Physical TherapyBOBATH-PTNCT07270107
Bobath Instruction in Physiotherapy: Virtual Reality Versus Traditional Methods
A study testing Immersive VR headset instruction and Traditional instruction in people with Physical Therapy and Education, run by Kocaeli Sağlık ve Teknoloji Üniversitesi at 1 site in Turkey (Türkiye).
Trial summary
This randomized controlled trial evaluated the effectiveness of immersive virtual reality (VR)-based instruction compared with traditional face-to-face teaching for delivering the Bobath concept in physiotherapy education. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Any age, women onlyHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Physical Therapy, Education, Virtual Reality
- What is being tested?
- Immersive VR headset instruction and Traditional instruction
- Type of treatment
- Medical device
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 20 participants
- Where
- 1 siteTurkey (Türkiye)
- Study dates
- 1 May 2025to 30 Jun 2025
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages Any age
- Women only
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Child, Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Third-year undergraduate physiotherapy students.
- First-time enrollment in the Neurophysiological Approaches II course.
- No prior training or formal exposure to the Bobath concept.
- System Usability Scale (SUS) score classified as A+ (96-100 percentile). -Ability to participate in VR or face-to-face instruction as assigned.- Voluntary participation with provision of written informed consent.-
Who cannot join
- History of medical conditions contraindicating VR use (e.g., vestibular disorders, migraine, epilepsy).
- Prior experience, certification, or coursework related to the Bobath concept.
- Failure to provide informed consent.
- Any condition that may limit safe participation in the educational session or assessments.
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
Turkey (Türkiye)1 site
Kocaeli Health and Technology University
Kocaeli
About this study
Official title: Immersive Virtual Reality Versus Traditional Instruction for Teaching the Bobath Concept in Physiotherapy Education: A Randomized Controlled Trial
This randomized controlled trial evaluated the effectiveness of immersive virtual reality (VR)-based instruction compared with traditional face-to-face teaching for delivering the Bobath concept in physiotherapy education. Third-year physiotherapy students were randomly assigned to either VR-based or conventional instruction and completed standardized theoretical and practical assessments immediately after training and again two weeks later. While both instructional methods resulted in comparable short-term learning outcomes, the VR group demonstrated superior retention of practical skills at follow-up. Findings suggest that immersive VR is a feasible and effective educational approach for enhancing motor skill learning in neurophysiological rehabilitation training.
Read the detailed description
This two-arm, parallel-group, single-blind randomized controlled trial aims to investigate whether immersive virtual reality (VR)-based education can enhance learning and retention of the Bobath concept among undergraduate physiotherapy students. The Bobath approach, widely used in neurorehabilitation, requires learners to integrate postural control principles, movement facilitation techniques, and sensorimotor strategies-skills traditionally taught through face-to-face lectures and hands-on demonstrations. Given the increasing integration of digital technologies in health professions education, immersive VR may offer an alternative through interactive, high-fidelity, and repeatable learning experiences.
Students will be randomized to receive either a standardized face-to-face instructional session or an immersive 360° VR-based session of equivalent duration and content. Both groups will be exposed to theoretical explanations and practical demonstrations focusing on trunk control strategies, alignment principles, and facilitation techniques. Practical components in both groups will be reinforced through structured small-group practice following the instructional session.
To ensure methodological rigor, two independent evaluators blinded to group allocation will assess student performance through a multiple-choice knowledge test and a three-station Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE), administered two days after training and again two weeks later to evaluate retention. Inter-rater reliability will be calculated to ensure consistency of scoring across evaluators.
- Conditions
- Physical Therapy, Education, Virtual Reality, Neurorehabilitation
- Being tested
- Immersive VR headset instruction, Traditional instruction
- Keywords
- Neurorehabilitation, Immersive virtual reality, Objective Structured Clinical Examination, Digital health education
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Immersive VR headset instructionDevice
The study interventions consisted of two educational delivery methods used to teach the Bobath concept in physiotherapy training. Both interventions provided identical learning objectives, theoretical content, and practical demonstration elements related to postural control strategies. The instructional materials were standardized in duration, sequencing, and educational objectives to ensure equivalence across groups. Delivery differed only in format, with one method provided through traditional in-person instruction and the other through immersive virtual reality technology. All students practiced the demonstrated techniques following the instructional component, and no additional instructional materials were provided beyond the assigned modality
Traditional instructionOther
This intervention delivers Bobath concept education through conventional face-to-face teaching methods. The instructional session includes faculty-led theoretical explanations and live demonstrations delivered in a traditional classroom or laboratory setting. Students receive the standardized content through direct instructor interaction, consistent with customary physiotherapy training practices. All participants subsequently engage in supervised practice to apply the demonstrated concepts.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Face-to-Face Bobath Instruction | Active comparator | Participants assigned to the Face-to-Face (F2F) group received a 45-minute instructor-led session consisting of theoretical explanation and practical demonstrations of Bobath-based postural control strategies. The session included live demonstration of facilitation techniques, alignment correction, and trunk control activities. After the instructional segment, students practiced the techniques in small groups under instructor supervision. Content duration, learning objectives, and practice structure were standardized across both study arms. Receives: Other: Traditional instruction |
| Virtual Reality Bobath Instruction | Experimental | Participants in the Virtual Reality (VR) group received the same 45-minute instructional content through an immersive 360° VR video recorded by the same instructor. The VR session integrated theoretical narration with practical demonstrations of Bobath postural control strategies. Students viewed the session collectively using VR headsets. A structured debriefing followed to reinforce key concepts and allow question clarification. As in the F2F group, students then practiced the techniques in small groups following the session. Receives: Device: Immersive VR headset instruction |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Theoretical Knowledge Score
Description:
The theoretical outcome measure assesses students' understanding of Bobath-based postural control strategies using a 10-item multiple-choice examination. Each correct response is awarded 1 point. Raw scores (0-10) are converted to a 0-100 scale.
Score Range: 0-100 Direction: Higher scores indicate better theoretical knowledge. The same standardized test is administered at both assessment points to evaluate learning and retention under the two instructional modalities.
Measured: Post-test at 2 days and retention test at 2 weeks after the intervention
Practical Performance Score (OSCE)
Practical skill performance is evaluated using a three-station Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) assessing Bobath-based postural control strategies. Each station uses a standardized 3-point checklist (0 = not performed, 1 = partially performed, 2 = correctly performed). The combined station scores are converted to a 0-100 scale.
Score Range: 0-100 Direction: Higher scores indicate better practical performance. All assessments are video-recorded and independently scored by two blinded evaluators using the same scoring rubric. This metric evaluates both immediate skill acquisition and subsequent retention.
Measured: Post-test at 2 days and retention test at 2 weeks after the intervention
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted8 Dec 2025
- Study start1 May 2025
- Primary completion28 May 2025
- Study completion30 Jun 2025
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (1)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Physical TherapyStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Other
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Model description
- This study used a two-arm, parallel-group, single-blind randomized controlled trial design comparing immersive virtual reality-based instruction with traditional face-to-face education for teaching the Bobath concept to physiotherapy students. Participants were randomly allocated in a 1:1 ratio, and blinded evaluators conducted all theoretical and practical assessments at post-test and retention time points.
- Masking
- Single blind
- Who is masked
- Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 20 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Kocaeli Sağlık ve Teknoloji Üniversitesi
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Sena Çınarlı, Kocaeli Sağlık ve Teknoloji Üniversitesi
- Investigators
- Hatice Sena Çınarlı, Principal investigator, Kocaeli University
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07270107
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- KOSTU-25-BOBATH
- Acronym
- BOBATH-PT
- Status last verified
- Nov 2025
- First submitted
- 22 Nov 2025
- Last updated
- 8 Dec 2025
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- Undecided: The investigators have not yet determined whether individual participant data (IPD) will be shared. A decision regarding data sharing will be made after study completion, considering institutional policies, ethical requirements, and data privacy standards.
Publications
Cinarli S, Aydogan G, Sever E, Gulcelik GE, Atmaca H. Immersive virtual reality vs. traditional instruction for short-term learning and follow-up outcomes in the Bobath concept: a randomized controlled trial. BMC Med Educ. 2026 Aug 20;26(1):1341. doi: 10.1186/s12909-026-09904-2.
PubMed 42625179
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 8 Dec 2025. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Immersive Virtual Reality Versus Traditional Instruction for Teaching the Bobath Concept in Physiotherapy Education: A Randomized Controlled Trial
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07270107
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- BOBATH-PT / KOSTU-25-BOBATH
- Conditions
- Physical Therapy, Education, Virtual Reality, Neurorehabilitation
- Keywords
- Neurorehabilitation, Immersive virtual reality, Objective Structured Clinical Examination, Digital health education
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 20 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Kocaeli Sağlık ve Teknoloji ÜniversitesiUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 1 May 2025 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 28 May 2025 (actual)
- Study completion
- 30 Jun 2025 (actual)
- First posted
- 8 Dec 2025 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
This randomized controlled trial evaluated the effectiveness of immersive virtual reality (VR)-based instruction compared with traditional face-to-face teaching for delivering the Bobath concept in physiotherapy education. Third-year physiotherapy students were randomly assigned to either VR-based or conventional instruction and completed standardized theoretical and practical assessments immediately after training and again two weeks later. While both instructional methods resulted in comparable short-term learning outcomes, the VR group demonstrated superior retention of practical skills at follow-up. Findings suggest that immersive VR is a feasible and effective educational approach for enhancing motor skill learning in neurophysiological rehabilitation training.
Detailed description
This two-arm, parallel-group, single-blind randomized controlled trial aims to investigate whether immersive virtual reality (VR)-based education can enhance learning and retention of the Bobath concept among undergraduate physiotherapy students. The Bobath approach, widely used in neurorehabilitation, requires learners to integrate postural control principles, movement facilitation techniques, and sensorimotor strategies-skills traditionally taught through face-to-face lectures and hands-on demonstrations. Given the increasing integration of digital technologies in health professions education, immersive VR may offer an alternative through interactive, high-fidelity, and repeatable learning experiences.
Students will be randomized to receive either a standardized face-to-face instructional session or an immersive 360° VR-based session of equivalent duration and content. Both groups will be exposed to theoretical explanations and practical demonstrations focusing on trunk control strategies, alignment principles, and facilitation techniques. Practical components in both groups will be reinforced through structured small-group practice following the instructional session.
To ensure methodological rigor, two independent evaluators blinded to group allocation will assess student performance through a multiple-choice knowledge test and a three-station Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE), administered two days after training and again two weeks later to evaluate retention. Inter-rater reliability will be calculated to ensure consistency of scoring across evaluators.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Other
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind (outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 2
- Model description
- This study used a two-arm, parallel-group, single-blind randomized controlled trial design comparing immersive virtual reality-based instruction with traditional face-to-face education for teaching the Bobath concept to physiotherapy students. Participants were randomly allocated in a 1:1 ratio, and blinded evaluators conducted all theoretical and practical assessments at post-test and retention time points.
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Face-to-Face Bobath Instruction | Active comparator | Other: Traditional instructionParticipants assigned to the Face-to-Face (F2F) group received a 45-minute instructor-led session consisting of theoretical explanation and practical demonstrations of Bobath-based postural control strategies. The session included live demonstration of facilitation techniques, alignment correction, and trunk control activities. After the instructional segment, students practiced the techniques in small groups under instructor supervision. Content duration, learning objectives, and practice structure were standardized across both study arms. |
| Virtual Reality Bobath Instruction | Experimental | Device: Immersive VR headset instructionParticipants in the Virtual Reality (VR) group received the same 45-minute instructional content through an immersive 360° VR video recorded by the same instructor. The VR session integrated theoretical narration with practical demonstrations of Bobath postural control strategies. Students viewed the session collectively using VR headsets. A structured debriefing followed to reinforce key concepts and allow question clarification. As in the F2F group, students then practiced the techniques in small groups following the session. |
Who may qualify
- Sex
- Female only
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Child, Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (4 listed)
- Third-year undergraduate physiotherapy students.
- First-time enrollment in the Neurophysiological Approaches II course.
- No prior training or formal exposure to the Bobath concept.
- System Usability Scale (SUS) score classified as A+ (96-100 percentile). -Ability to participate in VR or face-to-face instruction as assigned.- Voluntary participation with provision of written informed consent.-
Key exclusion criteria (4 listed)
- History of medical conditions contraindicating VR use (e.g., vestibular disorders, migraine, epilepsy).
- Prior experience, certification, or coursework related to the Bobath concept.
- Failure to provide informed consent.
- Any condition that may limit safe participation in the educational session or assessments.
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Immersive VR headset instructionThe study interventions consisted of two educational delivery methods used to teach the Bobath concept in physiotherapy training. Both interventions provided identical learning objectives, theoretical content, and practical demonstration elements related to postural control strategies. The instructional materials were standardized in duration, sequencing, and educational objectives to ensure equivalence across groups. Delivery differed only in format, with one method provided through traditional in-person instruction and the other through immersive virtual reality technology. All students practiced the demonstrated techniques following the instructional component, and no additional instructional materials were provided beyond the assigned modality | Device | Virtual Reality Bobath Instruction |
| Traditional instructionThis intervention delivers Bobath concept education through conventional face-to-face teaching methods. The instructional session includes faculty-led theoretical explanations and live demonstrations delivered in a traditional classroom or laboratory setting. Students receive the standardized content through direct instructor interaction, consistent with customary physiotherapy training practices. All participants subsequently engage in supervised practice to apply the demonstrated concepts. | Other | Face-to-Face Bobath Instruction |
Primary outcome
Theoretical Knowledge Score
Time frame: Post-test at 2 days and retention test at 2 weeks after the intervention
Description: The theoretical outcome measure assesses students' understanding of Bobath-based postural control strategies using a 10-item multiple-choice examination. Each correct response is awarded 1 point. Raw scores (0-10) are converted to a 0-100 scale. Score Range: 0-100 Direction: Higher scores indicate better theoretical knowledge. The same standardized test is administered at both assessment points to evaluate learning and retention under the two instructional modalities.
Practical Performance Score (OSCE)
Time frame: Post-test at 2 days and retention test at 2 weeks after the intervention
Practical skill performance is evaluated using a three-station Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) assessing Bobath-based postural control strategies. Each station uses a standardized 3-point checklist (0 = not performed, 1 = partially performed, 2 = correctly performed). The combined station scores are converted to a 0-100 scale. Score Range: 0-100 Direction: Higher scores indicate better practical performance. All assessments are video-recorded and independently scored by two blinded evaluators using the same scoring rubric. This metric evaluates both immediate skill acquisition and subsequent retention.
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 8 Dec 2025.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 42625179Cinarli S, Aydogan G, Sever E, Gulcelik GE, Atmaca H. Immersive virtual reality vs. traditional instruction for short-term learning and follow-up outcomes in the Bobath concept: a randomized controlled trial. BMC Med Educ. 2026 Aug 20;26(1):1341. doi: 10.1186/s12909-026-09904-2.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: Undecided. The investigators have not yet determined whether individual participant data (IPD) will be shared. A decision regarding data sharing will be made after study completion, considering institutional policies, ethical requirements, and data privacy standards.
Related trials for Physical Therapy
Not yet recruiting
Feasibility of Resisted Expiratory Muscle Training for Females Assigned at Birth With Stress Urinary Incontinence: A Pilot Study
Stress Urinary Incontinence
Recruiting
Evaluation of a Switchable Acrylic Adhesive Drape for Safer Removal in Negative Pressure Wound Therapy Applications.
Frequency and Type of Medical Adhesive-Related Skin Injury, NPWT Drape Seal Effectiveness Rate (or Leak Incidence Rate)
Not yet recruiting
Ayres Sensory Integration Intervention for Children With Cerebral Palsy
Cerebral Palsy (CP)
RecruitingPhase 3
Testing Whether Hormone Therapy With Ribociclib is as Effective as Chemotherapy Followed by Hormone Therapy With Ribociclib for the Treatment of High Anatomic Stage Breast Cancer With Low Recurrence Risk, The RxFINE-Low Trial
Anatomic Stage II Breast Cancer AJCC v8, Anatomic Stage IIIA Breast Cancer AJCC v8
Not yet recruiting
Evaluation of the Axomove Therapy Medical Device to Facilitate Adapted Physical Activity for Patients With Obesity
Obese Adults
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Hatice Sena Çınarlı principal investigator
Kocaeli University
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Immersive VR headset instruction and Traditional instruction in people with Physical Therapy and Education, run by Kocaeli Sağlık ve Teknoloji Üniversitesi at 1 site in Turkey (Türkiye).
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 4 inclusion and 4 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 8 Dec 2025. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in Turkey (Türkiye). Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Theoretical Knowledge Score (time frame: Post-test at 2 days and retention test at 2 weeks after the intervention). The study lists 2 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT07270107, which also lists 1 linked publication.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 8 Dec 2025.