Evaluation of two simulated AR exeragme prototype in virtual reality using two training concepts (endurance/strength endurance) for older people with hypertensio

Not Applicable

• Conditions: I10; Essential (primary) hypertension

• Registration Number: DRKS00022881
• Lead Sponsor: Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin - Forschungsgruppe Geriatrie

Brief Summary

Not available

Detailed Description

Not available

Study Timeline

• Study Start: 2020-09-07
• Study Completion: 2020-11-06
• Last Update Posted: 19 August 2024

Recruitment & Eligibility

• Status: Complete
• Sex: All
• Target Recruitment: 24

Inclusion Criteria

• = 65 years
• Diagnosed essential hypertension (grade I)
• Independent mobility
• Presence of subject information and signed consent

Exclusion Criteria

• Existence of legal support
• MCI and severe cognitive impairments (TICS <31 pts.)
• Increased risk of falling (Tinetti test <20 points)
• Diseases associated with a high risk of falling (stroke, Parkinson's)
• dizziness
• Severe visual impairment
• rice sickness
• Pacemaker
• Blood pressure at rest above 200/110 mmHg

Study & Design

• Study Type: interventional
• Study Design: Not specified

Primary Outcome Measures

Name	Time	Method
The primary aim is to achieve the individual intensity of exertion. To achieve this, a comparison is made with the individually specified intensity of exertion by means of continuous pulse monitoring via a wearable. The study will take place in October 2020.<br>Used assessments are:<br>- Borg Scale (Borg, 1990)<br>- NASA TLX (Task Load Index) (Xiao et al., 2005)<br><br>Another primary aim is the evaluation of user friendliness. Used assessments are:<br>- TUI-Post (Kothgassner et al., 2014)<br>- UEQ (Laugwitz et al., 2009)

Secondary Outcome Measures

Name	Time	Method
- Presence Questionnaire (PQ) (Witmer & Singer, 1998)<br>- Immersive Tendencies Questionnaire (ITQ) (Witmer & Singer, 1998)<br>- Simulator Sickness Questionnaire (SSQ) (Kennedy et al.,1993)<br>- Gratch report scale (Gratch et al., 2007; Wang & Gratch, 2009)<br>- Scale for the rating of Uncanny Valley effects (Ho & MacDorman, 2017)<br><br>Guideline-based individual interviews on the following topic:<br>- What was good/not so good?<br>- What caused problems?<br>- How was the training under VR glasses?<br>- How was the overall duration?<br>- Were the breaks sufficient?<br>- How did you like the Avatar?<br>- How do you rate the UI features?