [last accessed 26/08/2026]
  48. ↑ Virtuix Omni. Virtuix Omni One Trailer. Available from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zi8rjwtZ_cs [last accessed 26/08/2026]
  49. ↑ Cyberith. Cyberith Virtualizer Motion Demonstration Video - using a Virtualizer ELITE 2. Available from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bHEXGGnuZtA [last accessed 26/08/2026]
  50. ↑ Infinadeck. 20250609 Infinadeck Portal Introduction Video. Available from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gXoKM8TRVZw [last accessed 26/08/2026]
  51. ↑ Moments Matter. Disney's 'HoloTile' Floor: A Quantum Leap into Omnifictional Realms. Available from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Esa2Qiw0EM [last accessed 26/08/2026]
Retrieved from "https://www.physio-pedia.com/w/index.php?title=Virtual_Reality_for_Individuals_Affected_by_Stroke&oldid=382813"