Submitted Successfully!
To reward your contribution, here is a gift for you: A free trial for our video production service.
Thank you for your contribution! You can also upload a video entry or images related to this topic.
Version Summary Created by Modification Content Size Created at Operation
1
Raffaele Ferri
 -- 4663 2024-01-05 08:26:15 |
2 format change
Peter Tang
 -2 word(s) 4661 2024-01-05 08:41:45 |

Video Upload Options

Do you have a full video?
Send video materials Upload full video

Confirm

Are you sure to Delete?
Yes No
Cite
If you have any further questions, please contact Encyclopedia Editorial Office.
Catania, V.; Rundo, F.; Panerai, S.; Ferri, R. Virtual Reality for Rehabilitation of Acquired Cognitive Disorders. Encyclopedia. Available online: https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/53468 (accessed on 18 May 2024).
Catania V, Rundo F, Panerai S, Ferri R. Virtual Reality for Rehabilitation of Acquired Cognitive Disorders. Encyclopedia. Available at: https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/53468. Accessed May 18, 2024.
Catania, Valentina, Francesco Rundo, Simonetta Panerai, Raffaele Ferri. "Virtual Reality for Rehabilitation of Acquired Cognitive Disorders" Encyclopedia, https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/53468 (accessed May 18, 2024).
Catania, V., Rundo, F., Panerai, S., & Ferri, R. (2024, January 05). Virtual Reality for Rehabilitation of Acquired Cognitive Disorders. In Encyclopedia. https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/53468
Catania, Valentina, et al. "Virtual Reality for Rehabilitation of Acquired Cognitive Disorders." Encyclopedia. Web. 05 January, 2024.
Virtual Reality for Rehabilitation of Acquired Cognitive Disorders
Edit
This entry is adapted from the peer-reviewed paper 10.3390/bioengineering11010035

Virtual Reality (VR) is presented as a transformative tool that immerses individuals in interactive environments, offering promising opportunities for enhancing cognitive functions and improving quality of life.

cognitive rehabilitation virtual reality serious game videogames attention executive functions memory

1. Introduction

Cognitive impairments resulting from neurological conditions, such as stroke, traumatic brain injury, and neurodegenerative diseases, pose significant challenges to affected individuals and their families. These impairments can impact memory, attention, executive functions (EFs), spatial cognition, language abilities, and functional living skills (which progressively deteriorate as a consequence of cognitive impairments), often leading to a reduced quality of life and increased dependency. Traditional cognitive rehabilitation approaches have relied on paper-and-pencil exercises and computer-based programs, which may lack the engagement and real-world relevance necessary for effective recovery. Virtual Reality (VR) is a transformative technology that has garnered increasing attention in the field of neuroscience, neuropsychology, and cognitive rehabilitation [1][2][3][4][5][6][7]; by immersing individuals in interactive, multisensory environments [6], VR holds the promise to revolutionize the way we approach cognitive rehabilitation, offering novel opportunities for enhancing cognitive functions, promoting neural plasticity, and ultimately improving the lives of those affected by cognitive impairments [1][3][8][9][10]. Several reviews and meta-analyses have been published showing the potential benefits of VR for neuroscientific and/or neuropsychological purposes [11][12][13], and also some guidelines are starting to be available for its use [14]. This research embarks on a journey through the realm of VR for cognitive rehabilitation, aiming to provide a thorough exploration of this exciting field. People suffering from acquired cognitive impairments might belong to three different clinical conditions: (1) cognitive frailty, a form of aging-related deterioration characterized by physical and cognitive impairments (particularly attention, immediate and delayed free recall, and executive functions), putting individuals at risk of Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI), dementia, and mortality [15][16][17][18]. In this case, rehabilitation aims to restore functional skills and prevent further damage. (2) Mild Neurocognitive Disorder—mNCD (or MCI), characterized by a modest cognitive decline from a previous level of performance in one or more cognitive domains, without interference in everyday activities [19]. This condition increases the risk of developing dementia. (3) Major Neurocognitive Disorder—MNCD (or dementia), which presents with a significant cognitive decline from a previous level of performance in one or more cognitive domains, interfering with independence in everyday activities [19].

2. The Principles of Virtual Reality in Cognitive Rehabilitation

VR technology encompasses a spectrum of differently immersive experiences, from non-immersive to highly immersive environments, offering a versatile range of tools for cognitive rehabilitation [10][20]. At one end of this spectrum are non-immersive setups that typically involve standard computers, tablets, smartphones, and television screens. These setups, while less immersive, still provide valuable cognitive exercises and are accessible for a wide range of users. In this case, the individual is not totally immersed in the virtual environment; he navigates the scene in third person, but may experience both the real world, e.g., his location and the physical boundaries of the room he is working in, as well as the virtual world on the screen. Moving along the spectrum, there are more immersive tools, such as the Cave Automatic Virtual Environments (CAVEs), and headsets [21][22]; in this case, the user navigates the scene in first person. The CAVEs [23] consist of a room-sized cube with projected 3D visuals on multiple walls. However, the most common and accessible form of VR technology for cognitive rehabilitation involves head-mounted displays (HMD), such as Oculus Rift/Quest or HTC Vive. Indeed, in a CAVE, if you look down at yourself, you will see your real body; on the contrary, if you wear an oculus you cannot see your body, but you feel immersed in the virtual environment you are interacting with, knowing for sure it is not so [21]. The HMD utilize high-resolution displays and motion-tracking sensors to transport users into immersive 3D environments, but it is also possible to use less expensive devices, like Samsung Gear VR and a smartphone, to enjoy the virtual contents.
Various types of content can be used in VR to evoke different responses from both psychological and physiological perspectives. These content options range from standard and 360° photos/videos to 3D scenarios [24]. The choice of content also depends on the level of interaction with the virtual environment. For example, when using 360° videos, which are more cost-effective in terms of time and resources [18][25], the user can only change the point of view from which they observe the scene and interact with buttons specially designed for navigating the environment or receiving information. On the other hand, with 3D scenarios, users can also interact with all the enabled 3D objects within the scene.
Input devices like handheld controllers, gloves, or hand-tracking sensors allow users to interact with the virtual world, fostering sensorimotor interactions and cognitive engagement. These VR environments, whether non-immersive or highly immersive, offer a flexible and customizable approach to cognitive rehabilitation, accommodating individual needs and preferences.
Two versions of a memory task utilizing a supermarket scenario, one in full immersion with a head-mounted display and the other with low immersion on a desktop, were administered to both young adults and senior individuals. The purpose was to assess age-related differences in the use of these two platforms. The results indicated that immersive VR proved to be more fatiguing for both groups. Older adults performed better with the desktop system and reported minimal side effects. No differences were found in the preference for one platform over the other [26]. Furthermore, immersive VR was well-received by the senior participants.
VR is grounded in several fundamental principles that underpin its efficacy as a tool for cognitive rehabilitation. These principles are crucial to understanding how VR can create immersive and interactive environments that facilitate cognitive recovery.

2.1. Immersion and Presence

Immersion and presence are two fundamental aspects of VR that can profoundly impact the effectiveness of cognitive rehabilitation programs. Immersion is the technological capability of a system to create an illusion of reality for the user’s senses, making them an active part of the 3D environment [27]. A sensory-rich environment is provided, which fosters experiential learning. In VR for cognitive rehabilitation, immersion means that patients are not just spectators but active participants in their therapy. They can interact with virtual objects, practice real-life scenarios, and receive immediate feedback, all of which are invaluable for retraining cognitive functions. For individuals with cognitive impairments, immersion helps to bridge the gap between abstract cognitive exercises and practical, real-world challenges. For instance, a person recovering from a traumatic brain injury might use VR to navigate a virtual supermarket, practicing memory and decision-making skills in a context that closely mirrors their daily life. This kind of immersive, contextually relevant training can enhance the transfer of learned skills to real-world situations, a critical goal in cognitive rehabilitation [28][29]. A subjective correlate of immersion is the illusion of “being there”, or the sense of presence [21][30], which refers to the feeling of being physically and mentally present in the computer-generated environment, despite knowing it is not real. The greater the immersion, the greater the sense of presence [31]. Lo Priore and colleagues [32] developed the V-Store, where typical subjects could complete six sets of tasks involving categorical abstraction, programming, short-term memory, and attention. The study aimed to investigate the sense of presence in both immersive and non-immersive conditions. The results indicated a higher psychophysiological galvanic skin response in the immersive group compared to the non-immersive group.
In the context of cognitive rehabilitation, the sense of presence can be harnessed to engage patients more deeply in their therapeutic activities. When individuals feel immersed in a VR scenario, they are more likely to invest their attention and effort, leading to improved outcomes. For example, a stroke survivor participating in VR-based hand–eye coordination exercises may experience a heightened sense of presence, making them more motivated to complete their rehabilitation tasks. This increased engagement can accelerate the recovery process by encouraging consistent and enthusiastic participation in therapy.

2.2. Ecological Validity

Human behavior occurs within a dynamic relationship with the natural environment. Individuals do not passively perceive external stimuli, which are often multimodal and complex; instead, they actively interact with their surroundings. As a result, findings from laboratory settings may exhibit low ecological validity. Additionally, within the field of behavioral neuroscience, such findings may not accurately identify the neural mechanisms underpinning natural behavior. Virtual Reality (VR) could offer a valuable solution to this issue [33], as it allows for a high degree of experimental control while providing environments that closely resemble real-life settings [34]. It is worth noting that immersion and ecological validity are interconnected [33]. However, the ecological validity of VR for cognitive rehabilitation remains a critical point of consideration. While VR environments can be tailored to simulate real-world scenarios and challenges, the extent to which these simulations mimic the complexities of everyday life is a subject of ongoing debate. One of the key strengths of VR lies in its ability to provide controlled and repetitive exposure to stimuli and tasks, facilitating targeted cognitive training. However, the ecological validity of these exercises hinges on the accuracy of the virtual environments in replicating the challenges individuals encounter in their daily lives [35]. For instance, a VR driving simulator can help to retrain cognitive functions related to attention and decision-making, but its effectiveness relies on how closely it mirrors the unpredictability and complexity of actual road conditions. Researchers must strive to strike a balance between controlled training environments and ecologically valid scenarios to ensure that cognitive gains achieved in VR translate effectively into real-world functioning [35][36]. Moreover, assessing the ecological validity of VR-based cognitive rehabilitation necessitates a multifaceted approach. It involves not only the fidelity of the virtual environment but also the individual’s ability to generalize skills and strategies learned in VR to real-world settings. Long-term studies that track patients’ progress and functioning in their daily lives following VR rehabilitation are crucial for evaluating its ecological validity. Additionally, interdisciplinary collaboration between cognitive psychologists, VR developers, and healthcare professionals is vital to fine-tune VR applications, ensuring that they align with rehabilitation goals and the complexities of real-life challenges. While challenges remain, the continuous advancement of VR technology and research holds promise for enhancing the ecological validity of VR-based cognitive rehabilitation, offering individuals with cognitive impairments a more effective pathway toward functional recovery.

2.3. Embodiment and Multisensory Feedback

Embodiment and multisensory feedback play pivotal roles in the effectiveness of VR for cognitive rehabilitation. Embodiment refers to the sensation of one’s physical presence within a virtual environment [37][38]. In the context of cognitive rehabilitation, embodiment is crucial [27], as it can facilitate a profound connection between the patient and the virtual world. By embodying an avatar or virtual representation of themselves, individuals can engage in rehabilitative activities that closely mimic real-life situations. For example, a patient re-learning how to walk after a stroke can embody an avatar and experience the sensation of walking, allowing them to practice and regain motor skills in a controlled and immersive setting. This embodiment not only enhances motivation but also leverages the brain’s plasticity, potentially accelerating the recovery process [27]. Multisensory feedback is another key element in VR-based cognitive rehabilitation, and elderly people seem to benefit from multisensorial learning [39]. VR technology can provide patients with a rich array of sensory inputs, such as visual, auditory, and haptic feedback, making therapy more engaging and effective. For instance, a patient with cognitive impairments related to spatial awareness can benefit from a VR environment that provides multisensory cues about their surroundings, helping them to re-learn navigation skills. Furthermore, multisensory feedback can offer real-time information and reinforcement during therapy sessions, aiding individuals in understanding their progress and making necessary adjustments. The integration of multiple sensory modalities in VR not only enhances the overall rehabilitation experience but also provides a versatile platform to cater to a wide range of cognitive challenges.

3. Cognitive Domains in Rehabilitation

3.1. Attention

Virtual Reality has been extensively applied in attention rehabilitation for individuals with attention deficits, for example, due to stroke [40] or traumatic brain injury [41]. VR environments, reflecting real routes and landscapes, can be designed to include stimuli and distractors, mimicking real-life situations where the user’s focus is challenged. In these environments, users may be required to perform tasks while ignoring distractions and focusing on targets, gradually improving their attentional control, not only into the VR scenario, but also in real life. For example, it is possible to do an activity where users navigate (or are navigated) through a virtual path along which they name the virtual objects encountered. Another example exercise involves a VR driving simulation, where the user must maintain concentration on the road while ignoring roadside billboards or sudden roadblocks, enhancing sustained attention abilities.
There are numerous applications of VR in cognitive–motor rehabilitation, and various studies have demonstrated the significant potential and benefits, including improvements in attention, of the use of VR in patients with MCI. Training activities using games designed for the Xbox 360 Kinect have shown benefits both in the short term and in the long term [42]. Virtual reality-based physical and cognitive (dual-task) training programs have led to significant improvements in dual-task gait performance, which may be attributed to enhancements in executive function [43]. Dual-task applications have improved motivation for rehabilitation and cognitive function [44].
The use of VR has also demonstrated benefits for chronic stroke patients. For instance, it has been observed that attention, spatial awareness, and depressive mood can be positively influenced by employing an Adaptive Conjunctive Cognitive Training (ACCT) in virtual reality [45]. The utilization of the Reh@City v2.0 app, a simulator for daily living activities, has revealed improvements in various cognitive domains in everyday life [22].

3.2. Memory

VR is a potent tool for memory assessment and rehabilitation, addressing both short-term and long-term memory impairments. For short-term memory deficits, VR tasks might include exercises where users must remember a series of objects or locations in a virtual environment, training their working memory. Long-term memory can be targeted by immersing users in memorable virtual scenarios. For instance, individuals with Alzheimer’s disease can revisit familiar places or events from their past through VR, potentially improving autobiographical memory recall.
Virtual reality can be effectively used for both the assessment of memory impairments and memory rehabilitation. In memory assessment, the use of virtual reality can provide more comprehensive, ecologically valid, and controlled evaluations of memory than standardized tests can offer. It can also more effectively guide rehabilitation efforts tailored to the specific impairments of individual patients. Moreover, VR rehabilitation promotes procedural learning in people with memory impairments, and this improvement carries over to the real world [46][47].
While current VR rehabilitation solutions for aging and neurodegenerative diseases are still in their early stages of development, the ability to engage with body-related information, manipulate objects, receive environmental stimuli, and incorporate multisensory cues makes virtual reality one of the most promising options for spatial memory rehabilitation in aging populations [48]. Furthermore, some studies have shown that VR training, on one hand, can lead to an improvement, or at the very least, the maintenance, of cognitive functions [22][45][49]. On the other hand, it enhances motivation for rehabilitation and cognitive function [44] and is both feasible and well-tolerated by participants [50].

3.3. Executive Functions

VR-based interventions are particularly effective for rehabilitating EFs, such as problem-solving, planning, and decision making [51]. Users can engage in complex, real-world scenarios that demand strategic thinking. The assessment of Executive Functions (EFs) through VR applications typically involves daily-living skill tasks. Indeed, research has established a specific relationship between EFs and activities in daily living [52][53][54]. The virtual supermarket environment is the most commonly utilized, as shopping is considered an essential skill for everyday life. Supermarket and grocery scenarios [55][56][57][58][59], as well as VR versions of the Multiple Errands Test, were developed for this purpose [60][61]. Furthermore, VR environments replicating city locations, apartments [62][63][64], office scenarios [65], and kitchens for cooking tasks [66] have been created. In these scenarios, individuals must follow recipes, manage time, and make decisions about ingredient quantities, thereby exercising their planning and problem-solving abilities.
Additionally, VR-based neuropsychological tests can assess EFs in a more ecologically valid manner and may complement traditional paper-and-pencil neuropsychological assessments or enhance their psychometric validity [7][55][61][62][66][67][68][69].
Regarding the rehabilitation of executive deficits, most studies have developed scenarios based on real-life situations, in which patients perform daily living skills. A positive correlation between standard cognitive and functional measures was found in a task simulating a fire evacuation, administered to participants with MCI, mild AD, and healthy controls [64]. The use of daily living scenarios appeared to have positive effects in rehabilitating and maintaining cognitive functions in patients with stroke [70], AD [51][71][72], various types of dementia [73], and MCI [71][72][74].
Some studies have explored non-daily living virtual environments. For instance, Huang [75] combined exergaming (Fruit Ninja) with VR. Adults and older individuals (non-clinical groups) participated in a 4-week training program, showing improvements in inhibition and task switching, mediated by the sense of presence. Programs that combine VR-based physical and cognitive training have shown effectiveness not only in cognitive function but also in IADL (Instrumental Activities of Daily Living) standard measures in patients with MCI [9][76]. Another study proposed an exergame platform, the Active Brain Trainer, focused on EFs, and designed for patients with acquired brain injury (ABI) in the chronic phase. This feasibility study found both neuropsychological and functional improvements.
A recent review [11] evaluated the effectiveness of VR programs on EFs in patients with MCI. Fourteen randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included in the study: seven of them used semi-immersive VR, four used fully immersive VR, and three used non-immersive VR. The authors suggested a positive effect of VR applications on cognitive flexibility (especially with semi-immersive and non-immersive VR), global cognitive function, attention, and short-term memory (especially with non-immersive VR) compared to the control groups.
In a recent study by Araújo et al. [77], the effects of a single session of VR, augmented reality, and neuro-functional physiotherapy on EFs and postural control in individuals with Parkinson’s disease without cognitive impairments were compared. The sessions lasted 50 min each, with a 7-day interval between them. All three intervention modalities improved both EFs and postural control.

3.4. Spatial Skills

Spatial cognition and navigation abilities are vital for everyday tasks, and VR can provide tailored interventions for individuals with deficits in this domain. Users can practice wayfinding in VR environments, like virtual cities or mazes, improving their spatial orientation and navigation skills. The literature on this topic was reviewed with a focus on patients presenting with various neuropsychological diseases. The results underscored the potential of navigation tasks in virtual environments to enhance navigation and orientation skills in patients with spatial memory disorders [78]. For individuals with brain injuries impacting spatial skills, exercises involving map reading, virtual treasure hunts, or even architectural design tasks can promote spatial cognition recovery. Currently, the rehabilitation of navigation ability and spatial orientation after brain damage is generally focused on training within the rehabilitation hospital or in the patient’s home as part of common physiotherapy and occupational therapy sessions.
The development of virtual reality (VR) applications may enable better generalization and the precise assessment and rehabilitation of spatial skills [79][80]. Studies with stroke patients who compared cognitive test results before and after VR training involving navigation and orientation in virtual environments have shown improvements in several cognitive domains (such as executive and visuospatial skills, language, attention, and memory skills) [22][81][82]. A controlled study with community-dwelling chronic stroke and cognitively impaired stroke patients who performed 30 min of daily exercise for 6 weeks showed significant improvements in attention, spatial awareness, and generalized cognitive functioning in the experimental group compared to the control group, who solved standard cognitive tasks at home for an equivalent period of time [45].
In the context of neurodegenerative diseases, a study was conducted with patients at risk of developing Alzheimer’s disease (AD) who performed worse than their age-matched controls, making it a potential tool for diagnosing disease development [83]. Additionally, AD patients showed impairments in VR tasks designed to study navigation skills; however, their performance could not be used to predict the degree of disorientation they might experience in the real world [84]. In one case study, a man at the onset of AD was enrolled in a cognitive treatment program based on spatial navigation in a VR environment. The results showed that the participant learned to navigate perfectly towards the desired goals in the virtual environment over the course of the training program. Furthermore, subjective feedback from his primary caregiver indicated that his ability to orient himself while driving improved significantly, and he appreciated the cognitive improvement in his daily life at home. These findings suggest that VR treatments could benefit other people with AD [85].

3.5. Language

VR-based language rehabilitation is beneficial for individuals with aphasia or language impairments. In VR environments, users can engage in interactive conversations with virtual characters, practicing their language comprehension and expression.
Some studies have investigated virtual reality in neurorehabilitation with the aim of analyzing its effects on specific cognitive domains, for example, memory, attention, executive functions, language, and visuospatial abilities [13][86]. The results relating to language are conflicting; in some cases, there were no significant improvements after rehabilitation based on virtual reality [13], and in other studies improvements were observed in specific areas, for example, in verbal fluency [86].
This inhomogeneity of results is confirmed by another study [87], which demonstrated a borderline-positive clinical effect of VR for the severity of the language disorder compared to conventional rehabilitation therapy, while no effects of VR were found on functional communication, word search, and on repetition.
Giachero et al. [88] conducted a study in which thirty-six people with chronic aphasia (PWA) were randomly assigned to two groups. The VR group underwent conversational therapy while observing daily life in VR, while the control group was trained in a conventional environment without VR support. Within-group comparisons showed significant improvement in several language tasks only in the VR group. Significant gains, after the treatment, were also found in the VR group in various psychological dimensions, for example, self-esteem and emotional and mood state.
In a quasi-randomized study on a group of people with aphasia, a platform called Eva Park was tested, which contained a number of functional and fantastic places and allowed for interactive communication between multiple users. After a 5-week training program, significant improvements in functional communication were noted; there was excellent compliance with the intervention, with no participant lost to follow-up [89].
Marshall et al. [90] investigated the possibility of providing group social support to people with aphasia via a multi-user virtual reality platform with the aim of promoting well-being and communication success. The feasibility results showed that the recruitment objective was achieved with excellent participant compliance, while no significant change was observed in any of the outcome measures (well-being, communication, social connection and quality of life). Overall, however, the data suggested that a broader trial of remote group support, using virtual reality, would be worthwhile.
Regarding the use of VR in the assessment of acquired language disorders, the study by Wall et al. [91] shows preliminary evidence that the VR cognitive assessment app for aphasia is a feasible cognitive assessment for stroke survivors with and without aphasia.
There are currently no VR applications that have been designed to assess or treat cognitive-communication disorders (CCDs) following traumatic brain injury (TBI). A study of Brassel et al. aimed to explore the views of speech–language pathologists (SLPs) who work with people who have a TBI to generate ideas and considerations for using VR in rehabilitation for CCDs [92]. Useful suggestions emerged from the thematic analysis to overcome possible obstacles to the use of VR, and the idea also emerged that VR could be a very useful tool for improving clinical practice.
These interactions can be customized to target specific language deficits, such as naming difficulties. Furthermore, VR environments can simulate real-life scenarios like a grocery store or a restaurant, enabling users to practice functional language skills in context.

3.6. The Activities of Daily Living and the Instrumental Activities of Daily Living

VR-based programs have emerged as groundbreaking approaches for improving the activities of daily living (ADL) and the instrumental activities of daily living (IADL) [56][74][93], especially for individuals with various mental disorders such as MCI and AD [72]. These applications can be personalized according to the strengths and weaknesses of the patients, immersing them in realistic virtual environments where they can practice a wide range of tasks, from basic self-care routines to more complex activities like grocery shopping or managing finances. VR therapy not only enhances physical and cognitive skills but also fosters a sense of independence and confidence in individuals striving to regain control over their daily lives.
Only a few studies have developed programs with scenarios for daily living to re-learn specific functional living skills and evaluate the impact that this re-learning has on actual skills in natural environments [28][29][71][94][95][96][97][98]. The results of these studies will be described in Section 4. However, some general indications can be drawn:
  • The utility of familiarization training before starting real VR training, especially for older people who are less familiar with even simple technological devices.
  • Virtual training (VT) should have a sufficient duration, of at least a few weeks, to allow for the re-learning of functional living skills.
  • The development of the virtual application should include not only feedback but also error corrections and prompts to help patients to produce the correct responses.
  • VT variable scores and/or standard neuropsychological and quality of life measures should be included, as well as questionnaires on agreement, acceptability, and negative side effects.
In the virtual assessment of everyday functions, a study by Allain et al. [99] used a non-immersive virtual coffee machine for a coffee-making task with patients with AD. The authors aimed to compare virtual and real tasks, as well as to find links between the virtual task and global cognition, executive functions, and IADL (as reported by caregivers). The findings showed correlations between the virtual task and all the cognitive and IADL measures, as well as the ability of the virtual task to predict the actual skill.

3.7. A Holistic Approach

VR-based interventions excel in addressing multiple cognitive domains simultaneously. For example, a VR-based shopping scenario can require users to plan their shopping list (EFs), navigate through the store (spatial skills), maintain attention to the task (attention), recall item names (memory), and engage in conversations with store attendants (language). This holistic approach is particularly valuable for individuals with complex cognitive deficits, promoting comprehensive cognitive rehabilitation. VR technology’s adaptability and versatility make it a valuable tool for creating tailored interventions that cater to the specific cognitive needs of each individual, fostering a more inclusive and effective approach to cognitive rehabilitation.

3.8. Stress and Cognitive Load

The intersection of VR and human psychology has also been explored. Kim et al. [100] analyzed the stress-alleviating potential of VR by conducting an open randomized crossover trial on individuals experiencing high stress levels. Their findings reveal that exposure to VR not only significantly reduces stress but also induces positive changes in physiological parameters, particularly heart rate variability. The study suggests that immersive VR experiences have promising applications in stress management interventions. Complementing this, Collins et al. [101] contributed to the discourse by proposing a methodology to measure cognitive load and insight in VR learning contexts. By employing a mixed-methods approach, combining self-reporting measures and physiological data, they offer a comprehensive understanding of cognitive processes in VR. This integrated approach sheds light on the intricate relationship between stress reduction, emotional load, and cognitive processes in VR environments, paving the way for more refined and effective applications in areas such as stress management and virtual learning experiences.

3.9. Multisensory Feedback

Multisensory feedback, particularly in the context of integrating VR with biofeedback mechanisms such as electroencephalogram (EEG) and electrocardiogram (ECG), represents a groundbreaking approach to enhance user experience and therapeutic interventions. Studies exploring the synergy between VR and biofeedback have demonstrated promising outcomes in various fields [102]. For instance, in the realm of rehabilitation, VR coupled with biofeedback can facilitate motor skill development and cognitive rehabilitation by providing immersive and responsive environments [103]. The integration of EEG and ECG data into VR experiences not only enhances the realism and interactivity of virtual environments but also provides valuable insights into users’ cognitive and emotional states. This holistic approach to feedback systems not only elevates the immersive quality of VR but also holds great potential for advancing fields such as healthcare, education, and mental well-being.

References

  1. Wen, D.; Lan, X.; Zhou, Y.; Li, G.; Hsu, S.H.; Jung, T.P. The Study of Evaluation and Rehabilitation of Patients with Different Cognitive Impairment Phases Based on Virtual Reality and EEG. Front. Aging Neurosci. 2018, 10, 88.
  2. Cipresso, P.; Giglioli, I.A.C.; Raya, M.A.; Riva, G. The Past, Present, and Future of Virtual and Augmented Reality Research: A Network and Cluster Analysis of the Literature. Front. Psychol. 2018, 9, 2086.
  3. Maggio, M.G.; Maresca, G.; De Luca, R.; Stagnitti, M.C.; Porcari, B.; Ferrera, M.C.; Galletti, F.; Casella, C.; Manuli, A.; Calabro, R.S. The Growing Use of Virtual Reality in Cognitive Rehabilitation: Fact, Fake or Vision? A Scoping Review. J. Natl. Med. Assoc. 2019, 111, 457–463.
  4. D’Cunha, N.M.; Nguyen, D.; Naumovski, N.; McKune, A.J.; Kellett, J.; Georgousopoulou, E.N.; Frost, J.; Isbel, S. A Mini-Review of Virtual Reality-Based Interventions to Promote Well-Being for People Living with Dementia and Mild Cognitive Impairment. Gerontology 2019, 65, 430–440.
  5. Parsons, T.D.; Gaggioli, A.; Riva, G. Extended Reality for the Clinical, Affective, and Social Neurosciences. Brain Sci. 2020, 10, 922.
  6. Zhu, S.; Sui, Y.; Shen, Y.; Zhu, Y.; Ali, N.; Guo, C.; Wang, T. Effects of Virtual Reality Intervention on Cognition and Motor Function in Older Adults with Mild Cognitive Impairment or Dementia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Front. Aging Neurosci. 2021, 13, 586999.
  7. Kim, E.; Han, J.; Choi, H.; Prie, Y.; Vigier, T.; Bulteau, S.; Kwon, G.H. Examining the Academic Trends in Neuropsychological Tests for Executive Functions Using Virtual Reality: Systematic Literature Review. JMIR Serious Games 2021, 9, e30249.
  8. Dores, A.R.; Barbosa, F.; Marques, A.; Carvalho, I.P.; De Sousa, L.; Castro-Caldas, A. Virtual reality and rehabilitation: Why or why not? A systematic literature review. Acta Medica Port. 2012, 25, 414–421.
  9. Liao, Y.Y.; Tseng, H.Y.; Lin, Y.J.; Wang, C.J.; Hsu, W.C. Using virtual reality-based training to improve cognitive function, instrumental activities of daily living and neural efficiency in older adults with mild cognitive impairment. Eur. J. Phys. Rehabil. Med. 2020, 56, 47–57.
  10. Georgiev, D.D.; Georgieva, I.; Gong, Z.; Nanjappan, V.; Georgiev, G.V. Virtual Reality for Neurorehabilitation and Cognitive Enhancement. Brain Sci. 2021, 11, 221.
  11. Yu, D.; Li, X.; Lai, F.H. The effect of virtual reality on executive function in older adults with mild cognitive impairment: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Aging Ment. Health 2023, 27, 663–673.
  12. Lin, C.; Ren, Y.; Lu, A. The effectiveness of virtual reality games in improving cognition, mobility, and emotion in elderly post-stroke patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Neurosurg. Rev. 2023, 46, 167.
  13. Riva, G.; Mancuso, V.; Cavedoni, S.; Stramba-Badiale, C. Virtual reality in neurorehabilitation: A review of its effects on multiple cognitive domains. Expert Rev. Med. Devices 2020, 17, 1035–1061.
  14. Devos, H.; Ng, C.; Santos, F.H.; Sood, P.; Hu, X.; Zanwar, P.; Ogawa, E.; Heyn, P. Virtual Reality for Cognitive Rehabilitation: A Beginner’s Guide for Clinicians. Arch. Phys. Med. Rehabil. 2023, 104, 355–358.
  15. Delrieu, J.; Andrieu, S.; Pahor, M.; Cantet, C.; Cesari, M.; Ousset, P.J.; Voisin, T.; Fougere, B.; Gillette, S.; Carrie, I.; et al. Neuropsychological Profile of “Cognitive Frailty” Subjects in MAPT Study. J. Prev. Alzheimer’s Dis. 2016, 3, 151–159.
  16. Serino, S.; Barello, S.; Miraglia, F.; Triberti, S.; Repetto, C. Virtual Reality as a Potential Tool to Face Frailty Challenges. Front. Psychol. 2017, 8, 1541.
  17. Brigola, A.G.; Rossetti, E.S.; Dos Santos, B.R.; Neri, A.L.; Zazzetta, M.S.; Inouye, K.; Pavarini, S.C.I. Relationship between cognition and frailty in elderly: A systematic review. Dement. Neuropsychol. 2015, 9, 110–119.
  18. Pedroli, E.; Mancuso, V.; Stramba-Badiale, C.; Cipresso, P.; Tuena, C.; Greci, L.; Goulene, K.; Stramba-Badiale, M.; Riva, G.; Gaggioli, A. Brain M-App’s Structure and Usability: A New Application for Cognitive Rehabilitation at Home. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 2022, 16, 898633.
  19. American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th ed.; American Psychiatric Publishing: Arlington, VA, USA, 2013.
  20. Ventura, S.; Brivio, E.; Riva, G.; Banos, R.M. Immersive Versus Non-immersive Experience: Exploring the Feasibility of Memory Assessment Through 360 degrees Technology. Front. Psychol. 2019, 10, 2509.
  21. Slater, M.; Sanchez-Vives, M.V. Enhancing Our Lives with Immersive Virtual Reality. Front. Robot. AI 2016, 3, 74.
  22. Faria, A.L.; Pinho, M.S.; Bermudez, I.B.S. A comparison of two personalization and adaptive cognitive rehabilitation approaches: A randomized controlled trial with chronic stroke patients. J. Neuroeng. Rehabil. 2020, 17, 78.
  23. Cruz-Neira, C.; Sandin, D.J.; DeFanti, T.A.; Kenyon, R.V.; Hart, J.C. The CAVE: Audio Visual Experience Automatic Virtual Environment. Commun. ACM 1992, 35, 64–72.
  24. Higuera-Trujillo, J.L.; Lopez-Tarruella Maldonado, J.; Llinares Millan, C. Psychological and physiological human responses to simulated and real environments: A comparison between Photographs, 360 degrees Panoramas, and Virtual Reality. Appl. Ergon. 2017, 65, 398–409.
  25. Appel, L.; Appel, E.; Bogler, O.; Wiseman, M.; Cohen, L.; Ein, N.; Abrams, H.B.; Campos, J.L. Older Adults with Cognitive and/or Physical Impairments Can Benefit from Immersive Virtual Reality Experiences: A Feasibility Study. Front. Med. 2019, 6, 329.
  26. Plechata, A.; Sahula, V.; Fayette, D.; Fajnerova, I. Age-Related Differences with Immersive and Non-immersive Virtual Reality in Memory Assessment. Front. Psychol. 2019, 10, 1330.
  27. Tieri, G.; Morone, G.; Paolucci, S.; Iosa, M. Virtual reality in cognitive and motor rehabilitation: Facts, fiction and fallacies. Expert Rev. Med. Devices 2018, 15, 107–117.
  28. Panerai, S.; Gelardi, D.; Catania, V.; Rundo, F.; Tasca, D.; Musso, S.; Prestianni, G.; Muratore, S.; Babiloni, C.; Ferri, R. Functional Living Skills: A Non-Immersive Virtual Reality Training for Individuals with Major Neurocognitive Disorders. Sensors 2021, 21, 5751.
  29. Panerai, S.; Catania, V.; Rundo, F.; Tasca, D.; Musso, S.; Babiloni, C.; Prestianni, G.; Muratore, S.; Ferri, R. Functional Living Skills in Patients with Major Neurocognitive Disorder Due to Degenerative or Non-Degenerative Conditions: Effectiveness of a Non-Immersive Virtual Reality Training. Sensors 2023, 23, 1896.
  30. Sanchez-Vives, M.V.; Slater, M. From presence to consciousness through virtual reality. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 2005, 6, 332–339.
  31. Bohil, C.J.; Alicea, B.; Biocca, F.A. Virtual reality in neuroscience research and therapy. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 2011, 12, 752–762.
  32. Lo Priore, C.; Castelnuovo, G.; Liccione, D.; Liccione, D. Experience with V-STORE: Considerations on presence in virtual environments for effective neuropsychological rehabilitation of executive functions. Cyberpsychology Behav. Impact Internet Multimed. Virtual Real. Behav. Soc. 2003, 6, 281–287.
  33. Thurley, K. Naturalistic neuroscience and virtual reality. Front. Syst. Neurosci. 2022, 16, 896251.
  34. Minderer, M.; Harvey, C.D.; Donato, F.; Moser, E.I. Neuroscience: Virtual reality explored. Nature 2016, 533, 324–325.
  35. Parsons, T.D. Virtual Reality for Enhanced Ecological Validity and Experimental Control in the Clinical, Affective and Social Neurosciences. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 2015, 9, 660.
  36. Bell, I.H.; Nicholas, J.; Alvarez-Jimenez, M.; Thompson, A.; Valmaggia, L. Virtual reality as a clinical tool in mental health research and practice. Dialogues Clin. Neurosci. 2020, 22, 169–177.
  37. Kilteni, K.; Groten, R.; Slater, M. The Sense of Embodiment in Virtual Reality. Presence Teleoper. Virtual Environ. 2012, 21, 373–387.
  38. Slater, M.; Perez-Marcos, D.; Ehrsson, H.H.; Sanchez-Vives, M.V. Inducing illusory ownership of a virtual body. Front. Neurosci. 2009, 3, 214–220.
  39. Bauer, A.C.M.; Andringa, G. The Potential of Immersive Virtual Reality for Cognitive Training in Elderly. Gerontology 2020, 66, 614–623.
  40. Buxbaum, L.J.; Palermo, M.A.; Mastrogiovanni, D.; Read, M.S.; Rosenberg-Pitonyak, E.; Rizzo, A.A.; Coslett, H.B. Assessment of spatial attention and neglect with a virtual wheelchair navigation task. J. Clin. Exp. Neuropsychol. 2008, 30, 650–660.
  41. Cox, D.J.; Davis, M.; Singh, H.; Barbour, B.; Nidiffer, F.D.; Trudel, T.; Mourant, R.; Moncrief, R. Driving rehabilitation for military personnel recovering from traumatic brain injury using virtual reality driving simulation: A feasibility study. Mil. Med. 2010, 175, 411–416.
  42. Amjad, I.; Toor, H.; Niazi, I.K.; Pervaiz, S.; Jochumsen, M.; Shafique, M.; Haavik, H.; Ahmed, T. Xbox 360 Kinect Cognitive Games Improve Slowness, Complexity of EEG, and Cognitive Functions in Subjects with Mild Cognitive Impairment: A Randomized Control Trial. Games Health J. 2019, 8, 144–152.
  43. Liao, Y.Y.; Chen, I.H.; Lin, Y.J.; Chen, Y.; Hsu, W.C. Effects of Virtual Reality-Based Physical and Cognitive Training on Executive Function and Dual-Task Gait Performance in Older Adults with Mild Cognitive Impairment: A Randomized Control Trial. Front. Aging Neurosci. 2019, 11, 162.
  44. Park, J.S.; Jung, Y.J.; Lee, G. Virtual Reality-Based Cognitive-Motor Rehabilitation in Older Adults with Mild Cognitive Impairment: A Randomized Controlled Study on Motivation and Cognitive Function. Healthcare 2020, 8, 335.
  45. Maier, M.; Ballester, B.R.; Leiva Banuelos, N.; Duarte Oller, E.; Verschure, P. Adaptive conjunctive cognitive training (ACCT) in virtual reality for chronic stroke patients: A randomized controlled pilot trial. J. Neuroeng. Rehabil. 2020, 17, 42.
  46. Brooks, B.M.; Rose, F.D. The use of virtual reality in memory rehabilitation: Current findings and future directions. NeuroRehabilitation 2003, 18, 147–157.
  47. Matheis, R.J.; Schultheis, M.T.; Tiersky, L.A.; DeLuca, J.; Millis, S.R.; Rizzo, A. Is learning and memory different in a virtual environment? Clin. Neuropsychol. 2007, 21, 146–161.
  48. Tuena, C.; Serino, S.; Pedroli, E.; Stramba-Badiale, M.; Riva, G.; Repetto, C. Building Embodied Spaces for Spatial Memory Neurorehabilitation with Virtual Reality in Normal and Pathological Aging. Brain Sci. 2021, 11, 1067.
  49. Man, D.W.; Chung, J.C.; Lee, G.Y. Evaluation of a virtual reality-based memory training programme for Hong Kong Chinese older adults with questionable dementia: A pilot study. Int. J. Geriatr. Psychiatry 2012, 27, 513–520.
  50. Park, J.H.; Liao, Y.; Kim, D.R.; Song, S.; Lim, J.H.; Park, H.; Lee, Y.; Park, K.W. Feasibility and Tolerability of a Culture-Based Virtual Reality (VR) Training Program in Patients with Mild Cognitive Impairment: A Randomized Controlled Pilot Study. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 3030.
  51. Oliveira, J.; Gamito, P.; Souto, T.; Conde, R.; Ferreira, M.; Corotnean, T.; Fernandes, A.; Silva, H.; Neto, T. Virtual Reality-Based Cognitive Stimulation on People with Mild to Moderate Dementia due to Alzheimer’s Disease: A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 5290.
  52. Tomaszewski Farias, S.; Cahn-Weiner, D.A.; Harvey, D.J.; Reed, B.R.; Mungas, D.; Kramer, J.H.; Chui, H. Longitudinal changes in memory and executive functioning are associated with longitudinal change in instrumental activities of daily living in older adults. Clin. Neuropsychol. 2009, 23, 446–461.
  53. Hall, J.R.; Vo, H.T.; Johnson, L.A.; Barber, R.C.; O’Bryant, S.E. The Link between Cognitive Measures and ADLs and IADL Functioning in Mild Alzheimer’s: What Has Gender Got to Do with It? Int. J. Alzheimer’s Dis. 2011, 2011, 276734.
  54. Moro, V.; Condoleo, M.T.; Valbusa, V.; Broggio, E.; Moretto, G.; Gambina, G. Cognitive stimulation of executive functions in mild cognitive impairment: Specific efficacy and impact in memory. Am. J. Alzheimer’s Dis. Other Dement. 2015, 30, 153–164.
  55. Jacoby, M.; Averbuch, S.; Sacher, Y.; Katz, N.; Weiss, P.L.; Kizony, R. Effectiveness of executive functions training within a virtual supermarket for adults with traumatic brain injury: A pilot study. IEEE Trans. Neural Syst. Rehabil. Eng. A Publ. IEEE Eng. Med. Biol. Soc. 2013, 21, 182–190.
  56. Nir-Hadad, S.Y.; Weiss, P.L.; Waizman, A.; Schwartz, N.; Kizony, R. A virtual shopping task for the assessment of executive functions: Validity for people with stroke. Neuropsychol. Rehabil. 2017, 27, 808–833.
  57. Parsons, T.D.; McMahan, T. An initial validation of the Virtual Environment Grocery Store. J. Neurosci. Methods 2017, 291, 13–19.
  58. Rand, D.; Katz, N.; Shahar, M.; Kizony, R.; Weiss, P.L. The virtual mall: A functional virtual environment for stroke rehabilitation. Annu. Rev. Cybertherapy Telemed. A Decade VR 2005, 3, 193–198.
  59. Kizony, R.; Josman, N.; Katz, N.; Rand, D.; Weiss, P.L. Virtual reality and the rehabilitation of executive functions: An annotated bibliography. Isr. J. Occup. Ther. 2008, 17, E47–E61.
  60. Raspelli, S.; Carelli, L.; Morganti, F.; Poletti, B.; Corra, B.; Silani, V.; Riva, G. Implementation of the multiple errands test in a NeuroVR-supermarket: A possible approach. Stud. Health Technol. Inform. 2010, 154, 115–119.
  61. Raspelli, S.; Pallavicini, F.; Carelli, L.; Morganti, F.; Poletti, B.; Corra, B.; Silani, V.; Riva, G. Validation of a Neuro Virtual Reality-based version of the Multiple Errands Test for the assessment of executive functions. Stud. Health Technol. Inform. 2011, 167, 92–97.
  62. Renison, B.; Ponsford, J.; Testa, R.; Richardson, B.; Brownfield, K. The ecological and construct validity of a newly developed measure of executive function: The Virtual Library Task. J. Int. Neuropsychol. Soc. JINS 2012, 18, 440–450.
  63. Jovanovski, D.; Zakzanis, K.; Campbell, Z.; Erb, S.; Nussbaum, D. Development of a novel, ecologically oriented virtual reality measure of executive function: The Multitasking in the City Test. Appl. Neuropsychol. Adult 2012, 19, 171–182.
  64. Tarnanas, I.; Schlee, W.; Tsolaki, M.; Muri, R.; Mosimann, U.; Nef, T. Ecological validity of virtual reality daily living activities screening for early dementia: Longitudinal study. JMIR Serious Games 2013, 1, e1.
  65. Jansari, A.; Agnew, R.; Akesson, K.; Murphy, L. The use of virtual reality to assess and predict real-world executive dysfunction: Can VR help for work-placement rehabilitation? Brain Impair. 2004, 5, 110.
  66. Chicchi Giglioli, I.A.; Bermejo Vidal, C.; Alcaniz Raya, M. A Virtual Versus an Augmented Reality Cooking Task Based-Tools: A Behavioral and Physiological Study on the Assessment of Executive Functions. Front. Psychol. 2019, 10, 2529.
  67. Campbell, Z.; Zakzanis, K.K.; Jovanovski, D.; Joordens, S.; Mraz, R.; Graham, S.J. Utilizing virtual reality to improve the ecological validity of clinical neuropsychology: An FMRI case study elucidating the neural basis of planning by comparing the Tower of London with a three-dimensional navigation task. Appl. Neuropsychol. 2009, 16, 295–306.
  68. Borgnis, F.; Baglio, F.; Pedroli, E.; Rossetto, F.; Isernia, S.; Uccellatore, L.; Riva, G.; Cipresso, P. EXecutive-Functions Innovative Tool (EXIT 360 degrees): A Usability and User Experience Study of an Original 360 degrees-Based Assessment Instrument. Sensors 2021, 21, 5867.
  69. Borgnis, F.; Borghesi, F.; Rossetto, F.; Pedroli, E.; Lavorgna, L.; Riva, G.; Baglio, F.; Cipresso, P. Psychometric Calibration of a Tool Based on 360 Degree Videos for the Assessment of Executive Functions. J. Clin. Med. 2023, 12, 1645.
  70. Faria, A.L.; Andrade, A.; Soares, L.; Sb, I.B. Benefits of virtual reality based cognitive rehabilitation through simulated activities of daily living: A randomized controlled trial with stroke patients. J. Neuroeng. Rehabil. 2016, 13, 96.
  71. Manera, V.; Petit, P.D.; Derreumaux, A.; Orvieto, I.; Romagnoli, M.; Lyttle, G.; David, R.; Robert, P.H. ‘Kitchen and cooking’, a serious game for mild cognitive impairment and Alzheimer’s disease: A pilot study. Front. Aging Neurosci. 2015, 7, 24.
  72. Son, C.; Park, J.H. Ecological Effects of VR-Based Cognitive Training on ADL and IADL in MCI and AD patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 15875.
  73. Fasilis, T.; Patrikelis, P.; Siatouni, A.; Alexoudi, A.; Veretzioti, A.; Zachou, L.; Gatzonis, S.S. A pilot study and brief overview of rehabilitation via virtual environment in patients suffering from dementia. Psychiatr. Psychiatr. 2018, 29, 42–51.
  74. Park, J.H. Does the virtual shopping training improve executive function and instrumental activities of daily living of patients with mild cognitive impairment? Asian J. Psychiatry 2022, 69, 102977.
  75. Huang, K.T. Exergaming Executive Functions: An Immersive Virtual Reality-Based Cognitive Training for Adults Aged 50 and Older. Cyberpsychology Behav. Soc. Netw. 2020, 23, 143–149.
  76. Shochat, G.; Maoz, S.; Stark-Inbar, A.; Blumenfeld, B.; Rand, D.; Preminger, S.; Sacher, Y. Motion-based virtual reality cognitive training targeting executive functions in acquired brain injury community-dwelling individuals: A feasibility and initial efficacy pilot. In Proceedings of the 2017 International Conference on Virtual Rehabilitation (ICVR), Montreal, QC, Canada, 19–22 June 2017; pp. 1–8.
  77. Araujo, H.; Souza, R.J.; da Silva, T.C.O.; Nascimento, T.S.; Terra, M.B.; Smaili, S.M. Immediate Effect of Augmented Reality, Virtual Reality, and Neurofunctional Physiotherapy on Postural Control and Executive Function of Individuals with Parkinson’s Disease. Games Health J. 2023, 12, 211–219.
  78. Montana, J.I.; Tuena, C.; Serino, S.; Cipresso, P.; Riva, G. Neurorehabilitation of Spatial Memory Using Virtual Environments: A Systematic Review. J. Clin. Med. 2019, 8, 1516.
  79. Koenig, S.T.; Crucian, G.P.; Dalrymple-Alford, J.C.; Dunser, A. Virtual reality rehabilitation of spatial abilities after brain damage. Stud. Health Technol. Inform. 2009, 144, 105–107.
  80. Martelli, D.; Prado, A.; Xia, B.; Verghese, J.; Agrawal, S.K. Development of a Virtual Floor Maze Test—Effects of Distal Visual Cues and Correlations with Executive Function in Healthy Adults. IEEE Trans. Neural Syst. Rehabil. Eng. A Publ. IEEE Eng. Med. Biol. Soc. 2019, 27, 2229–2236.
  81. Maggio, M.G.; Latella, D.; Maresca, G.; Sciarrone, F.; Manuli, A.; Naro, A.; De Luca, R.; Calabro, R.S. Virtual Reality and Cognitive Rehabilitation in People with Stroke: An Overview. J. Neurosci. Nurs. J. Am. Assoc. Neurosci. Nurses 2019, 51, 101–105.
  82. Kober, S.E.; Wood, G.; Hofer, D.; Kreuzig, W.; Kiefer, M.; Neuper, C. Virtual reality in neurologic rehabilitation of spatial disorientation. J. Neuroeng. Rehabil. 2013, 10, 17.
  83. Castegnaro, A.; Howett, D.; Li, A.; Harding, E.; Chan, D.; Burgess, N.; King, J. Assessing mild cognitive impairment using object-location memory in immersive virtual environments. Hippocampus 2022, 32, 660–678.
  84. Coughlan, G.; Puthusseryppady, V.; Lowry, E.; Gillings, R.; Spiers, H.; Minihane, A.M.; Hornberger, M. Test-retest reliability of spatial navigation in adults at-risk of Alzheimer’s disease. PLoS ONE 2020, 15, e0239077.
  85. White, P.J.; Moussavi, Z. Neurocognitive Treatment for a Patient with Alzheimer’s Disease Using a Virtual Reality Navigational Environment. J. Exp. Neurosci. 2016, 10, 129–135.
  86. Mrakic-Sposta, S.; Di Santo, S.G.; Franchini, F.; Arlati, S.; Zangiacomi, A.; Greci, L.; Moretti, S.; Jesuthasan, N.; Marzorati, M.; Rizzo, G.; et al. Effects of Combined Physical and Cognitive Virtual Reality-Based Training on Cognitive Impairment and Oxidative Stress in MCI Patients: A Pilot Study. Front. Aging Neurosci. 2018, 10, 282.
  87. Cao, Y.; Huang, X.; Zhang, B.; Kranz, G.S.; Zhang, D.; Li, X.; Chang, J. Effects of virtual reality in post-stroke aphasia: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Neurol. Sci. Off. J. Ital. Neurol. Soc. Ital. Soc. Clin. Neurophysiol. 2021, 42, 5249–5259.
  88. Giachero, A.; Calati, M.; Pia, L.; La Vista, L.; Molo, M.; Rugiero, C.; Fornaro, C.; Marangolo, P. Conversational Therapy through Semi-Immersive Virtual Reality Environments for Language Recovery and Psychological Well-Being in Post Stroke Aphasia. Behav. Neurol. 2020, 2020, 2846046.
  89. Marshall, J.; Booth, T.; Devane, N.; Galliers, J.; Greenwood, H.; Hilari, K.; Talbot, R.; Wilson, S.; Woolf, C. Evaluating the Benefits of Aphasia Intervention Delivered in Virtual Reality: Results of a Quasi-Randomised Study. PLoS ONE 2016, 11, e0160381.
  90. Marshall, J.; Devane, N.; Talbot, R.; Caute, A.; Cruice, M.; Hilari, K.; MacKenzie, G.; Maguire, K.; Patel, A.; Roper, A.; et al. A randomised trial of social support group intervention for people with aphasia: A Novel application of virtual reality. PLoS ONE 2020, 15, e0239715.
  91. Wall, K.J.; Cumming, T.B.; Koenig, S.T.; Pelecanos, A.M.; Copland, D.A. Using technology to overcome the language barrier: The Cognitive Assessment for Aphasia App. Disabil. Rehabil. 2018, 40, 1333–1344.
  92. Brassel, S.; Brunner, M.; Power, E.; Campbell, A.; Togher, L. Speech-Language Pathologists’ Views of Using Virtual Reality for Managing Cognitive-Communication Disorders Following Traumatic Brain Injury. Am. J. Speech-Lang. Pathol. 2023, 32, 907–923.
  93. Borgnis, F.; Baglio, F.; Pedroli, E.; Rossetto, F.; Uccellatore, L.; Oliveira, J.A.G.; Riva, G.; Cipresso, P. Available Virtual Reality-Based Tools for Executive Functions: A Systematic Review. Front. Psychol. 2022, 13, 833136.
  94. Hofmann, M.; Rosler, A.; Schwarz, W.; Muller-Spahn, F.; Krauchi, K.; Hock, C.; Seifritz, E. Interactive computer-training as a therapeutic tool in Alzheimer’s disease. Compr. Psychiatry 2003, 44, 213–219.
  95. Van Schaik, P.; Martyr, A.; Blackman, T.; Robinson, J. Involving persons with dementia in the evaluation of outdoor environments. Cyberpsychology Behav. Impact Internet Multimed. Virtual Real. Behav. Soc. 2008, 11, 415–424.
  96. Foloppe, D.A.; Richard, P.; Yamaguchi, T.; Etcharry-Bouyx, F.; Allain, P. The potential of virtual reality-based training to enhance the functional autonomy of Alzheimer’s disease patients in cooking activities: A single case study. Neuropsychol. Rehabil. 2018, 28, 709–733.
  97. Yamaguchi, T.; Foloppe, D.A.; Richard, P.; Richard, E.; Allain, P. A Dual-Modal Virtual Reality Kitchen for (Re)Learning of Everyday Cooking Activities in Alzheimer’s Disease. Presence 2012, 21, 43–57.
  98. Panerai, S.; Catania, V.; Rundo, F.; Bevilacqua, V.; Brunetti, A.; De Meo, C.; Gelardi, D.; Babiloni, C.; Ferri, R. Feasibility of a Non-immersive Virtual Reality Training on Functional Living Skills Applied to Person with Major Neurocognitive Disorder. In Intelligent Computing Methodologies. ICIC 2019. Lecture Notes in Computer Science; Huang, D.S., Huang, Z.K., Hussain, A., Eds.; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2019; Volume 11645.
  99. Allain, P.; Foloppe, D.A.; Besnard, J.; Yamaguchi, T.; Etcharry-Bouyx, F.; Le Gall, D.; Nolin, P.; Richard, P. Detecting everyday action deficits in Alzheimer’s disease using a nonimmersive virtual reality kitchen. J. Int. Neuropsychol. Soc. JINS 2014, 20, 468–477.
  100. Kim, H.; Kim, D.J.; Kim, S.; Chung, W.H.; Park, K.A.; Kim, J.D.K.; Kim, D.; Kim, M.J.; Kim, K.; Jeon, H.J. Effect of Virtual Reality on Stress Reduction and Change of Physiological Parameters Including Heart Rate Variability in People with High Stress: An Open Randomized Crossover Trial. Front. Psychiatry 2021, 12, 614539.
  101. Collins, J.; Regenbrecht, H.; Langlotz, T.; Can, Y.S.; Ersoy, C.; Butson, R. Measuring cognitive load and insight: A methodology exemplified in a virtual reality learning context. In Proceedings of the 2019 IEEE International Symposium on Mixed and Augmented Reality (ISMAR), Beijing, China, 14–18 October 2019; pp. 351–362.
  102. Luddecke, R.; Felnhofer, A. Virtual Reality Biofeedback in Health: A Scoping Review. Appl. Psychophysiol. Biofeedback 2022, 47, 1–5.
  103. So, B.P.; Lai, D.K.; Cheung, D.S.; Lam, W.K.; Cheung, J.C.; Wong, D.W. Virtual Reality-Based Immersive Rehabilitation for Cognitive- and Behavioral-Impairment-Related Eating Disorders: A VREHAB Framework Scoping Review. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 5821.
More
© Text is available under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy.
Upload a video for this entry
Information
Subjects: Medical Informatics
Contributors MDPI registered users' name will be linked to their SciProfiles pages. To register with us, please refer to https://encyclopedia.pub/register :
Valentina Catania
,
Francesco Rundo
,
Simonetta Panerai
,
Raffaele Ferri
View Times: 112
Revisions: 2 times (View History)
Update Date: 05 Jan 2024
Table of Contents
    1000/1000
    Hot Most Recent
    Feedback