Augmented reality-based training versus standard training in improvement of balance, mobility and fall risk: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Abstract

PubMed, Google Scholar, Scopus, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were systematically searched from inception to January 2023. Randomized trials and observational cohort studies comparing the effects of AR-based exercises with conventional training in patients 18 years and older were included in the analysis. Studies using virtual reality, case reports and series, reviews, meta-analyses, letters, and editorials were excluded. Post-intervention data on the Berg Balance Scale (BBS) and Timed Up and Go (TUG) Test were extracted and studied. The fixed-effects inverse variance model was utilized to pool the extracted data. Out of 438 articles, seven articles (199 participants) comparing AR-based exercise with the standard training were included in the systematic review. Six articles with sufficient data on the parameters were included in the meta-analysis. AR-based exercises resulted in a significantly higher BBS score than conventional exercise (Hedge's g=0.48, 95% CI=0.19-0.77, P<0.001). The BBS value was significantly higher in AR-based training of 8 weeks or more (Hedge's g=0.88, 95% CI=0.46-1.31) when compared with trainings conducted for less than 8 weeks (Hedge's g=0.11, 95% CI=-0.30 to 0.52), P=0.01). Likewise, the TUG Test score was found to be to be significantly lower in ARgroup than the controls (Hedge's g= -0.54, 95% CI=-0.85 to -0.23, P<0.01). In comparison to conventional methods, AR-based exercises had higher improvements in balance, mobility, and fall risk parameters. The use of AR technology in elderly patients can promote independence while preventing falls and associated morbidity and mortality. There is a need for a larger randomized controlled trial to provide a more accurate comparison on efficacy and safety of different modalities of training.