Case Reports Open access

Integrating and monitoring hand burn rehabilitative treatment using Virtual Reality

[Integrazione e monitoraggio del trattamento riabilitativo delle ustioni della mano con la realtà virtuale]

Authors

Published
13 April 2017
Section
Case Reports
DOI
10.4081/gimle.613
Pages
113-115

Abstract

Hand burn is not a common condition in the clinical practice and needs a long and laboured rehabilitative treatment to restore the lost function. This case report illustrates the achievable improvements in mobility and function by using innovative inertial systems for occupational exercise in a Virtual Reality, in addition to a traditional rehabilitative treatment. Through these instruments, we could promote and concurrently assess the recovery of a functional grasp and the ability in the execution of Activities of Daily Living.

References

  1. 1) Cowan AC, Stegink-Jansen CW. Rehabilitation of hand burn injuries: Current updates. Injury. 2013; 13: 28-34. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.injury.2013.01.015
  2. 2) Fabi SG, Massaki A, Eimpunth S, et al. Evaluation of microfocused ultrasound with visualization for lifting, tightening, and wrinkle reduction of the décolletage. J Am Accad Dermatol. 2013; 69(6): 965-71. 3) Ottomann C, Stojadinovic A, Lavin PT, et al. Prospective randomized phase Il Trial of accelerated re-epithelialization of superficial seconddegree burn wounds using extracorporeal shock wave therapy. Ann Surg. 2012; 255(1): 23-9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaad.2013.06.045
  3. 4) Lee KS, Jung MC. Ergonomic Evaluation of Biomechanical Hand Function. Saf Health Work. 2015; 6(1): 9-17. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.shaw.2014.09.002
  4. 5) Luna-Heredia E, Martin-Pena G, Ruiz-Galiana J. Handgrip dynamometry in healthy adults. Clinical Nutrition. 2005; 24,250-258. 6) Ingegnoli F, Galbiati V, Boracchi P, et al. Reliability and validity of the Italian version of the hand functional disability scale in patients with systemic sclerosis. Clin Rheumatol. 2008; 27(6): 743-9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10067-007-0785-9
  5. 7) Holden M. Virtual environments for motor rehabilitation: review. Cyberpsychol Behav. 2005; 8(3): 187-211. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1089/cpb.2005.8.187
  6. 8) Subramanian SK, Massie CL, Malcolm MP, et al. Does provision of extrinsic feedback result in improved motor learning in the upper limb post stroke? A systematic review of the evidence. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2010; 24(2): 113-24. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1545968309349941
  7. 9) Levanon Y. The advantages and disadvantages of using high technology in hand rehabilitation. J Hand Ther. 2013; 26(2): 179-83. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jht.2013.02.002
  8. 10) Burridge JH, Hughes M. Potential for new technologies in clinical practice. Curr Opin Neurol. 2010; 23: 671-677. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/WCO.0b013e3283402af5
  9. 11) Jarus T, Shavit S, Ratzon N. From hand twister to mind twister: computer-aided treatment in traumatic wrist fracture. Am J Occup Ther. 2000; 2: 176-182. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5014/ajot.54.2.176
  10. 12) Pollok A, Farmer SE, Brady MC, et al. Interventions for improving upper limb function after stroke. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014; 11: CD010820. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD010820.pub2

Metrics

Citations and online attention from Dimensions, Altmetric and PlumX.

PlumX Metrics

License

Copyright (c) 2017 The Author(s)

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

PAGEPress has chosen to apply the Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC 4.0) to all manuscripts to be published.

Most read articles by the same author(s)