Physiotherapy Review

Pełna treść

1/2026 vol. 30
Artykuł oryginalny

Assessment of cybersickness symptoms during stimulation of an extreme scenario in virtual reality – one-shot case study

Piotr Hałka 1
,
Aleksandra Katarzyna Nowakowska 2
,
Magdalena Nowak 2
,
David Lucena-Anton 3
,
Sebastian Rutkowski 1
  1. Department of Physical Education and Physiotherapy, Opole University of Technology, Opole, Poland
  2. Doctoral School, Opole University of Technology, Opole, Poland
  3. Department of Nursing and Physiotherapy, University of Cadiz, Cadiz, Spain, Spain
Research, Physiotherapy Review, 2026, 30(1), 34-44
DOI: https://doi.org/10.5114/phr.2026.160359
Data publikacji online: 2026/03/26
Plik artykułu
art4_1_2026.pdf
Confronting perimenopausal women’s knowledge of coronary heart disease with their health behaviours. Controversial role of hormone replacement therapy in the protection of coronary heart disease
  1. Levin MF. What is the potential of virtual reality for post-stroke sensorimotor rehabilitation? Expert Rev Neurother. 2020; 20 (3): 195–197.
  2. Rubio-Tamayo J, Gertrudix Barrio M, García García F. Immersive environments and virtual reality: systematic review and advances in communication, interaction and simulation. Multimodal Technol Interact. 2017; 1 (4): 21.
  3. Benjamin DR, Van De Water ATM, Peiris CL. Effects of exercise on diastasis of the rectus abdominis muscle in the antenatal and postnatal periods: a systematic review. Physiotherapy. 2014; 100 (1): 1–8.
  4. Mandal S. Brief introduction of virtual reality and its challenges. 2013.
  5. Huang W, Roscoe RD, Johnson-Glenberg MC, Craig SD. Motivation, engagement, and performance across multiple virtual reality sessions and levels of immersion. J Comput Assist Learn. 2021; 37 (3): 745–758.
  6. Rose T, Nam CS, Chen KB. Immersion of virtual reality for rehabilitation – review. Appl Ergon. 2018; 69: 153–161.
  7. Wohlgenannt I, Simons A, Stieglitz S. Virtual reality. Bus Inf Syst Eng. 2020; 62 (5): 455–461.
  8. Mayor J, Raya L, Sanchez A. A comparative study of virtual reality methods of interaction and locomotion based on presence, cybersickness, and usability. IEEE Trans Emerg Top Comput. 2021; 9 (3): 1542–1553.
  9. Pottle J. Virtual reality and the transformation of medical education. Future Healthc J. 2019; 6 (3): 181–185.
  10. Cabero J, Barroso J. The educational possibilities of augmented reality. J New Approaches Educ Res. 2016; 5 (1): 44–50. 44 Physiotherapy Review | Volume XXX Issue 1/2026
  11. Valente L, Feijó B, Ribeiro A, Clua E. The concept of pervasive virtuality and its application in digital entertainment systems. In: Wallner G, Kriglstein S, Hlavacs H, Malaka R, Lugmayr A, Yang HS, editors. Entertainment Computing – ICEC 2016. Cham: Springer; 2016. p. 187–198.
  12. Cao S. Virtual reality applications in rehabilitation.In: Kurosu M, editor. Human-Computer Interaction:Theory, Design, Development and Practice. Cham: Springer; 2016. p. 3–10.
  13. Molhemi F, Monjezi S, Mehravar M, Shaterzadeh- Yazdi MJ, Salehi R, Hesam S, et al. Effects of virtual reality vs conventional balance training on balance and falls in people with multiple sclerosis: a randomized controlled trial. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2021; 102 (2): 290–299.
  14. Truijen S, Abdullahi A, Bijsterbosch D, Van Zoest E, Conijn M, Wang Y, et al. Effect of home-based virtual reality training and telerehabilitation on balance in individuals with Parkinson disease, multiple sclerosis, and stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Neurol Sci. 2022; 43 (5): 2995–3006.
  15. Kourtesis P, Linnell J, Amir R, Argelaguet F, MacPherson SE. Cybersickness in virtual reality questionnaire (CSQ-VR): a validation and comparison against SSQ and VRSQ. Virtual Worlds. 2023; 2 (1): 16–35.
  16. Ramaseri Chandra AN, El Jamiy F, Reza H. A systematic survey on cybersickness in virtual environments. Computers. 2022; 11 (4): 51.
  17. Kim H, Kim DJ, Chung WH, Park KA, Kim JDK, Kim D, et al. Clinical predictors of cybersickness in virtual reality (VR) among highly stressed people. Sci Rep. 2021; 11 (1): 12139.
  18. Simón Vicente L, Rodríguez-Cano S, Delgado-Benito V, Ausín V, Cubo E. Cybersickness: a systematic literature review of adverse effects related to virtual reality. Neurologia. 2022.
  19. Weech S, Kenny S, Barnett-Cowan M. Presence and cybersickness in virtual reality are negatively related: a review. Front Psychol. 2019; 10: 158.
  20. Saredakis D, Szpak A, Birckhead B, Keage HAD, Rizzo A, Loetscher T. Factors associated with virtual reality sickness in head-mounted displays: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Front Hum Neurosci. 2020; 14: 96.
  21. Howard MC, Van Zandt EC. A meta-analysis of the virtual reality problem: unequal effects of virtual reality sickness across individual differences. Virtual Reality. 2021; 25 (4): 1221–1246.
  22. Kim YS, Won J, Jang SW, Ko J. Effects of cybersickness caused by head-mounted display–based virtual reality on physiological responses: cross-sectional study. JMIR Serious Games. 2022; 10 (4): e37938.
  23. Bouchard S, Berthiaume M, Robillard G, Forget H, Daudelin-Peltier C, Renaud P, et al. Arguing in favor of revising the simulator sickness questionnaire factor structure when assessing side effects induced by immersions in virtual reality. Front Psychiatry. 2021; 12: 739742.
  24. Stanney K, Fidopiastis C, Foster L. Virtual reality is sexist: but it does not have to be. Front Robot AI. 2020; 7: 4.
  25. Stanney K, Lawson BD, Rokers B, Dennison M, Fidopiastis C, Stoffregen T, et al. Identifying causes of and solutions for cybersickness in immersive technology: reformulation of a research and development agenda. Int J Hum Comput Interact. 2020; 36 (19): 1783–1803.
  26. Tian N, Lopes P, Boulic R. A review of cybersickness in head-mounted displays: raising attention to individual susceptibility. Virtual Reality. 2022; 26 (4): 1409–1441.
PUBLISHER
Udostępnij
Zintergrowane z
Zasady redakcyjne
Sarajevo Declaration on Integrity and Visibility of Scholarly Publications