Effects of virtual reality and gamified digital rehabilitation on functional recovery in individuals with Spinal Cord Injury: a systematic review and Bayesian multilevel meta-analysis
5 affiliations
- 1School of Physical Education, Shanxi University , , ,
- 2School of Teacher Education, Hezhou University , , ,
- 3Department of Physical Education, Lyuliang University , , ,
- 4Department of Physical Education, Shanxi Institute of Science and Technology , , ,
- 5Faculty of Sports and Leisure, Guangdong Ocean University , , ,
Abstract
Background: Virtual reality (VR) and gamified digital rehabilitation can increase task-specific practice and feedback for individuals with Spinal Cord Injury (SCI); however, their incremental effects on functional recovery remain uncertain.
Methods: We searched PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and the Cochrane Library from database inception through July 1, 2026, for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating VR or gamified digital rehabilitation in adults with SCI. Comparator conditions were classified as active rehabilitation, sham or attention control, or minimal/no intervention. The primary outcome was the Spinal Cord Independence Measure (SCIM). Hedges’ g estimates were synthesized using a Bayesian three-level random-effects model that accounted for within-study dependence. We estimated the 95% credible interval (CrI), 95% prediction interval (PI), and posterior probabilities of any benefit ( g > 0) and of meeting a distribution-based threshold for clinical importance ( g ≥ 0.40). A post hoc sensitivity analysis restricted the SCIM synthesis to trials with active-rehabilitation comparators. Seven secondary outcomes were synthesized separately. Risk of bias and certainty of evidence were assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool (RoB 2) and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.
Results: Thirteen RCTs involving 295 participants were included; comparator conditions were active rehabilitation in ten trials, sham or attention control in two, and no intervention in one. Seven studies contributed 25 eligible SCIM effect estimates. The pooled posterior mean effect favored digital rehabilitation but was small and imprecisely estimated (Hedges’ g = 0.24; 95% CrI, −0.12 to 0.61; 95% PI, −1.17 to 1.58). The posterior probabilities of any benefit and of a clinically important effect were 91.8 and 17.4%, respectively. Restricting the synthesis to the six SCIM studies with active-rehabilitation comparators yielded a similar, imprecise estimate ( g = 0.28; 95% CrI, −0.20 to 0.75). Posterior mean effects for all seven secondary outcomes favored digital rehabilitation, although each 95% CrI included the null value. Direct posterior comparisons provided no clear evidence of effect modification by intervention category, injury completeness, or intervention duration. The weekly-dose association was uncertain and did not improve predictive performance. Overall risk of bias was rated as some concerns, and certainty was very low for all outcomes.
Conclusion: VR and gamified digital rehabilitation may provide small functional benefits relative to the comparator conditions used in the included trials; however, clinically important and reproducible improvements have not been demonstrated. Current evidence is insufficient to prioritize specific technology types, patient subgroups, intervention durations, or weekly training doses.
Systematic review registration: CRD420261458807; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD420261458807
Related
- Rehabilitation efficacy of neuromuscular training for individuals suffering from knee osteoarthritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis based on randomized controlled trials
- Nurse-led rehabilitation after total hip or knee arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis of functional recovery, self-efficacy, and quality of life.
- Effects of an Intensive Gait Training Rehabilitation Protocol After Single Event Multilevel Surgery in Cerebral Palsy: Activ'Marche.
- A Systems Biology Model Linking Peripheral NIMETOX Biomarkers to Multilevel Brain Structural and Functional Alterations Across Major Depression and Schizophrenia
- Xerostomia and Its Association with Polypharmacy and Oral Health Status Among Elderly Saudi Individuals from an Institutional Rehabilitation Center
BibTeX
@article{xie2026effects,
title = {{Effects of virtual reality and gamified digital rehabilitation on functional recovery in individuals with Spinal Cord Injury: a systematic review and Bayesian multilevel meta-analysis}},
author = {Mengnan Xie and Mingyue Jiao and Zelong Duan and Jian Li and Yueying Zhu and Binbin Zhang and Fangfang Wen and Jifeng Long},
journal = {Frontiers in neurology},
year = {2026},
month = oct,
doi = {10.3389/fneur.2026.1954856},
url = {https://europepmc.org/article/PMC/PMC13668546},
note = {CC BY},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - Effects of virtual reality and gamified digital rehabilitation on functional recovery in individuals with Spinal Cord Injury: a systematic review and Bayesian multilevel meta-analysis
AU - Mengnan Xie
AU - Mingyue Jiao
AU - Zelong Duan
AU - Jian Li
AU - Yueying Zhu
AU - Binbin Zhang
AU - Fangfang Wen
AU - Jifeng Long
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/10/01
JO - Frontiers in neurology
DO - 10.3389/fneur.2026.1954856
UR - https://europepmc.org/article/PMC/PMC13668546
AB - Background: Virtual reality (VR) and gamified digital rehabilitation can increase task-specific practice and feedback for individuals with Spinal Cord Injury (SCI); however, their incremental effects on functional recovery remain uncertain. Methods: We searched PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and the Cochrane Library from database inception through July 1, 2026, for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating VR or gamified digital rehabilitation in adults with SCI. Comparator conditions were classified as active rehabilitation, sham or attention control, or minimal/no intervention. The primary outcome was the Spinal Cord Independence Measure (SCIM). Hedges’ g estimates were synthesized using a Bayesian three-level random-effects model that accounted for within-study dependence. We estimated the 95% credible interval (CrI), 95% prediction interval (PI), and posterior probabilities of any benefit ( g > 0) and of meeting a distribution-based threshold for clinical importance ( g ≥ 0.40). A post hoc sensitivity analysis restricted the SCIM synthesis to trials with active-rehabilitation comparators. Seven secondary outcomes were synthesized separately. Risk of bias and certainty of evidence were assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool (RoB 2) and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. Results: Thirteen RCTs involving 295 participants were included; comparator conditions were active rehabilitation in ten trials, sham or attention control in two, and no intervention in one. Seven studies contributed 25 eligible SCIM effect estimates. The pooled posterior mean effect favored digital rehabilitation but was small and imprecisely estimated (Hedges’ g = 0.24; 95% CrI, −0.12 to 0.61; 95% PI, −1.17 to 1.58). The posterior probabilities of any benefit and of a clinically important effect were 91.8 and 17.4%, respectively. Restricting the synthesis to the six SCIM studies with active-rehabilitation comparators yielded a similar, imprecise estimate ( g = 0.28; 95% CrI, −0.20 to 0.75). Posterior mean effects for all seven secondary outcomes favored digital rehabilitation, although each 95% CrI included the null value. Direct posterior comparisons provided no clear evidence of effect modification by intervention category, injury completeness, or intervention duration. The weekly-dose association was uncertain and did not improve predictive performance. Overall risk of bias was rated as some concerns, and certainty was very low for all outcomes. Conclusion: VR and gamified digital rehabilitation may provide small functional benefits relative to the comparator conditions used in the included trials; however, clinically important and reproducible improvements have not been demonstrated. Current evidence is insufficient to prioritize specific technology types, patient subgroups, intervention durations, or weekly training doses. Systematic review registration: CRD420261458807; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD420261458807
SN - 1664-2295
ER -