Omar Janeh
Keigo Matsumto
Brian Horsak- 1Department of Computer Engineering, University of Technology, Baghdad, Iraq
- 2Graduate School of Information Science and Technology, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan
- 3Center for Digital Health and Social Innovation, St. Pölten University of Applied Sciences, St Pölten, Austria
Editorial on the Research Topic
The role of perceptual manipulations of xr in neurological rehabilitation
Neurological rehabilitation aims to restore function and improve the quality of life for individuals with neurological impairments. In recent years, advancements in extended reality (XR) technologies, including virtual reality (VR), augmented reality (AR), and mixed reality (MR), have played a pivotal role in influencing and manipulating human perception. These technologies enhance neuroplasticity Cheung et al. (2014), promote motor learning Im et al. (2016), and alleviate symptoms like pain or neglect Dunn et al. (2017) by targeting specific sensory modalities such as visual, tactile, auditory, vestibular, and proprioceptive. As XR technological advances have improved, these allowed XR developers to manipulate perceptions of end-user experiences by creating real-world sensations in a virtual world. However, opportunities for object manipulation and body movement through virtual environments (VEs) provide frameworks that, in varying degrees, are perceived as comparable to similar opportunities in the real world.
Through manipulations in the XR, we can manipulate individual sources of sensory information, which are physiologically bound together. This makes it possible to study the contribution of these individual sensory inputs and multisensory integration to self-perception and motor control. This sensory manipulation takes advantage of the capabilities of XR to induce activation through observation and to perturb reality to target specific neural networks, particularly those neural networks associated with sensorimotor learning, thus promising the effective potential for rehabilitation training; e.g., to alleviate phantom limb pain Dunn et al. (2017) or improve upper limb function Regenbrecht et al. (2012). Treatment effects often arise when there’s a discrepancy between misleading visual feedback and other sensory inputs, which can significantly influence the outcome Saunders and Knill (2004); Ramachandran and Altschuler (2009). However, it is important to understand the neural mechanism underlying these innovative rehabilitation strategies Merians et al. (2009); Georgiev et al. (2021); Hao et al. (2022). Little is understood about the susceptibility of brain function to various sensory manipulations within the VE. It is critical to determine the underlying neurological mechanisms of moving and interacting within a VE and to consider how they may be exploited to facilitate activation in neural networks associated with sensorimotor learning.
This Research Topic, The Role of Perceptual Manipulations of XR in Neurological Rehabilitation, collected scientific contributions regarding advances in XR technology for the further understanding and treatment of neurological disorders. Five articles have been included in this Research Topic (four original research articles and one review) examining perceptual manipulations within virtual spaces. The first article by Eckhoff et al. investigate how AR influences the perception of thermal pain and detection thresholds. Participants experienced their hands covered in virtual flames or blue fluid using an AR. Virtual flames induced analgesic and hyperalgesic effects, whereas blue fluid did not affect thermal thresholds. The study highlights AR’s potential as a tool for pain modulation and therapy, altering sensory experiences through visual-auditory illusions. The second article by Winkler et al. investigates how social context affects reactivity to smoking cues using VR. The study involved smokers and non-smokers exposed to smoking cues and neutral stimuli in social or neutral VR contexts. The presence of a social context reduced cravings in smokers and increased the time taken to approach the cigarette, suggesting a modulatory effect. The findings underscore VR’s potential in exposure therapy for smoking cessation by simulating social environments and enhancing understanding and treatment of addictive behaviors. The third article conducted by Porffy et al., explores the development and validation of VStore, a VR-based intervention with an intent to increase the ecological validity of cognitive assessments. Involving healthy adults and patients with psychosis, the study found high completion rates and no adverse effects. Performance metrics varied significantly across age groups and patients, indicating VStore’s potential clinical utility for neuropsychological assessment, particularly in evaluating cognitive decline and functional capacity. The fourth article presented by Roy et al. evaluate the efficacy of Motion-Assisted, Multi-Modal Memory Desensitization and Reconsolidation (3MDR) for treating post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) in veterans with mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI); the results showing significant reductions in PTSD severity. The study suggests that 3MDR, potentially enhanced by the eye movement component, is effective for PTSD treatment in veterans with mTBI, warranting further investigation in larger trials. The final article on this Research Topic by Crowe et al. systematically reviews the literature on the use of virtual therapists in immersive VEs for motor rehabilitation. The study examines the roles and representations of therapists in VEs, the nature of therapist-patient interactions, the activities conducted, and the experiences of both patients and therapists. Interactions between therapists and patients typically involve visual, haptic, or one-way audio feedback. The review emphasizes the need for future research to explore the roles of virtual therapists in greater detail, focusing on reducing therapist manual input, enhancing personalization, and improving individualized patient feedback to support the therapeutic alliance in VR settings.
Author contributions
OJ: Writing–original draft, Writing–review and editing. KM: Writing–original draft, Writing–review and editing. BH: Writing–original draft, Writing–review and editing.
Funding
The author(s) declare that no financial support was received for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Publisher’s note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
References
Cheung, K. L., Tunik, E., Adamovich, S. V., and Boyd, L. A. (2014). Neuroplasticity and virtual reality. Virtual Real. Phys. Mot. rehabilitation. 5–24. doi:10.1007/978-1-4939-0968-1_2
Dunn, J., Yeo, E., Moghaddampour, P., Chau, B., and Humbert, S. (2017). Virtual and augmented reality in the treatment of phantom limb pain: a literature review. NeuroRehabilitation 40, 595–601. doi:10.3233/nre-171447
Georgiev, D. D., Georgieva, I., Gong, Z., Nanjappan, V., and Georgiev, G. V. (2021). Virtual reality for neurorehabilitation and cognitive enhancement. Brain Sci. 11, 221. doi:10.3390/brainsci11020221
Hao, J., Xie, H., Harp, K., Chen, Z., and Siu, K.-C. (2022). Effects of virtual reality intervention on neural plasticity in stroke rehabilitation: a systematic review. Archives Phys. Med. Rehabilitation 103, 523–541. doi:10.1016/j.apmr.2021.06.024
Im, H., Ku, J., Kim, H. J., and Kang, Y. J. (2016). Virtual reality-guided motor imagery increases corticomotor excitability in healthy volunteers and stroke patients. Ann. rehabilitation Med. 40, 420–431. doi:10.5535/arm.2016.40.3.420
Merians, A. S., Tunik, E., and Adamovich, S. V. (2009). Virtual reality to maximize function for hand and arm rehabilitation: exploration of neural mechanisms. In Advanced technologies in rehabilitation (Amsterdam: IOS Press). 109–125.
Ramachandran, V. S., and Altschuler, E. L. (2009). The use of visual feedback, in particular mirror visual feedback, in restoring brain function. Brain 132, 1693–1710. doi:10.1093/brain/awp135
Regenbrecht, H., Hoermann, S., McGregor, G., Dixon, B., Franz, E., Ott, C., et al. (2012). Visual manipulations for motor rehabilitation. Comput. and Graph. 36, 819–834. doi:10.1016/j.cag.2012.04.012
Keywords: extended reality, perceptual manipulations, perceptual illusions, neurological rehabilitation, sensorimotor learning, neuroplasticity
Citation: Janeh O, Matsumto K and Horsak B (2024) Editorial: The role of perceptual manipulations of XR in neurological rehabilitation. Front. Virtual Real. 5:1472756. doi: 10.3389/frvir.2024.1472756
Received: 30 July 2024; Accepted: 23 August 2024;
Published: 30 August 2024.
Edited and reviewed by:
Albert Rizzo, University of Southern California, United StatesCopyright © 2024 Janeh, Matsumto and Horsak. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
*Correspondence: Omar Janeh, MTIwMDQ5QHVvdGVjaG5vbG9neS5lZHUuaXE=