journal of biomedical informatics
All submissions of the EM system will be redirected to Online Manuscript Submission System. Authors are requested to submit articles directly to Online Manuscript Submission System of respective journal.

Augmented Reality in Patient Rehabilitation: European Case Studies

Alisha Shethy*
 
Department of Biomedical Informatics and Medical Education, University of Washington, United States, Email: shethyalisha@foxmail.com
 
*Correspondence: Alisha Shethy, Department of Biomedical Informatics and Medical Education, University of Washington, United States, Email: shethyalisha@foxmail.com

, Manuscript No. ejbi-24-143169; , Pre QC No. ejbi-24-143169; QC No. ejbi-24-143169; , Manuscript No. ejbi-24-143169; Published: 26-Aug-2024

This open-access article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (CC BY-NC) (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits reuse, distribution and reproduction of the article, provided that the original work is properly cited and the reuse is restricted to noncommercial purposes. For commercial reuse, contact submissions@ejbi.org

European Journal of Biomedical Informatics

Introduction

Augmented Reality (AR) technology is revolutionizing patient rehabilitation by enhancing therapeutic exercises, improving patient engagement, and providing real-time feedback. This article explores the application of AR inpatient rehabilitation through various European case studies, highlighting its benefits, challenges, and future prospects. Augmented Reality superimposes digital information onto the real world, allowing users to interact with virtual elements in a physical environment. In the context of rehabilitation, AR can create immersive experiences that make therapy more engaging and effective. Patients can perform exercises in a gamified environment, receive instant feedback, and track their progress over time [1].

European Case Studies

Virtual Reality and Augmented Reality in Stroke Rehabilitation (VR4REHAB) project, funded by the European Union's Interreg North-West Europe program, aims to develop innovative AR and Virtual Reality (VR) applications for stroke rehabilitation. The project involves collaboration between various European universities, hospitals, and technology companies. One notable application is the use of AR to create interactive environments where stroke patients can practice motor skills and cognitive functions. Early results indicate that AR-based rehabilitation can significantly improve patient outcomes by providing engaging and effective therapy sessions [2].

The REHAB-LAB Project, based in France, explores the use of AR for upper limb rehabilitation in patients with neurological disorders. By using AR glasses, patients can interact with virtual objects in real-time, which helps in improving their motor skills and coordination. Clinical trials have shown that patients using AR for rehabilitation demonstrated faster recovery times and better motor function compared to traditional therapy methods. St. Mary’s Hospital in London has integrated AR into its orthopaedic rehabilitation program. Patients recovering from surgeries such as knee and hip replacements use AR applications to perform guided exercises. These applications provide real-time feedback on the accuracy and quality of movements, helping patients achieve optimal recovery. The hospital reported that patients using AR experienced reduced pain levels and increased mobility compared to those undergoing conventional rehabilitation [3, 4].

The HOLOREHAB project, conducted in Spain, focuses on using AR to support the rehabilitation of patients with musculoskeletal disorders. By wearing AR headsets, patients can see digital overlays of exercises in their real environment, making it easier to follow therapy instructions. The project has shown promising results, with patients reporting higher satisfaction levels and improved functional outcomes. The University of Freiburg's Department of Neurology has been experimenting with AR to aid in the rehabilitation of patients with Parkinson’s disease. AR applications are used to provide visual cues and augmented feedback during walking exercises, helping patients improve their gait and balance. Studies have demonstrated that AR-assisted rehabilitation leads to significant improvements in walking speed and stability [5, 6].

AR technology can be expensive, limiting its accessibility for some healthcare facilities and patients. Ensuring the accuracy and reliability of AR systems is crucial for effective rehabilitation. Technical glitches can disrupt therapy sessions and reduce patient confidence. Some patients may be resistant to adopting new technologies, particularly older adults who are less familiar with digital devices. Integrating AR into existing clinical workflows can be challenging. Healthcare providers need to be trained to use AR systems effectively [7, 8].

Future Prospects

Advancements in AR hardware improvements in AR hardware, such as lighter and more comfortable headsets, will enhance user experience and increase adoption rates. AI Integration combining AR with artificial intelligence (AI) can provide more sophisticated and adaptive rehabilitation programs. AI algorithms can analyse patient data and adjust therapy exercises in real-time. Remote rehabilitation AR has the potential to support remote rehabilitation, allowing patients to engage in therapy from the comfort of their homes. This is particularly valuable in rural areas with limited access to rehabilitation centres. Expanded applications beyond physical rehabilitation, AR can be applied to cognitive and psychological therapies, offering comprehensive rehabilitation solutions [9, 10].

Conclusion

Augmented Reality is transforming patient rehabilitation in Europe by making therapy more engaging, personalized, and effective. European case studies demonstrate the potential of AR to improve patient outcomes across various medical conditions. While challenges remain, ongoing advancements in technology and increased collaboration between healthcare providers and technology developers are likely to drive further innovation in this field. As AR continues to evolve, it promises to play a crucial role in the future of patient rehabilitation, enhancing the quality of care and improving the lives of patients.

References

  1. Dubois RW, Brook RH. Preventable deaths: who, how often, and why? Ann Intern Med. 1988; 109(7):582-9.

    2. Indexed at , Google Scholar, Cross Ref

  2. Krizek TJ. Surgical error: ethical issues of adverse events. Arch. Surg. 2000; 135(11):1359-66.

    3. Indexed at , Google Scholar, Cross Ref

  3. Kuperman GJ, Boyle D, Jha A, Rittenberg E, Ma'Luf N, Tanasijevic MJ,et al. How promptly are inpatients treated for critical laboratory results?. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 1998; 5(1):112-9.

    4. Indexed at , Google Scholar, Cross Ref

  4. Sequist TD, Gandhi TK, Karson AS, Fiskio JM, Bugbee D, Sperling M,et al. A randomized trial of electronic clinical reminders to improve quality of care for diabetes and coronary artery disease. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2005; 12(4):431-7.

    5. Indexed at , Google Scholar, Cross Ref

  5. Pivovarov R, Albers DJ, Sepulveda JL, Elhadad N. Identifying and mitigating biases in EHR laboratory tests. J Biomed Inform. 2014; 51:24-34.

    6. Indexed at , Google Scholar, Cross Ref

  6. Breathett K, Liu WG, Allen LA, Daugherty SL, Blair IV, Jones J, et al. African Americans are less likely to receive care by a cardiologist during an intensive care unit admission for heart failure. JACC: Heart Failure. 2018;6(5):413-20.

    7. Indexed at , Google Scholar, Cross Ref

  7. Abbott DE, Voils CL, Fisher DA, Greenberg CC, Safdar N. Socioeconomic disparities, financial toxicity, and opportunities for enhanced system efficiencies for patients with cancer. J Surg Oncol. 2017; 115(3):250-6.

    8. Indexed at , Google Scholar, Cross Ref

  8. Jumper J, Evans R, Pritzel A, Green T, Figurnov M, Ronneberger O, et al. Highly accurate protein structure prediction with AlphaFold. Nature. 2021; 596(7873):583-9.

    9. Indexed at , Google Scholar, Cross Ref

  9. Erickson BJ, Korfiatis P, Akkus Z, Kline TL. Machine learning for medical imaging. Radiographics. 2017; 37(2):505-15.

    10. Indexed at , Google Scholar, Cross Ref

  10. Bycroft C, Freeman C, Petkova D, Band G, Elliott LT, et al. The UK Biobank resource with deep phenotyping and genomic data. Nature. 2018; 562(7726):203-9.

    11. Indexed at , Google Scholar, Cross Ref