Augmented reality for stroke rehabilitation during COVID-19

Table 8 The proportions of participants with performance improvement exceeding MCIDs/MDCs

Outcome	MCID/MDC	PP analysis (n=39)		ITT analysis (n=84)
		AR-Centre (n = 23)	AR-Home (n = 16)	AR-Centre (n = 59)	AR-Home (n = 25)
		% Post-pre > MCID	% Post-pre > MCID	% Post-pre > MCID	% Post-pre > MCID
FMA-UE	5.25 (MCID) [49]	34.78%	37.50%	13.56%	12.00%
FMA-LE	3.57 (MDC) [52]	52.17%	62.50%	20.34%	40.00%
BBS	2.7 (MDC) [53]	43.48%	37.50%	16.95%	24.00%
FAC	4\(^*\)	4.35%	6.25%	1.69%	4.00%
BI	1.85 (MCID) [50]	N/A	37.50%	N/A	24.00%
SF-12v2 PCS	2.5 (MCID) [51]	47.83%	68.75%	18.64%	44.00%
SF-12v2 MCS	10\(^{**}\)	30.43%	12.50%	11.86%	8.00%

FMA Fugl-Meyer Assessment, FMA-UE FMA for Upper-Extremity, FMA-LE FMA for Lower-Extremity, BBS Berg Balance Scale, FAC Functional Ambulation Category, BI Barthel Index of Activities of Daily Living, SF-12v2 The 12-Item Short Form Health Survey (PCS = Physical Component Summary and MCS = Mental Component Summary), MCID minimal clinically important difference, MDC minimally detectable change
\(^*\) A threshold of 4 was used. A participant’s performance gain on FAC is clinically significant if and only if she was with limited mobility in the baseline assessment (FAC \(<4\)) and become an independent walker after the trials (post-assessment FAC \(\ge\)4) [54]
\(^{**}\) 10% of the maximum was used as the threshold

ISSN: 1743-0003