Cited by 29Spatial Neglect and Hemispheric DysfunctionStroke Rehabilitation and RecoveryVirtual Reality Applications and Impacts

User Perspectives on Exergames Designed to Explore the Hemineglected Space for Stroke Patients With Visuospatial Neglect: Usability Study

Open access
Tobler-Ammann, Bernadette C, Surer, Elif, Knols, Ruud H, Borghese, N Alberto, de Bruin, Eling D·2017·JMIR Serious Games

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Visuospatial neglect due to stroke is characterized by the inability to perceive stimuli emerging in the area opposite to the side of brain damage. Besides adopting conventional rehabilitation methods to treat neglect symptoms, the use of virtual reality (VR) is becoming increasingly popular. We designed a series of 9 exergames aimed to improve exploration of the neglected side of space. When new VR interventions are designed, it is important to assess the usability aspects of such management strategies within the target population. To date, most studies used questionnaires to assess user satisfaction with the intervention or product being tested. However, only a combination of both quantitative and qualitative data allows a full picture of user perspective. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to quantitatively and qualitatively assess patient and therapist perspectives of a VR intervention based on the series of 9 exergames designed to explore hemineglected space. Specifically, we wanted to evaluate (1) perceived-user friendliness of the exergames, (2) attitude towards using the exergames, and (3) intention to use the exergames in the future. METHODS: A total of 19 participants (7 patients, 12 therapists) evaluated the exergames they had used 5 times a week during 3 weeks. The Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) questionnaire was filled out after the intervention. Based on those responses, we conducted focus group interviews (with therapists) and individual interviews (with patients). To analyze the TAM questionnaires, we used descriptive statistics. We adopted content and comparative analysis to analyze the interviews and drew illustration maps to analyze the focus group interviews. RESULTS: The therapists took a more critical stance with a mean TAM questionnaire total score of 48.6 (SD 4.5) compared to the patients who had a mean total score of 56.1 (SD 12.3). The perceived user-friendliness score was 5.6 (SD 1.4) for patients and 4.9 (SD 1.4) for therapists. The attitude towards using the exergames was rated 4.8 (SD 1.9) by patients and 3.6 (SD 1.4) by therapists, respectively. The intention to use the exergames in the future was rated 3.9 (SD 2.1) by patients and 3.7 (SD 1.8) by therapists. We gained information on how to improve the exergames in the interviews. CONCLUSIONS: Patients and therapists perceived the exergames as user-friendly; however, using the games further with the actual test version was not perceived as conceivable. The therapists were generally more critical towards future use than the patients. Therefore, involving both users to achieve acceptable and user-friendly versions of game-based rehabilitation for the future is deemed crucial and warranted. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02353962; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02353962 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6soxIJlAZ).

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2196/games.8013

Cites

46 of 46 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [1]Kenneth MH Watson RT Valenstein E Karnath H-O Milner AD Vallar G Spatial Neglect The cognitive and neural bases of spatial neglect 2002 Oxford Oxford University Press
  2. [31]Masrom M Technology Acceptance Model and E-learning 2007 12th International Conference on Education 2007 Brunei, Darussalam 21 24

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Tobler-Ammann, B. C., Surer, E., Knols, R. H., Borghese, N. A., & de Bruin, E. D.
Affiliations
  • Maastricht University (NL)
  • University Hospital Zurich (CH)
  • University of Milan (IT)
Corresponding author
Tobler-Ammann, Bernadette C
Venue
JMIR Serious Games
Published
2017-08-25
Volume
5
Issue
3
Pages
e18
ISSN
2291-9279 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2746964134
Cited by
29
References
46
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 4
FWCI
1.57
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • JMIR Serious Games (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Archivio Istituzionale della Ricerca (Universita Degli Studi Di Milano) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Research Publications (Maastricht University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • OpenMETU (Middle East Technical University) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Repository for Publications and Research Data (ETH Zurich) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Research Publications (Maastricht University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • ETH Zürich Research Collection (cc-by)
Funders
European Commission (287713)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Spatial Neglect and Hemispheric Dysfunction
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Rehabilitation › Stroke Rehabilitation and Recovery
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Virtual Reality Applications and Impacts
Keywords
visuospatial neglect, stroke rehabilitation, exergames, virtual reality, usability, user acceptance, technology acceptance model, patient perspectives, therapist perspectives, intention to use, ease of use, attitudes toward technology, focus groups, user-centered design

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review