Mode
Text Size
Log in / Sign up

Immersive virtual reality yields highest effect sizes for upper limb motor function in stroke survivorsImmersive Virtual Reality Shows Promise for Stroke Recovery

AI-generated summary of the cited source, checked by automated accuracy review. How we work

Key Takeaway
Consider immersive virtual reality as a primary modality for improving upper limb motor function in stroke survivors.

This systematic review and network meta-analysis evaluated the efficacy of various virtual reality (VR) modalities, including immersive, semi-immersive, and nonimmersive formats, for stroke survivors with upper limb motor function impairment. The analysis included a total of 1,524 patients to compare these technologies against routine rehabilitation.

For upper limb motor function, immersive VR ranked highest (SUCRA = 86.10%), followed by semi-immersive (SUCRA = 57.80%) and nonimmersive (SUCRA = 50.90%). The reported effect sizes (SMD) were 1.20 for immersive, 0.75 for semi-immersive, and 0.61 for nonimmersive. Regarding secondary outcomes, immersive VR was the most effective for hand dexterity (SUCRA = 95.60%) and independence in daily life (SUCRA = 94.90%).

Clinicians may consider prioritizing immersive virtual reality as a primary modality for stroke rehabilitation exercises. However, the study did not report specific limitations or safety data, and the certainty of the evidence was not reported. The findings suggest a hierarchy of efficacy among VR types, with immersive systems providing the most substantial improvements in motor skills and daily independence.

How this fits prior evidence

This network meta-analysis addresses a gap in identifying the most effective rehabilitation modalities for stroke survivors. While previous evidence highlighted the role of acupuncture for dysphagia and the impact of intracranial atherosclerosis on stroke burden, this study specifically addresses the technological interventions for upper limb motor function. It provides a comparative hierarchy of virtual reality types to guide rehabilitation choices.

Researchers analyzed data from 1,524 stroke survivors to compare different types of virtual reality (VR) for improving upper limb motor function. The study compared immersive, semi-immersive, and nonimmersive VR against routine rehabilitation. The results showed that immersive VR was ranked highest for improving motor function, followed by semi-immersive and nonimmersive options.

In addition to motor function, the study looked at hand dexterity and independence in daily life. Immersive VR was found to be the most effective technology for both hand dexterity and helping patients perform daily tasks. While all three types of VR showed some improvement over standard care, the immersive experience had the highest scores in these categories.

Because this was a network meta-analysis of various studies, the results show a link between immersive VR and better outcomes, but they do not prove a direct cause. The study did not report any specific safety concerns or side effects. Patients and doctors should consider these findings as a way to choose the best rehabilitation tools for stroke recovery.

What this means for you:
Immersive virtual reality may be more effective than other VR types for stroke survivors' motor skills and independence.

Common questions

What is the difference between immersive and nonimmersive virtual reality?

Immersive virtual reality provides a more complete digital environment, while nonimmersive and semi-immersive versions offer less intense experiences. This study found that immersive VR ranked highest for improving upper limb motor function, with a score of 86.10%, compared to 57.80% for semi-immersive and 50.90% for nonimmersive.

Is immersive virtual reality safe for stroke patients?

The study did not report any specific adverse events, serious safety concerns, or reasons for patients to stop treatment. However, because this was a meta-analysis of several studies, you should talk to your doctor to see if this specific technology is right for your recovery plan.

Study Details

Study typeMeta analysis
EvidenceLevel 1
PublishedSep 2026
View Original Abstract ↓
BackgroundUpper limb motor function impairment is a highly prevalent sequela following stroke, significantly compromising patients’ independence in daily life and decreasing their quality of life. Virtual reality represents a promising therapeutic intervention for this condition; however, the comparative efficacy of virtual reality interventions with different levels of immersion remains unclear.MethodsA comprehensive electronic literature search was performed in PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and CINAHL up to July 2025. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the use of different levels of immersion virtual reality intervention (such as immersive virtual reality, semi-immersive virtual reality and nonimmersive virtual reality) compared with routine rehabilitation for stroke with upper limb motor function impairment were included. A random-effects model was used for the network meta-analysis. Efficacy was assessed via standardized mean differences (SMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), and interventions were ranked via surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) probabilities.ResultsTwenty-nine RCTs involving 1,524 participants were included from 6,830 records. Compared with the control interventions, the virtual reality intervention improved upper limb motor function, enhanced hand dexterity, and enhanced independence in the daily life of stroke patients. With respect to upper limb motor function, immersive virtual reality was ranked the highest (SUCRA = 86.10%; SMD = 1.20; 95% CI: 0.33, 2.07), followed by semi-immersive virtual reality (SUCRA = 57.80%; SMD = 0.75; 95% CI: −0.35, 1.86) and nonimmersive virtual reality (SUCRA = 50.90%; SMD = 0.61; 95% CI: −0.15, 1.37). Compared with nonimmersive virtual reality (SUCRA = 50.50%; SMD = 0.42; 95% CI: −0.03, 0.87) and semi-immersive virtual reality (SUCRA = 49.30%; SMD = 0.43; 95% CI: −0.21, 1.07), immersive virtual reality (SUCRA = 95.60%; SMD = 1.11; 95% CI: 0.40, 1.82) was the most effective intervention for hand dexterity. With respect to independence in daily life, immersive virtual reality was the most effective technology (SUCRA = 94.90%; SMD = 1.32; 95% CI: 0.46, 2.18), followed by nonimmersive virtual reality (SUCRA = 43.10%; SMD = 0.28; 95% CI: −0.91, 1.47) and semi-immersive virtual reality (SUCRA = 39.50%; SMD = 0.23; 95% CI: −1.00, 1.46).ConclusionImmersive virtual reality is the most effective treatment method for improving upper limb motor function, enhancing hand dexterity, and enhancing independence in the daily life of stroke patients. In the future, clinicians should consider prioritizing immersive virtual reality as a primary modality for stroke rehabilitation exercises.Systematic review registrationhttps://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD420251114167, Identifier: CRD420251114167.
Free Newsletter

Clinical research that matters. Delivered to your inbox.

Join thousands of clinicians and researchers. No spam, unsubscribe anytime.