Technologies of virtual and augmented reality in rehabilitation

Traditional rehabilitation methods are often limited by patient compliance issues and deficiencies in objective feedback, which are necessary for significant functional improvement. Therefore, new approaches should be implemented to improve patient motivation and increase therapy effectiveness. The increasing use of virtual reality (VR) and augmented reality (AR) technologies in rehabilitation is a solution. While VR creates a fully immersive digital environment that replaces the real world and requires the use of headsets, AR overlays digital elements onto the real world: using smart glasses, tablets, or VR headsets, patients can see both their physical surroundings and virtual cues. Thus, these technologies provide real-time feedback and cues during exercise. This study reveals the effectiveness of VR and AR technologies for rehabilitating patients with functional impairments resulting from cancer, stroke, multiple sclerosis, traumatic brain injury, low vision, and musculoskeletal disorders. These techniques relieve pain while improving function, mental health, and quality of life. High patient compliance with these rehabilitation methods has been demonstrated. The reasons for the success of these technologies are discussed, as well as the challenges hindering their widespread implementation in clinical practice.

1. Lo H.H.M., Zhu M., Zou Z., et al. Immersive and nonimmersive virtual reality-assisted active training in chronic musculoskeletal pain: systematic review and meta-analysis. J Med Internet Res. 2024; 26: e48787. https://doi.org/10.2196/48787.

2. Plavoukou T., Staktopoulos P., Papagiannis G., et al. Virtual and augmented reality for chronic musculoskeletal rehabilitation: a systematic review and exploratory meta-analysis. Bioengineering. 2025; 12 (7): 745. https://doi.org/10.3390/bioengineering12070745.

3. Li L. Effect of remote control augmented reality multimedia technology for postoperative rehabilitation of knee joint injury. Comput Math Methods Med. 2022; 2022: 9320063. https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/9320063.

4. Rubio-Zarapuz A., Apolo-Arenas M.D., Tomas-Carus P., et al. Comparative analysis of psychophysiological responses in fibromyalgia patients: evaluating neuromodulation alone, neuromodulation combined with virtual reality, and exercise interventions. Medicina. 2024; 60 (3): 404. https://doi.org/10.3390/medicina60030404.

5. Aksoy M.E., Kocaoglu B., İzzetoglu K., et al. Assessment of learning in simulator-based arthroscopy training with the diagnostic arthroscopy skill score (DASS) and neurophysiological measures. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2023; 31 (12): 5332–45. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-023-07571-0.

6. Kayaalp M.E., Konstantinou E., Karaismailoglu B., et al. The metaverse in orthopaedics: virtual, augmented and mixed reality for advancing surgical training, arthroscopy, arthroplasty and rehabilitation. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2025; 33 (8): 3039–50. https://doi.org/10.1002/ksa.12723.

7. Su Z., Zhang L., Lian X., Guan M. Virtual reality-based exercise rehabilitation in cancer-related dysfunctions: scoping review. J Med Internet Res. 2024; 26: e49312. https://doi.org/10.2196/49312.

8. Aderinto N., Olatunji G., Abdulbasit M.O., et al. Exploring the efficacy of virtual reality-based rehabilitation in stroke: a narrative review of current evidence. Ann Med. 2023; 55 (2): 2285907. https://doi.org/10.1080/07853890.2023.2285907.

9. Khokale R., Mathew G.S., Ahmed S., et al. Virtual and augmented reality in post-stroke rehabilitation: a narrative review. Cureus. 2023; 15 (4): e37559. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.37559.

10. Kopalli S.R., Shukla M., Jayaprakash B., et al. Artificial intelligence in stroke rehabilitation: from acute care to long-term recovery. Neuroscience. 2025; 572: 214–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroscience.2025.03.017.

11. Leong S.C., Tang Y.M., Toh F.M., Fong K.N.K. Examining the effectiveness of virtual, augmented, and mixed reality (VAMR) therapy for upper limb recovery and activities of daily living in stroke patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2022; 19 (1): 93. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12984-022-01071-x.

12. Bateni H., Carruthers J., Mohan R., Pishva S. Use of virtual reality in physical therapy as an intervention and diagnostic tool. Rehabil Res Pract. 2024; 2024: 1122286. https://doi.org/10.1155/2024/1122286.

13. Bui J., Luauté J., Farnè A. Enhancing upper limb rehabilitation of stroke patients with virtual reality: a mini review. Front Virtual Real. 2021; 2: 595771. https://doi.org/10.3389/frvir.2021.595771.

14. Kiper P., Godart N., Cavalier M., et al. Effects of immersive virtual reality on upper-extremity stroke rehabilitation: a systematic review with meta-analysis. J Clin Med. 2024; 13 (1): 146. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm13010146.

15. Patsaki I., Dimitriadi N., Despoti A., et al. The effectiveness of immersive virtual reality in physical recovery of stroke patients: a systematic review. Front Syst Neurosci. 2022; 16: 880447. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnsys.2022.880447.

16. Huang C.Y., Chiang W.C., Yeh Y.C., et al. Effects of virtual reality-based motor control training on inflammation, oxidative stress, neuroplasticity and upper limb motor function in patients with chronic stroke: a randomized controlled trial. BMC Neurol. 2022; 22 (1): 21. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12883-021-02547-4.

17. Kale M.B., Wankhede N.L., Bishoyi A.K., et al. Emerging biophysical techniques for probing synaptic transmission in neurodegenerative disorders. Neuroscience. 2025; 565: 63–79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroscience.2024.11.055.

18. Shen J., Gu X., Fu J., et al. Virtual reality-induced motor function of the upper extremity and brain activation in stroke: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial. Front Neurol. 2023; 14: 1094617. https://doi.org/10.3389/fneur.2023.1094617.

19. Patil V., Narayan J., Sandhu K., Dwivedy S.K. Integration of virtual reality and augmented reality in physical rehabilitation: a state-of-theart review. In: Subburaj K., Sandhu K., Ćuković S. (Eds) Revolutions in product design for healthcare: advances in product design and design methods for healthcare. Chapter 10. Springer; 2022; 177–205. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-9455-4_10.

20. Gorman C., Gustafsson L. The use of augmented reality for rehabilitation after stroke: a narrative review. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol. 2022; 17 (4): 409–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/17483107.2020.1791264.

21. Su S., He J., Wang R., et al. The effectiveness of virtual reality, augmented reality, and mixed reality rehabilitation in total knee arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Arthroplasty. 2024; 39 (3): 582–90.e4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2023.08.051.

22. Vinolo Gil M.J., Gonzalez-Medina G., Lucena-Anton D., et al. Augmented reality in physical therapy: systematic review and meta-analysis. JMIR Serious Games. 2021; 9 (4): e30985. https://doi.org/10.2196/30985.

23. Lim J.Y., Yu H.J., Kim S.H., et al. Effectiveness of in-home, augmented reality-based telerehabilitation after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a randomized controlled trial. Orthop J Sports Med. 2024; 12 (10): 23259671241271729. https://doi.org/10.1177/23259671241271729.

24. Fakolade A., Salvia A.C., Phadke S., Kunz M. An interactive vision-based 3d augmented reality system for in-home physical rehabilitation: a qualitative inquiry to inform system development. Health Expect. 2024; 27 (5): e70020. https://doi.org/10.1111/hex.70020.

25. Gulsen C., Soke F., Eldemir K., et al. Effect of fully immersive virtual reality treatment combined with exercise in fibromyalgia patients: a randomized controlled trial. Assist Technol. 2022; 34 (3): 256–63. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400435.2020.1772900.

26. Plavoukou T., Apostolakopoulou K., Papagiannis G., et al. Impact of virtual reality, augmented reality, and sensor technology in knee osteoarthritis rehabilitation: a systematic review. Cureus. 2025; 17 (2): e79011. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.79011.

27. Pur D.R., Lee-Wing N., Bona M.D. The use of augmented reality and virtual reality for visual field expansion and visual acuity improvement in low vision rehabilitation: a systematic review. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2023; 261 (6): 1743–55. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00417-022-05972-4.

28. Albanese G.A., Bucchieri A., Podda J., et al. Robotic systems for upperlimb rehabilitation in multiple sclerosis: a SWOT analysis and the synergies with virtual and augmented environments. Front Robot AI. 2024; 11: 1335147. https://doi.org/10.3389/frobt.2024.1335147.

29. De Angelis M., Lavorgna L., Carotenuto A., et al. Digital technology in clinical trials for multiple sclerosis: systematic review. J Clin Med. 2021; 10 (11): 2328. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm10112328.

30. Scholz M., Haase R., Schriefer D., et al. Electronic health interventions in the case of multiple sclerosis: from theory to practice. Brain Sci. 2021; 11 (2): 180. https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci11020180.

31. Kanzler C.M., Lamers I., Feys P., et al. Personalized prediction of rehabilitation outcomes in multiple sclerosis: a proof-of-concept using clinical data, digital health metrics, and machine learning. Med Biol Eng Comput. 2022; 60 (1): 249–61. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11517-021-02467-y.

32. Liu M., Wilder S., Sanford S., et al. Augmented feedback modes during functional grasp training with an intelligent glove and virtual reality for persons with traumatic brain injury. Front Robot AI. 2023; 10: 1230086. https://doi.org/10.3389/frobt.2023.1230086.

33. van de Wouw C.L., Visser M., Gorter J.W., et al. Systematic review of the effectiveness of innovative, gamified interventions for cognitive training in paediatric acquired brain injury. Neuropsychol Rehabil. 2024; 34 (2): 268–99. https://doi.org/10.1080/09602011.2023.2174561