DIGITAL NEUROREHABILITATION IN CONTEMPORARY NEUROLOGY: TECHNOLOGICAL FOUNDATIONS, CLOSED-LOOP SYSTEMS, AND CLINICAL IMPLEMENTATION
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.31435/ijitss.3(51).2026.6640Keywords:
Digital Neurorehabilitation, Brain-Computer Interfaces, Robotic Exoskeletons, Virtual Reality, Closed-Loop Systems, Activity-Dependent Neuroplasticity, Stroke Recovery, Tele-RehabilitationAbstract
Neurological disorders—led by ischemic and hemorrhagic stroke, traumatic brain injury (TBI), spinal cord injury (SCI), and neurodegenerative conditions such as Parkinson’s disease and multiple sclerosis—represent a foremost contributor to global disease burden, long-term functional disability, and socioeconomic strain. While conventional physical and occupational therapies remain standard pillars of neurorestorative care, their real-world impact is frequently constrained by low repetition doses, subjective clinical rating scales, high workforce dependency, and poor long-term adherence following hospital discharge. Digital neurorehabilitation has emerged as a transformative, systems-level paradigm that shifts restorative neurology from empirical, episodic regimens toward continuous, high-dose, and data-driven motor re-education. This comprehensive review synthesizes empirical and technological advances (2019–2026) across the digital neurorehabilitation ecosystem. We examine the biomedical and engineering foundations of robotic exoskeletons and end-effector devices, immersive virtual, augmented, and mixed reality environments (VR/AR/MR), non-invasive electroencephalography-based brain-computer interfaces (BCIs), and closed-loop multi-sensor feedback architectures. Furthermore, we analyze the decentralization of therapy through wearable sensor networks and tele-rehabilitation platforms, alongside macroeconomic cost-effectiveness, medical device regulatory frameworks, and systemic clinical integration challenges. By bridging computational systems engineering, neurophysiology, and clinical neurology, this review establishes that closed-loop digital neurorehabilitation represents an indispensable, scalable pillar of modern precision neurological recovery.
References
Adamovich, S. V., Fluet, G. G., Tunik, E., & Merians, A. S. (2009). Sensorimotor training in virtual reality: A review. NeuroRehabilitation, 25(1), 29–44. https://doi.org/10.3233/NRE-2009-0497
Ang, K. K., Guan, C., Phua, K. S., Wang, C., Teh, I., Chen, C. W., Zhao, C. G., Chew, E., & Subramanian, S. K. (2015). Facilitating effects of transcranial direct current stimulation on motor imagery brain-computer interface with robotic feedback for stroke rehabilitation. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 96(3), S79–S87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2014.08.008
Bao, S. C., Wong, W. W., Leung, T. W., & Choi, K. S. (2020). Cortical functional connectivity changes associated with brain-computer interface training with robotic feedback for upper-limb rehabilitation in chronic stroke. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 14, 574516. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2020.574516
Bernhardt, J., Hayward, K. S., Kwakkel, G., Ward, N. S., Wolf, S. L., Borschmann, K., Krakauer, J. W., & Cramer, S. C. (2017). Agreed definitions and a shared vision for new standards in stroke recovery research: The Stroke Recovery and Rehabilitation Roundtable taskforce. International Journal of Stroke, 12(5), 444–450. https://doi.org/10.1177/1747493017711816
Biasiucci, A., Leeb, R., Iturrate, I., Perdikis, S., Al-Khodairy, A., Corbet, T., Schnider, A., Schmidlin, T., Zhang, H., Bassolino, M., & Millán, J. D. R. (2018). Brain-actuated functional electrical stimulation elicits lasting functional recovery in chronic stroke. Nature Communications, 9(1), 2421. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-04673-z
Blank, A. A., French, J. A., Pehlivan, A. U., & O'Malley, M. K. (2014). Current trends in robot-assisted upper-limb stroke rehabilitation: Promoting patient engagement in therapy. Current Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Reports, 2(3), 184–195. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40141-014-0056-z
Bortole, M., Venkatakrishnan, A., Zhu, F., Moreno, J. C., Francisco, G. E., Pons, J. L., & Contreras-Vidal, J. L. (2015). The H2 robotic exoskeleton for gait rehabilitation after stroke: Safety and feasibility trial. NeuroRehabilitation, 37(4), 709–729. https://doi.org/10.3233/NRE-151288
Cervera, M. A., Soekadar, S. R., Ushiba, J., Millán, J. D. R., Liu, M., Birbaumer, N., & Garipelli, G. (2018). Brain-computer interfaces for post-stroke motor rehabilitation: A meta-analysis. Annals of Clinical and Translational Neurology, 5(5), 651–663. https://doi.org/10.1002/acn3.544
Chaudhary, U., Birbaumer, N., & Ramos-Murguialday, A. (2016). Brain–computer interfaces for communication and rehabilitation. Nature Reviews Neurology, 12(9), 513–525. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrneurol.2016.113
Daly, J. J., & Wolpaw, J. R. (2008). Brain–computer interfaces in neurological rehabilitation. The Lancet Neurology, 7(11), 1032–1043. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1474-4422(08)70223-0
Dobkin, B. H. (2013). Wearable motion sensors to continuously measure real-world physical activities. Current Opinion in Neurology, 26(6), 602–608. https://doi.org/10.1097/WCO.0000000000000026
Feigin, V. L., Vos, T., Nichols, E., Owolabi, M. O., Carroll, W. M., Dichgans, M., Deuschl, G., Parmar, P., Brainin, M., & Murray, C. (2021). The global burden of neurological disorders: Translating evidence into policy. The Lancet Neurology, 19(3), 255–265. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1474-4422(19)30411-9
Galea, M. D. (2019). Telemedicine in rehabilitation. Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Clinics of North America, 30(2), 473–483. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pmr.2018.12.002
Gorelick, P. B. (2019). The global burden of stroke: Persistent and disabling. The Lancet Neurology, 18(5), 417–418. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1474-4422(19)30030-4
Guadagnoli, M. A., & Lee, T. D. (2004). Regulation of cognitive effort in motor learning: Information-processing and the optimal challenge point. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 30(4), 878–890. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.30.4.878
Held, J. P., Ferrer, B., Graf, C., Luft, A. R., & Veerbeek, J. M. (2018). Usability and effectiveness of a mobile app for home-based upper limb rehabilitation after stroke: A randomized controlled trial. Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation, 15(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12984-018-0435-0
Keshner, E. A., Weiss, P. T., Geifman, D., & Levin, M. F. (2019). Tracking the evolution of virtual reality applications to targeted clinical populations in neurorehabilitation. Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation, 16(1), 76. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12984-019-0545-2
Kleim, J. A., & Jones, T. A. (2008). Principles of experience-dependent neural plasticity: Implications for rehabilitation after brain damage. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 51(1), S225–S239. https://doi.org/10.1044/1092-4388(2008/018
Krakauer, J. W., & Carmichael, S. T. (2017). Broken movement: The neurobiology of motor recovery after stroke. MIT Press.
Kwakkel, G., Van Wegen, E. E., Burridge, J. H., Winstein, C. J., van Dokkum, L. E., Alt Murphy, M., Levin, M. F., & Krakauer, J. W. (2019). Standardized measurement of quality of upper limb movement after stroke: Consensus-based core recommendations from the Second Stroke Recovery and Rehabilitation Roundtable. International Journal of Stroke, 14(8), 783–791. https://doi.org/10.1177/1747493019873519
Lang, C. E., Macdonald, J. R., Reisman, D. S., Boyd, L., Kimberley, T. J., Schindler-Ivens, S. M., Hornby, T. G., Ross, S. A., & Scheets, P. L. (2009). Observation of amounts of movement practice provided during stroke rehabilitation. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 90(10), 1692–1698. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2009.04.005
Laver, K. E., Lange, B., George, S., Deutsch, J. E., Saposnik, G., & Crotty, M. (2017). Virtual reality for stroke rehabilitation. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 11(11), CD008349. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD008349.pub4
Linder, S. M., Rosenfeldt, A. B., Bay, R. C., Sahu, K., Wolf, S. L., & Alberts, J. L. (2015). Improving quality of life and depression after stroke through telerehabilitation. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 69(2), 6902290020p1–6902290020p10. https://doi.org/10.5014/ajot.2015.014498
Llorens, R., Fuentes, M. A., Borrego, A., Latorre, J., Alcañiz, M., & Colomer, C. (2018). Effectiveness of a virtual reality-based intervention on functional outcomes after stroke: A randomized controlled trial. Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation, 15(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12984-018-0402-9
Lohse, K. R., Hilderman, C. G. E., Cheung, K. L., Tatla, S., & Van der Loos, H. F. M. (2014). Virtual reality therapy for adults post-stroke: A systematic review and meta-analysis exploring virtual environments and commercial games in therapy. PLoS One, 9(3), e93318. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0093318
Maciejasz, P., Eschweiler, J., Gerlach-Hahn, K., Jansen-Troy, A., & Leonhardt, S. (2014). A survey on robotic devices for upper limb rehabilitation. Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation, 11(1), 3. https://doi.org/10.1186/1743-0003-11-3
Maier, M., Ballester, B. R., & Verschure, P. F. (2019). Principles of neurorehabilitation after stroke based on motor learning and brain plasticity mechanisms: An update. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 13, 74. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2019.00074
Marchal-Crespo, L., & Reinkensmeyer, D. J. (2009). Review of control strategies for robotic movement training after neurologic injury. Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation, 6(1), 20. https://doi.org/10.1186/1743-0003-6-20
Mathews, S. C., McShea, M. J., Hanley, C. L., Ravitz, A., Labrique, A. B., & Cohen, A. B. (2019). Digital health: A path to validation. npj Digital Medicine, 2(1), 38. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41746-019-0111-3
Novak, D., & Riener, R. (2015). Catching the right moment: A brief review of adaptive strategies in rehabilitation robotics. Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation, 12(1), 85. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12984-015-0076-2
Nudo, R. J. (2013). Recovery after brain injury: Mechanisms and principles. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 7, 887. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2013.00887
Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., Shamseer, L., Tetzlaff, J. M., Akl, E. A., Brennan, S. E., Chou, R., Glanville, J., Grimshaw, J. M., Hróbjartsson, A., Lalu, M. M., Li, T., Loder, E. W., Mayo-Wilson, E., McDonald, S., ... Moher, D. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ, 372, n71. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71
Patel, S., Park, H., Bonato, P., Chan, L., & Hesse, M. (2012). A review of wearable sensors and systems with application in rehabilitation. Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation, 9(1), 21. https://doi.org/10.1186/1743-0003-9-21
Perez-Marcos, D., Chevalley, O., Schmidlin, T., Garipelli, G., Serino, A., Vuadens, P., ... & Millán, J. D. R. (2017). Increasing upper limb training intensity in chronic stroke using embodied virtual reality: A pilot study. Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation, 14(1), 119. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12984-017-0328-9
Ramos-Murguialday, A., Broetz, D., Rea, M., Läer, L., Yilmaz, Ö., Brasil, F. L., Liberati, G., Curado, M. R., Garcia-Cossio, E., Vyziotis, A., Cho, W., Agostini, M., Soares, E., Soekadar, S., Caria, A., Cohen, L. G., & Birbaumer, N. (2013). Brain-machine interface in chronic stroke rehabilitation: A controlled study. Annals of Neurology, 74(1), 100–108. https://doi.org/10.1002/ana.23879
Reinkensmeyer, D. J., Burdet, E., Casadio, M., Krakauer, J. W., Kwakkel, G., Lang, C. E., Swinnen, S. P., Ward, N. S., & Schweighofer, N. (2016). Computational neurorehabilitation: Modeling plasticity and learning to predict recovery. Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation, 13(1), 42. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12984-016-0148-3
Sigrist, R., Rauter, G., Riener, R., & Wolf, P. (2013). Augmented visual, auditory, haptic, and multimodal feedback in motor learning: A review. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 20(1), 21–53. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-012-0333-8
Taub, E., Uswatte, G., & Mark, V. W. (2006). The motor-deficit paradigm and neurorehabilitation. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 10(4), 143–149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2006.02.012
Wagner, T. H., Lo, A. C., Peduzzi, P., Bravata, D. M., Huang, G. D., Krebs, H. I., Ringer, R. J., Federman, D. G., Richards, L. G., Haselkorn, J. K., Wittenberg, G. F., Volpe, B. T., Bever, C. T., Duncan, P. W., Sirota, A., & Volpe, B. T. (2011). An economic analysis of robot-assisted therapy for long-term upper-limb impairment after stroke. Stroke, 42(9), 2630–2632. https://doi.org/10.1161/STROKEAHA.110.606442
Wang, F., & Preininger, A. (2019). AI in health: State of the art, challenges, and future directions. Yearbook of Medical Informatics, 28(01), 16–26. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0039-1677908
Wang, Q., Markopoulos, P., Yu, B., Chen, W., & Timmermans, A. (2017). Interactive wearable systems for upper body rehabilitation: A systematic review. Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation, 14(1), 20. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12984-017-0229-y
World Health Organization. (2022). World Health Organization: Neurological disorders. WHO Press.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Radosław Swędrak, Zuzanna Dobrakowska, Jakub Klepacz
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
All articles are published in open-access and licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0). Hence, authors retain copyright to the content of the articles.
CC BY 4.0 License allows content to be copied, adapted, displayed, distributed, re-published or otherwise re-used for any purpose including for adaptation and commercial use provided the content is attributed.
