Current Developmental Disorders Reports

, Volume 3, Issue 2, pp 138–151 | Cite as

Integrating New Technologies into the Treatment of CP and DCD

  • Peter WilsonEmail author
  • Dido Green
  • Karen Caeyenberghs
  • Bert Steenbergen
  • Jonathan Duckworth
Disorders of Motor (PH Wilson, Section Editor)
Part of the following topical collections:
  1. Topical Collection on Disorders of Motor


This paper examines how current understandings of childhood participation and motor development provide opportunities for using new technologies (such as virtual reality—VR) for children with neurodevelopmental disorders. Specifically, the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health is used to conceptualize the role of technology in treatment across body structures and body function, activity performance, and participation (WHO 2007, 2012). First, we review the particular motor control and learning mechanisms that have been implicated in children with atypical motor development, like DCD. This section will highlight avenues for targeted remediation. Next, VR-based rehabilitation systems are reviewed in relation to neurodevelopmental disorders, focusing first on CP and second on more recent applications for children with DCD. We describe the evolution of particular design innovations in virtual rehabilitation including recent advances using tangible interfaces, as well as other methods targeting cognitive function more specifically. Benefits of these various treatments will be viewed through the lens of current theory and evaluated at the level of child and family outcomes. Finally, we consider the broader aspects of the potential for technological innovation in rehabilitation and its impact on brain function, activity competence, and longer-term participation.


Developmental coordination disorder Cerebral palsy Rehabilitation Virtual reality Cognitive training Gaming Interactive digital media 


Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of Interest

Peter Wilson, Dido Green, Karen Caeyenberghs, Bert Steenbergen, and Jonathan Duckworth declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.


  1. 1.
    WHO. International classification of functioning. Disability and Health (ICF). Geneva: World Health Organisation; 2007.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    WHO. Implementing the merger of the ICF and ICF-CY. Geneva: World Health Organisation; 2012.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bilbao A, Kennedy C, Chatterji S, Üstün B, Barquero JLV, Barth JT. The ICF: applications of the WHO model of functioning, disability and health to brain injury rehabilitation. NeuroRehabilitation. 2003;18(3):239–50.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Anderson DI, Campos JJ, Barbu-Roth MA. A developmental perspective on visual proprioception. In: Bremner G, Slater A, editors. Theories of infant development. Oxford: Blackwell; 2004. p. 30–69.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hyde C, Wilson P. Online motor control in children with developmental coordination disorder: chronometric analysis of double‐step reaching performance. Child Care Health Dev. 2011;37(1):111–22.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hyde C, Wilson PH. Dissecting online control in Developmental Coordination Disorder: a kinematic analysis of double-step reaching. Brain Cogn. 2011;75(3):232–41.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Diedrichsen J, White O, Newman D, Lally N. Use-dependent and error-based learning of motor behaviors. J Neurosci. 2010;30(15):5159–66.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Shadmehr R, Smith MA, Krakauer JW. Error correction, sensory prediction, and adaptation in motor control. Annu Rev Neurosci. 2010;33:89–108.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Desmurget M, Grafton S. Feedback or feedforward control: end of a dichotomy. Taking action: cognitive neuroscience perspectives on intentional acts. In: Johnson-Frey S, editor. Taking action: Cognitive neuroscience perspective on intentional acts. Cambridge: MIT Press; 2003. p. 289.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Sukerkar P. EEG source localization of visual and proprioceptive error processing during visually-guided target tracking with the wrist. Master’s Theses (2009). Paper 70. 2010.
  11. 11.
    Hyde CE, Wilson PH. Impaired online control in children with developmental coordination disorder reflects developmental immaturity. Dev Neuropsychol. 2013;38(2):81–97.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Konczak J, Jansen-Osmann P, Kalveram K-T. Development of force adaptation during childhood. J Mot Behav. 2003;35(1):41–52.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Smits-Engelsman B, Wilson P, Westenberg Y, Duysens J. Fine motor deficiencies in children with developmental coordination disorder and learning disabilities: an underlying open-loop control deficit. Hum Mov Sci. 2003;22(4):495–513.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hay L, Redon C. Feedforward versus feedback control in children and adults subjected to a postural disturbance. Exp Brain Res. 1999;125(2):153–62.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Dubrowski A, Bock O, Carnahan H, Jüngling S. The coordination of hand transport and grasp formation during single- and double-perturbed human prehension movements. Exp Brain Res. 2002;145(3):365–71.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Saunders JA, Knill DC. Humans use continuous visual feedback from the hand to control both the direction and distance of pointing movements. Exp Brain Res. 2005;162(4):458–73.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Van Braeckel K, Butcher PR, Geuze RH, Stremmelaar EF, Bouma A. Movement adaptations in 7- to 10-year-old typically developing children: evidence for a transition in feedback-based motor control. Hum Mov Sci. 2007;26(6):927–42.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Johnson MH. Developmental cognitive neuroscience. 3rd ed. Wiley-Blackwell; 2010.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Durston S, Davidson MC, Tottenham N, Galvan A, Spicer J, Fossella JA, et al. A shift from diffuse to focal cortical activity with development. Dev Sci. 2006;9(1):1–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Brocki KC, Bohlin G. Executive functions in children aged 6 to 13: a dimensional and developmental study. Dev Neuropsychol. 2004;26(2):571–93.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Suchy Y. Executive functioning: overview, assessment, and research issues for non-neuropsychologists. Ann Behav Med. 2009;37(2):106–16.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Chaminade T, Meltzoff AN, Decety J. Does the end justify the means? A PET exploration of the mechanisms involved in human imitation. Neuroimage. 2002;15(2):318–28.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Ruddock SR, Hyde CE, Piek JP, Sugden D, Morris S, Wilson PH. Executive systems constrain the flexibility of online control in children during goal-directed reaching. Dev Neuropsychol. 2014;39(1):51–68.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Somerville LH, Hare T, Casey BJ. Frontostriatal maturation predicts cognitive control failure to appetitive cues in adolescents. J Cogn Neurosci. 2011;23(9):2123–34. doi: 10.1162/jocn.2010.21572.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Eyre J, Taylor J, Villagra F, Smith M, Miller S. Evidence of activity-dependent withdrawal of corticospinal projections during human development. Neurology. 2001;57(9):1543–54.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    French B, Thomas LH, Leathley MJ, Sutton CJ, McAdam J, Forster A, et al. Repetitive task training for improving functional ability after stroke. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007;4(4). doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD006073.pub2.
  27. 27.
    Kuhnke N, Juenger H, Walther M, Berweck S, Mall V, Staudt M. Do patients with congenital hemiparesis and ipsilateral corticospinal projections respond differently to constraint‐induced movement therapy? Dev Med Child Neurol. 2008;50(12):898–903.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Sutcliffe TL, Logan WJ, Fehlings DL. Pediatric constraint-induced movement therapy is associated with increased contralateral cortical activity on functional magnetic resonance imaging. J Child Neurol. 2009;24(10):1230–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Brown-Lum M, Zwicker JG. Brain imaging increases our understanding of developmental coordination disorder: a review of literature and future directions. Curr Dev Disord Rep. 2015;2(2):131–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Peters LH, Maathuis CG, Hadders‐Algra M. Neural correlates of developmental coordination disorder. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2013;55(s4):59–64.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Zwicker JG, Missiuna C, Harris SR, Boyd LA. Developmental coordination disorder: a review and update. Eur J Paediatr Neurol. 2012;16(6):573–81.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Debrabant J, Vingerhoets G, Van Waelvelde H, Leemans A, Taymans T, Caeyenberghs K. Brain connectomics of visual-motor deficits in children with developmental coordination disorder. J Pediatr. 2016;169:21–7.e2.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Langevin LM, MacMaster FP, Crawford S, Lebel C, Dewey D. Common white matter microstructure alterations in pediatric motor and attention disorders. J Pediatr. 2014;164(5):1157–64. e1151.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    McLeod KR, Langevin LM, Goodyear BG, Dewey D. Functional connectivity of neural motor networks is disrupted in children with developmental coordination disorder and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. NeuroImage Clin. 2014;4:566–75.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Zwicker JG, Missiuna C, Harris SR, Boyd LA. Developmental coordination disorder: a pilot diffusion tensor imaging study. Pediatr Neurol. 2012;46(3):162–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Debrabant J, Gheysen F, Caeyenberghs K, Van Waelvelde H, Vingerhoets G. Neural underpinnings of impaired predictive motor timing in children with Developmental Coordination Disorder. Res Dev Disabil. 2013;34(5):1478–87.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Licari MK, Billington J, Reid SL, Wann JP, Elliott CM, Winsor AM, et al. Cortical functioning in children with developmental coordination disorder: a motor overflow study. Exp Brain Res. 2015;233(6):1703–10.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Zwicker JG, Missiuna C, Harris SR, Boyd LA. Brain activation associated with motor skill practice in children with developmental coordination disorder: an fMRI study. Int J Dev Neurosci. 2011;29(2):145–52.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Chicoine AJ, Lassonde M, Proteau L. Developmental aspects of sensorimotor integration. Dev Neuropsychol. 1992;8(4):381–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Wilson P, Ruddock S, Smits-Engelsman B, Polatajko H, Blank R. Understanding performance deficits in Developmental Coordination Disorder: a meta-analysis of recent research. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2013;55(3):217–28.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Livesey D, Keen J, Rouse J, White F. The relationship between measures of executive function, motor performance and externalising behaviour in 5- and 6-year-old children. Hum Mov Sci. 2006;25(1):50–64.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Piek JP, Dyck MJ, Francis M, Conwell A. Working memory, processing speed, and set‐shifting in children with developmental coordination disorder and attention‐deficit–hyperactivity disorder. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2007;49(9):678–83.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Saban MT, Ornoy A, Parush S. Executive function and attention in young adults with and without Developmental Coordination Disorder—a comparative study. Res Dev Disabil. 2014;35(11):2644–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Dijk H, Jannink MJ, Hermens HJ. Effect of augmented feedback on motor function of the affected upper extremity in rehabilitation patients: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials. J Rehabil Med. 2005;37(4):202–11.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    van Dijk H, Hermens HJ. Effects of age and timing of augmented feedback on learning muscle relaxation while performing a gross motor task. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2006;85(2):148–55.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Gordon A, Magill R. Motor learning: application of principles to pediatric rehabilitation. Physical therapy for children. Philadelphia: Elsevier; 2012. p. 151–75.Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Magill RA. Motor control and learning: concepts and applications. Dubuque: McGraw-Hill; 2004.Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Todorov E, Shadmehr R, Bizzi E. Augmented feedback presented in a virtual environment accelerates learning of a difficult motor task. J Mot Behav. 1997;29(2):147–58.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Wulf G, Chiviacowsky S, Schiller E, Ávila LTG. Frequent external-focus feedback enhances motor learning. Front Psychol. 2010;1(190):1–7.Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Wulf G, Shea C, Lewthwaite R. Motor skill learning and performance: a review of influential factors. Med Educ. 2010;44(1):75–84.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Wulf G, Prinz W. Directing attention to movement effects enhances learning: a review. Psychon Bull Rev. 2001;8(4):648–60.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Hommel B, Musseler J, Aschersleben G, Prinz W. The Theory of Event Coding (TEC): a framework for perception and action planning. Behav Brain Sci. 2001;24(5):849–78. discussion 878–937.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Prinz W. Perception and action planning. Eur J Cogn Psychol. 1997;9(2):129–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Piron L, Tombolini P, Turolla A, Zucconi C, Agostini M, Dam M, et al. Reinforced feedback in virtual environment facilitates the arm motor recovery in patients after a recent stroke. Paper presented at the Virtual Rehabilitation. 2007.Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Durham K, Van Vliet PM, Badger F, Sackley C. Use of information feedback and attentional focus of feedback in treating the person with a hemiplegic arm. Physiother Res Int. 2009;14(2):77–90.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Green D, Schertz M, Gordon AM, Moore A, Schejter Margalit T, Farquharson Y, et al. A multi‐site study of functional outcomes following a themed approach to hand–arm bimanual intensive therapy for children with hemiplegia. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2013;55(6):527–33.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Ishii H, Ullmer B. Tangible bits: towards seamless interfaces between people, bits and atoms. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the ACM SIGCHI Conference on Human factors in computing systems. 1997.Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Dourish P. Where the action is: the foundations of embodied interaction. New ed. Cambridge: MIT Press; 2004.Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Green D, Wilson P. Applications of VR technologies for childhood disability. Virtual reality for physical and motor rehabilitation. In: Weiss T, editor. Virtual reality technologies for health and clinical application. New York: Springer; 2014. p. 203–216.Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    Cobb S, Brooks AL, Sharkey PM. Virtual reality technologies and the creative arts in the areas of disability, therapy, health, and rehabilitation. In: Kumar S, Cohn ER, editors.x Telerehabilitation. London: Springer; 2013. p. 239–261.Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    Duckworth J, Mumford N, Caeyenberghs K, Eldridge R, Mayson S, Thomas PR, et al. Resonance: an interactive tabletop artwork for co-located group rehabilitation and play. Universal Access in Human-Computer Interaction. Access to Learning, Health and Well-Being. In: Antona M, Stephanidis C, editors. Lecture Notes in Computer Science. vol. 9177. Switzerland: Springer; 2015. p. 420–431.Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    Mumford N, Duckworth J, Thomas PR, Shum D, Williams G, Wilson PH. Upper limb virtual rehabilitation for traumatic brain injury: initial evaluation of the elements system. Brain Inj. 2010;24(5):780–91.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Snider L, Majnemer A, Darsaklis V. Virtual reality as a therapeutic modality for children with cerebral palsy. Dev Neurorehabil. 2010;13(2):120–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Galvin J, Levac D. Facilitating clinical decision-making about the use of virtual reality within paediatric motor rehabilitation: describing and classifying virtual reality systems. Dev Neurorehabil. 2011;14(2):112–22.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Laufer Y, Weiss PTL. Virtual reality in the assessment and treatment of children with motor impairment: a systematic review. J Phys Ther Educ. 2011;25(1):59.Google Scholar
  66. 66.
    Reid D, Campbell K. The use of virtual reality with children with cerebral palsy: a pilot randomized trial. Ther Recreat J. 2006;40(4):255.Google Scholar
  67. 67.
    Jannink MJ, Van Der Wilden GJ, Navis DW, Visser G, Gussinklo J, Ijzerman M. A low-cost video game applied for training of upper extremity function in children with cerebral palsy: a pilot study. Cyberpsychol Behav. 2008;11(1):27–32.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Chen Y-P, Kang L-J, Chuang T-Y, Doong J-L, Lee S-J, Tsai M-W, et al. Use of virtual reality to improve upper-extremity control in children with cerebral palsy: a single-subject design. Phys Ther. 2007;87(11):1441–57.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    You SH, Jang SH, Kim Y-H, Kwon Y-H, Barrow I, Hallett M. Cortical reorganization induced by virtual reality therapy in a child with hemiparetic cerebral palsy. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2005;47(09):628–35.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    James S, Ziviani J, Ware RS, Boyd RN. Randomized controlled trial of web‐based multimodal therapy for unilateral cerebral palsy to improve occupational performance. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2015;57(6):530–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Sakzewski et al. Efficacy of upper limb interventions for children with unilateral cerebral palsy: a systematic review and meta-analysis update. Pediatrics. 2014;133:e175–204.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Weinstein M, Green D, Geva R, Schertz M, Fattal-Valevski A, Artzi M, et al. Interhemispheric and intrahemispheric connectivity and manual skills in children with unilateral cerebral palsy. Brain Struct Funct. 2013;219:1025–40.Google Scholar
  73. 73.
    Subramanian SK, Massie CL, Malcolm MP, Levin MF. Does provision of extrinsic feedback result in improved motor learning in the upper limb poststroke? A systematic review of the evidence. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2010;24(2):113–24.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Jelsma J, Pronk M, Ferguson G, Jelsma-Smit D. The effect of the Nintendo Wii Fit on balance control and gross motor function of children with spastic hemiplegic cerebral palsy. Dev Neurorehabil. 2013;16(1):27–37.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Deutsch JE, Borbely M, Filler J, Huhn K, Guarrera-Bowlby P. Use of a low-cost, commercially available gaming console (Wii) for rehabilitation of an adolescent with cerebral palsy. Phys Ther. 2008;88(10):1196–207.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Laver K, George S, Ratcliffe J, Crotty M. Virtual reality stroke rehabilitation—hype or hope? Aust Occup Ther J. 2011;58(3):215–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Golomb MR, McDonald BC, Warden SJ, Yonkman J, Saykin AJ, Shirley B, et al. In-home virtual reality videogame telerehabilitation in adolescents with hemiplegic cerebral palsy. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2010;91(1):1–8. e1.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    Hammond J, Jones V, Hill EL, Green D, Male I. An investigation of the impact of regular use of the Wii Fit to improve motor and psychosocial outcomes in children with movement difficulties: a pilot study. Child Care Health Dev. 2014;40(2):165–75.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    Ferguson G, Jelsma D, Jelsma J, Smits-Engelsman B. The efficacy of two task-orientated interventions for children with Developmental Coordination Disorder: Neuromotor Task Training and Nintendo Wii Fit training. Res Dev Disabil. 2013;34(9):2449–61.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    Ashkenazi T, Weiss PL, Orian D, Laufer Y. Low-cost virtual reality intervention program for children with developmental coordination disorder: a pilot feasibility study. Pediatr Phys Ther. 2013;25(4):467–73.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. 81.
    Jelsma D, Geuze RH, Mombarg R, Smits-Engelsman BC. The impact of Wii Fit intervention on dynamic balance control in children with probable Developmental Coordination Disorder and balance problems. Hum Mov Sci. 2014;33:404–18.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. 82.
    Jelsma D, Ferguson GD, Smits-Engelsman BC, Geuze RH. Short-term motor learning of dynamic balance control in children with probable Developmental Coordination Disorder. Res Dev Disabil. 2015;38:213–22.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. 83.
    Straker L, Howie E, Smith A, Jensen L, Piek J, Campbell A. A crossover randomised and controlled trial of the impact of active video games on motor coordination and perceptions of physical ability in children at risk of Developmental Coordination Disorder. Hum Mov Sci. 2015;42:146–60.Google Scholar
  84. 84.
    Green D, Wilson PH. Use of virtual reality in rehabilitation of movement in children with hemiplegia—a multiple case study evaluation. Disabil Rehabil. 2012;34(7):593–604.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. 85.
    Eyre J. Corticospinal tract development and its plasticity after perinatal injury. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2007;31(8):1136–49.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. 86.
    Goble DJ, Hurvitz EA, Brown SH. Deficits in the ability to use proprioceptive feedback in children with hemiplegic cerebral palsy. Int J Rehabil Res. 2009;32(3):267–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. 87.
    Guzzetta A, D’Acunto G, Rose S, Tinelli F, Boyd R, Cioni G. Plasticity of the visual system after early brain damage. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2010;52:891–900.Google Scholar
  88. 88.
    Martin Bax D, Tydeman C, Flodmark O. Clinical and MRI correlates of cerebral palsy. JAMA. 2006;296:1602–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. 89.
    Löwing K, Bexelius A, Brogren Carlberg E. Activity focused and goal directed therapy for children with cerebral palsy—do goals make a difference? Disabil Rehabil. 2009;31(22):1808–16.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. 90.
    Akhutina T y, Foreman N, Krichevets A, Matikka L, Narhi V, Pylaeva N, et al. Improving spatial functioning in children with cerebral palsy using computerized and traditional game tasks. Disabil Rehabil. 2003;25(24):1361–71.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. 91.
    Weiss PL, Bialik P, Kizony R. Virtual reality provides leisure time opportunities for young adults with physical and intellectual disabilities. Cyberpsychol Behav. 2003;6(3):335–42.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. 92.
    Kirshner S, Weiss PL, Tirosh E. Meal-maker: a virtual meal preparation environment for children with cerebral palsy. Eur J Spec Needs Educ. 2011;26(3):323–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. 93.
    Standen PJ, Brown DJ, Cromby J. The effective use of virtual environments in the education and rehabilitation of students with intellectual disabilities. Br J Educ Technol. 2001;32(3):289–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. 94.
    Mumford N, Duckworth J, Thomas PR, Shum D, Williams G, Wilson PH. Upper-limb virtual rehabilitation for traumatic brain injury: a preliminary within-group evaluation of the elements system. Brain Inj. 2012;26(2):166–76.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. 95.
    Mumford N, Wilson PH. Virtual reality in acquired brain injury upper limb rehabilitation: evidence-based evaluation of clinical research. Brain Inj. 2009;23(3):179–91.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. 96.
    Morganti F, Goulene K, Gaggioli A, Stramba-Badiale M, Riva G. Grasping virtual objects: a feasibility study for an enactive interface application in stroke. PsychNology J. 2006;4(2):181–97.Google Scholar
  97. 97.
    Snapp-Childs W, Mon-Williams M, Bingham GP. A sensorimotor approach to the training of manual actions in children with developmental coordination disorder. J Child Neurol. 2013;28(2):204–12.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. 98.
    Cicerone KD, Langenbahn DM, Braden C, Malec JF, Kalmar K, Fraas M, et al. Evidence-based cognitive rehabilitation: updated review of the literature from 2003 through 2008. Arch Phys Med Rehab. 2011;92(4):519–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. 99.
    Slomine B, Locascio G. Cognitive rehabilitation for children with acquired brain injury. Dev Disabil Res Rev. 2009;15(2):133–43.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. 100.
    Luciana M, Lindeke L, Georgieff M, Mills M, Nelson CA. Neurobehavioral evidence for working-memory deficits in school-aged children with histories of prematurity. Dev Med Child Neurol. 1999;41(08):521–33.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. 101.
    Sigurdardottir S, Indredavik MS, Eiriksdottir A, Einarsdottir K, Gudmundsson HS, Vik T. Behavioural and emotional symptoms of preschool children with cerebral palsy: a population‐based study. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2010;52(11):1056–61.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  102. 102.
    Tsai C-L, Wang C-H, Tseng Y-T. Effects of exercise intervention on event-related potential and task performance indices of attention networks in children with developmental coordination disorder. Brain Cogn. 2012;79(1):12–22.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  103. 103.
    Løhaugen GC, Beneventi H, Andersen GL, Sundberg C, Østgård HF, Bakkan E, et al. Do children with cerebral palsy benefit from computerized working memory training? Study protocol for a randomized controlled trial. Trials. 2014;15(1):269.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  104. 104.
    Astle DE, Barnes JJ, Baker K, Colclough GL, Woolrich MW. Cognitive training enhances intrinsic brain connectivity in childhood. J Neurosci. 2015;35(16):6277–83.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  105. 105.
    Klingberg T, Forssberg H, Westerberg H. Training of working memory in children with ADHD. J Clin Exp Neuropsychol. 2002;24(6):781–91.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  106. 106.
    Rideout VJ, Foehr UG, Roberts DF. Generation M: media in the lives of 8- to 18-year-olds. Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation. 2010.
  107. 107.
    Rideout VJ, Vandewater EA, Wartella EA. Zero to six: electronic media in the lives of infants, toddlers and preschoolers. 2003.
  108. 108.
    Green D, Meroz A, Margalit AE, Ratzon NZ. A validation study of the Keyboard Personal Computer Style instrument (K-PeCS) for use with children. Appl Ergon. 2012;43(6):985–92.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  109. 109.
    Reid D. The influence of virtual reality on playfulness in children with cerebral palsy: a pilot study. Occup Ther Int. 2004;11(3):131–44.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  110. 110.
    Reid DT. Benefits of a virtual play rehabilitation environment for children with cerebral palsy on perceptions of self-efficacy: a pilot study. Pediatr Rehabil. 2002;5(3):141–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  111. 111.
    Anttila H, Autti-Rämö I, Suoranta J, Mäkelä M, Malmivaara A. Effectiveness of physical therapy interventions for children with cerebral palsy: a systematic review. BMC Pediatr. 2008;8(1):14.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  112. 112.
    Sakzewski L, Ziviani J, Boyd R. Systematic review and meta-analysis of therapeutic management of upper-limb dysfunction in children with congenital hemiplegia. Pediatrics. 2009;123(6):e1111–22.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  113. 113.
    National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). NICE clinical guidelines. 2012. Accessed 12 Feb 2016.
  114. 114.
    Hemayattalab R, Rostami LR. Effects of frequency of feedback on the learning of motor skill in individuals with cerebral palsy. Res Dev Disabil. 2010;31(1):212–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  115. 115.
    Wilson P. Developmental cognitive neuroscience perspective on motor rehabilitation. In: Sharkey P, Merrick J, editors. Virtual reality: people with special needs. NY: Nova Science Publishers; 2014.Google Scholar
  116. 116.
    Green D, Wilson PH. Validation of the Elements/RE-ACTION System for use with children: evaluation of performance across developmental stages. Paper presented at the Virtual Rehabilitation (ICVR), 2011 International Conference on. 2011.Google Scholar
  117. 117.
    Adams IL, Lust JM, Wilson PH, Steenbergen B. Compromised motor control in children with DCD: a deficit in the internal model?—a systematic review. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2014;47:225–44.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  118. 118.
    Hétu S, Mercier C. Using purposeful tasks to improve motor performance: does object affordance matter? Br J Occup Ther. 2012;75(8):367–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  119. 119.
    Shuwairi SM, Tran A, DeLoache JS, Johnson SP. Infants’ response to pictures of impossible objects. Infancy. 2010;15:636–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  120. 120.
    Liu W-Y, Zaino CA, McCoy SW. Anticipatory postural adjustments in children with cerebral palsy and children with typical development. Pediatr Phys Ther. 2007;19(3):188–95.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  121. 121.
    Pezzulo G. Coordinating with the future: the anticipatory nature of representation. Mind Mach. 2008;18(2):179–225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  122. 122.
    Steenbergen B, Gordon AM. Activity limitation in hemiplegic cerebral palsy: evidence for disorders in motor planning. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2006;48(09):780–3.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  123. 123.
    Pridmore T, Hilton D, Green J, Eastgate R, Cobb S. Mixed reality environments in stroke rehabilitation: interfaces across the real/virtual divide. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Disability, Virtual Reality & Associated Technology: 20–22 September 2004; Oxford; 2004.Google Scholar
  124. 124.
    Eaves D, Haythornthwaite L, Vogt S. Motor imagery during action observation modulates automatic imitation effects in rhythmical actions. Front Hum Neurosci. 2014;8:28.Google Scholar
  125. 125.
    Vogt S, Di Rienzo F, Collet C, Collins A, Guillot A. Multiple roles of motor imagery during action observation. Front Hum Neurosci. 2013;7:a807.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  126. 126.
    Gal E, Bauminger N, Goren-Bar D, Pianesi F, Stock O, Zancanaro M, et al. Enhancing social communication of children with high-functioning autism through a co-located interface. AI & Soc. 2009;24(1):75–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  127. 127.
    Kandalaft MR, Didehbani N, Krawczyk DC, Allen TT, Chapman SB. Virtual reality social cognition training for young adults with high-functioning autism. J Autism Dev Disord. 2013;43(1):34–44.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  128. 128.
    Weiss PL, Gal E, Eden S, Zancanaro M, Telch F. Usability of a multi-touch tabletop surface to enhance social competence training for children with Autism Spectrum Disorder. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the Chais conference on instructional technologies research. 2011.Google Scholar
  129. 129.
    Imms C, Mathews S, Richmond K, Law M, Ullenhag A. Optimising leisure participation: A pilot intervention study for adolescents with physical impairments. Disabil Rehabil. 2016;38:963–71.Google Scholar
  130. 130.
    Duckworth JD, Wilson PH. Embodiment and play in designing an interactive art system for movement rehabilitation. Second Nature. 2010;2(1),120–37.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Peter Wilson
    • 1
    Email author
  • Dido Green
    • 2
  • Karen Caeyenberghs
    • 1
  • Bert Steenbergen
    • 1
    • 3
  • Jonathan Duckworth
    • 4
  1. 1.Centre for Disability and Development Research (CeDDR)Australian Catholic UniversityMelbourneAustralia
  2. 2.Oxford-Brookes UniversityOxfordUK
  3. 3.Radboud UniversityNijmegenThe Netherlands
  4. 4.RMIT UniversityMelbourneAustralia

Personalised recommendations