Immersive Virtual Reality Assessment in Multiple Sclerosis: Patient-Reported Experience and Correlates

Research output: Contribution to journalResearch articleContributedpeer-review

Contributors

Abstract

Background: Immersive virtual reality (VR) has emerged as a promising tool for standardized, engaging assessment of motor and cognitive function in people with multiple sclerosis (pwMS). However, patient-reported experiences with immersive VR tasks have not been systematically evaluated. Objective: To characterize patient-reported experience measures (PREMs) after a multidomain immersive VR task and explore relationships with clinical characteristics, therapeutic history, and task performance. Methods: In this prospective cross-sectional study, participants completed a seated immersive VR task comprising six upper-limb tasks with motor and cognitive components. Patient experience was evaluated immediately afterward using a PREM questionnaire. Upper-limb activity limitations were assessed with the Arm Function in Multiple Sclerosis Questionnaire (AMSQ). Results: A total of 129 pwMS (EDSS 3.5-8.0) participated. Median PREM item scores ranged from 1.0 to 2.0 (scale 0-10), indicating an overall positive experience. Over 80% rated staff support as excellent; more than half perceived the assessment as safe, comfortable, and appropriately timed. An amount of 40.3% of pwMS wished to use VR tasks more often than once per year. PwMS receiving upper-limb physiotherapy or occupational therapy reported greater perceived difficulty than those without therapy. In exploratory analyses, higher perceived difficulty and a preference for less frequent VR use were associated with higher EDSS (r = 0.208 and 0.200) and ambulation scores (r = 0.215 and 0.195). Difficulty ratings were also related to pyramidal (r = 0.188) and sensory (r = 0.174) impairments. Conclusions: PwMS reported a positive overall experience with the immersive VR tasks. Further studies should evaluate the suitability and validity of this approach compared with conventional assessments.

Details

Original languageEnglish
Article number433
JournalBrain sciences
Volume16
Issue number4
Publication statusPublished - 21 Apr 2026
Peer-reviewedYes

External IDs

PubMedCentral PMC13114751
Scopus 105036864123
ORCID /0000-0002-7524-7628/work/213788251
ORCID /0000-0001-8799-8202/work/213788418
ORCID /0000-0003-2832-4640/work/213788600

Keywords