RESUMO
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This study is a narrative review aiming at evaluating the current literature of the last 5 years on gamification and musculoskeletal rehabilitation. The article search involved the following MeSH terms at PubMed: "gamification," "exergaming," and "rehabilitation." Original studies in English language were included. RECENT FINDINGS: After careful analysis of the search results, 17 articles were included in this review. The use of games for rehabilitation was investigated in musculoskeletal rehabilitation conditions such as shoulder surgery, impingement syndrome, rheumatoid arthritis, osteoarthritis, low back pain, fibromyalgia, fracture, and ligament reconstruction. Results were similar or superior to conventional physical therapy or home-based exercises, with the additional benefit of improving motivation to the exercise program. Improvements in quality of life and perceived health status were also observed. The cost-effectiveness of this type of technology was also mentioned as an advantage of exergames in musculoskeletal rehabilitation. Studies involving gamification in musculoskeletal rehabilitation stress the potential of this resource in several aspects of physical fitness, health, and quality of life, also improving motivation and adherence to the exercise treatment.
RESUMO
Patients with sequelae of stroke commonly report somatosensory losses. It is believed that body temperature may be associated with tactile sensibility and sensorimotor recovery of these patients. Demonstrate the associations among tactile sensibility, cutaneous temperature, subjective temperature perception, and sensorimotor recovery of patients with stroke sequelae. 86 patients with stroke sequelae were included. Patients had standardized regions of interest (ROIs) assessed with infrared thermography (FLIR T650SC) and monofilaments esthesiometry, and global motor recovery was evaluated with Fugl-Meyer Assessment (FMA). The presence of self-reported perception of temperature difference was used to divide the participants into two groups of 43 patients, and correlation tests were applied to establish correlations among variables. There is no clinically relevant association between tactile sensibility and cutaneous temperature of the foot, regardless of the subjective sensation of temperature changes. Sensorimotor recovery evaluated by FMA is associated with the difference of sensibility between both sides of the body (p < 0.001), as well as with the difference of tactile sensibility (p < 0.001). A clinically significant association between the difference of cutaneous temperature and tactile sensibility was not found, regardless of the presence or absence of subjective perception of such temperature difference. However, sensorimotor recovery is correlated with cutaneous temperature differences and tactile sensibility.
Assuntos
Temperatura Corporal , Sensação , Acidente Vascular Cerebral/fisiopatologia , Adulto , Idoso , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Recuperação de Função Fisiológica , Temperatura Cutânea , Acidente Vascular Cerebral/psicologia , Termografia , Percepção do TatoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Stroke combined with Diabetes Mellitus may cause sensibility and vascular alterations. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether sensitivity and plantar cutaneous temperature of clinically controlled patients with stroke and DM are different from those of patients with stroke only. METHODS: This is a cross-sectional case-control study. The volunteers were assessed for sensitivity by monofilament esthesiometry in their plantar region, and for temperature by infrared thermal imaging. The data was presented as means and standard deviations and comparisons were conducted with the Mann-Whitney statistical test, with statistical significance set at p< 0.05. RESULTS: Five cases and 11 controls were included according to the eligibility and pairing criteria. There were no discrepancies between the plegic and contralateral sides regarding temperature and sensibility of both cases and controls. However, in the control group, there was an observable tendency for different temperatures between the plegic and the contralateral sides, with p< 0.05 in most of the comparisons. CONCLUSIONS: There is no evidence that the cases and controls have different plantar sensibility nor different plantar temperature on their plegic and contralateral sides. However, significant temperature discrepancies between both plegic and contralateral sides were observed in the control group.