Pedro Gamito, PhD Laboratory of Computational Psychology

1. Virtual exercises to promote cognitive recovery in stroke patients: The comparison between HMD vs. screen exposure displays Pedro Gamito, PhD LaboratoryofComputationalPsychology University Lusófona ofHumanitiesand Technologies Lisbon, Portugal pedro.gamito@ulusofona.pt

2. Introduction I TBI/stroke Attention Executivefunctions Dailyliveactivities

3. Introduction II WWW VR Freeaccess Motivation Feedback Repetition Rehabilitation Repetition Feedback Motivation Online VR

4. Introduction III Palm VR Fishtank VR Projection VR Hand-based Displays OcclusiveHBDs Non-occlusiveHBDs Stationary Displays Head-based Displays

5. Introduction IV • less immersive; • no head tracker; • less expensive; • no hard/software proficiency; • available on almost every household. Fishtank VR Projection VR • more immersive; • head tracker; • more expensive; • hard/software • proficiency; • additional cost. OcclusiveHBDs NonocclusiveHBDs Stationary Displays Head-based Displays

6. Introduction V

7. Introduction VI 3D VR

8. Introduction VII

9. Introduction VIII dissemination Fishtank VR Projection VR OcclusiveHBDs NonocclusiveHBDs Stationary Displays Head-based Displays

10. MethodI • Participants • n = 17 • M = 51 yearsold (SD = 14); • Male/Female = 58%/42%; • Stroke; • Memory and attention impairments (Mini Mental - Folstein et al, 1975); • No previous psychiatric disorders, drug abuse , severe depression or neurological disease.

11. Method II Measures • Memory: Wechsler Memory Scale – WMS-III (Wechsler, 1954) & copy of Rey Complex Figure – RCF (Osterrieth, 1994) • Attention: Toulouse Piéron – TP (Piéron, 1955)

12. Method III Procedures • Psychology Department of the Centro de Medicina de Reabilitação de Alcoitão, Lisbon, Portugal; • VR + WWW: Unity 2.5; • HP Intel® Core™2 Quad Processor Q6600 PC equipped with a GeForce GT 220; • Tasks: daily activities + working memory + visuo-spatial orientation + recognition memory

13. Method IV Procedures • HMD: eMagin Z8 (n=9); • 21’’ Asus VE228D screen display (1680 X 1050 pixels of screen resolution) (n=8)

14. MethodV Procedures • 13 sessions (one session per week); • first session, memory and attention tests (WMS-III, RCF and TP); • on second and third session patients acquired computer interaction skills on a training platform; • next nine sessions were used for cognitive training by VR. • last session, memory and attention tests (WMS-III, RCF and TP).

15. MethodVI

16. Results I WMS mean scores (left figure) and RCF mean scores (right figure) to each experimental condition. main effect of evaluation in WMS (F(1, 16) = 12.491; MSE = 117.813; p < 0.01) and RCF (F(1, 16) = 8.676; MSE = 19.709; p < 0.05) no significant interaction effects were reported between factors (p > 0.05) in the WMS and RCF assessments significant increase in WMS (M = 85.71; SD = 3.89 vs. M = 98.94; SD = 3.99) and RCF scores

17. Results II TP mean scores to each experimental condition attention increased from initial (M = 75.69; SD = 10.83) to final assessment (M = 108.56; SD = 16.23) main effect of evaluation in the TP test (F(1, 16) = 15.935; MSE = 542.598; p < 0.01), no significant interaction effects (p > 0.05)

18. Finalremarks using VR exercises aimed at training memory and attention functions in stroke patients. • VR exercises aimed at training memory and attention functions in stroke patients; • No interaction effects between factors (p > 0.05),

19. Thanks ! labpsicom.ulusofona.pt pedro.gamito@ulusofona.pt