Evidence
The evidence summarised here relates to CorteXR Stroke and predecessor regulated clinical work in cognitive stroke rehabilitation after stroke. It should be read in the context of the published study, the intended use, and local clinical review.
Reported in the published VIRTUE study. These figures are not claims for CorteXR Studio.
The clinical evidence summarised here relates to CorteXR Stroke and earlier regulated clinical work in cognitive stroke rehabilitation.
CorteXR Studio uses related immersive activity technology, but it is a separate activity product for therapist-led sessions. The evidence on this page should not be used to describe CorteXR Studio as a medical, rehabilitation, outcome, diagnostic, assessment, or monitoring product.
CorteXR Stroke evidence
The study evaluated immersive virtual reality as an adjunct to standard care for stroke survivors with documented cognitive deficits. The intervention used realistic virtual Activities of Daily Living, tailored difficulty, and repeated practice to support attention, memory, orientation, and task sequencing.
The headline findings included a reported median MoCA change of +8 points in one subgroup, a reported length-of-stay difference compared with sham VR, and no serious adverse events reported.
The published trial provides important evidence for immersive VR cognitive rehabilitation after stroke, but it should be read as one part of a wider clinical and procurement review for CorteXR Stroke. Services should consider the study population, intervention setting, outcome measures, intended use, clinical safety documentation, and local pathway fit before making adoption decisions.
Study design
The trial was a double-blind, randomised controlled study involving 40 stroke patients with documented cognitive deficits. Participants received either VR-based cognitive rehabilitation alongside standard care or a sham VR intervention as placebo control.
The predecessor VIRTUE/CorteXR clinical work immersed participants in realistic, interactive scenarios designed to simulate activities of daily living, such as preparing a meal or managing transactions in a cafe. Tasks were tailored to individual ability with adjustable difficulty levels.
The primary outcome measure was cognitive improvement assessed using the Montreal Cognitive Assessment at the conclusion of treatment and three months post-randomisation. Secondary measures included satisfaction, safety assessments, and duration of hospital stay.
Participants were randomised between VR-based cognitive rehabilitation and sham VR control conditions, enabling comparison against placebo exposure.
The published study reported median MoCA improvements in intervention groups, with the largest reported change among patients with severe cognitive impairment.
The published study reported a reduction in length of stay for patients receiving VR treatment compared with sham VR. Services should interpret this finding in the context of the full study and their own pathway.
The study reported no serious adverse events and high acceptability, with minor issues such as transient dizziness or headset discomfort managed during sessions.
The study reported no serious adverse events. Patients and healthcare staff rated the system highly for usability, engagement, and satisfaction.
Participants in the intervention group showed improvements in cognitive domains including attention, memory, and orientation. The largest reported change was in the subgroup with severe cognitive impairment.
The published trial reported a reduced length of stay for patients receiving VR treatment compared with sham VR. This may be relevant to service-capacity and patient-flow discussions, subject to local evaluation.
The trial used VR-based cognitive rehabilitation as a complement to traditional therapy, providing safe, repetitive, and engaging practice environments without requiring additional staffing for every repetition.
Chatterjee, K., Buchanan, A., Cottrell, K., Hughes, S., Day, T.W., and John, N.W., 2022. Immersive virtual reality for the cognitive rehabilitation of stroke survivors. IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering, 30, pp.719-728.
The figures on this page should be read in the context of the full paper, local clinical judgement, and the intended-use documentation supplied during procurement review.
Clinical safety and NHS assurance
CorteXR Stroke is a healthcare technology product, so services also need to understand regulatory status, intended use, clinical safety, information governance, support arrangements, and deployment responsibilities.
For procurement, implementation, or clinical governance review of CorteXR Stroke, we provide the detailed evidence pack, including relevant version numbers, registration details, and formal documents.
Experience
The CorteXR platform has grown from work with clinicians and service stakeholders on immersive activity software. That experience informs product quality and usability, while the clinical evidence on this site remains tied to CorteXR Stroke.
For clinical teams reviewing UKCA-marked software for cognitive stroke rehabilitation.
View CorteXR StrokeFor therapists reviewing non-medical immersive activity software for supervised sessions.
View CorteXR StudioReady to explore CorteXR?
Tell us whether you are exploring CorteXR Stroke, CorteXR Studio, or product fit, and we will shape the conversation around your setting.
