TY - JOUR
T1 - Visualizing the third dimension in virtual training environments for neurologically impaired persons : Beneficial or disruptive?
AU - Hoogen, van den, W.M.
AU - Feys, P.
AU - Lamers, I.
AU - Coninx, K.
AU - Notelaers, S.
AU - Kerkhofs, L.
AU - IJsselsteijn, W.A.
PY - 2012
Y1 - 2012
N2 - Background
Many contemporary systems for neurorehabilitation utilize 3D virtual environments (VEs)
that allow for training patients‘ hand or arm movements. In the current paper we
comparatively test the effectiveness of two characteristics of VEs in rehabilitation training
when utilizing a 3D haptic interaction device: Stereo Visualization (monoscopic vs
stereoscopic image presentation) and Graphic Environment (2.5D vs 3D).
Method
An experimental study was conducted using a factorial within-subjects design. Patients (10
MS, 8 CVA) completed three tasks, each including a specific arm-movement along one of
three directional axes (left-right, up-down and forward-backward).
Results
The use of stereoscopy within a virtual training environment for neurorehabilitation of CVA
and MS patients is most beneficial when the task itself requires movement in depth. Further
to this, the 2.5D environment yields the highest efficiency and accuracy in terms of patients‘
movements. These findings were, however, dependent on participants‘ stereoscopic ability.
Conclusion
Despite the performance benefits of stereoscopy, our findings illustrate the non-triviality of
choices of using stereoscopy, and the type of graphic environment implemented. These
choices should be made with the task and target group, and even the individual patient in
mind.
AB - Background
Many contemporary systems for neurorehabilitation utilize 3D virtual environments (VEs)
that allow for training patients‘ hand or arm movements. In the current paper we
comparatively test the effectiveness of two characteristics of VEs in rehabilitation training
when utilizing a 3D haptic interaction device: Stereo Visualization (monoscopic vs
stereoscopic image presentation) and Graphic Environment (2.5D vs 3D).
Method
An experimental study was conducted using a factorial within-subjects design. Patients (10
MS, 8 CVA) completed three tasks, each including a specific arm-movement along one of
three directional axes (left-right, up-down and forward-backward).
Results
The use of stereoscopy within a virtual training environment for neurorehabilitation of CVA
and MS patients is most beneficial when the task itself requires movement in depth. Further
to this, the 2.5D environment yields the highest efficiency and accuracy in terms of patients‘
movements. These findings were, however, dependent on participants‘ stereoscopic ability.
Conclusion
Despite the performance benefits of stereoscopy, our findings illustrate the non-triviality of
choices of using stereoscopy, and the type of graphic environment implemented. These
choices should be made with the task and target group, and even the individual patient in
mind.
U2 - 10.1186/1743-0003-9-73
DO - 10.1186/1743-0003-9-73
M3 - Article
C2 - 23036010
SN - 1743-0003
VL - 9
SP - 1
EP - 10
JO - Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation
JF - Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation
IS - 73
ER -