Abstract Virtual reality (VR) has emerged as a promising tool for assessing upper-limb motor function, yet its validity remains unclear, particularly regarding the influence of human–machine interface (HMI) design and age. This observational cross-sectional study examined whether performance patterns observed in conventional assessments are preserved across VR implementations of the Box and Blocks Test (BBT) and Nine-Hole Peg Test (9HPT), and investigated how display modality (head-mounted display vs. 2D monitor), interaction modality (haptic device vs. optical hand tracking), and age affect motor performance. Twenty-six young and twenty-six older adults completed both physical and VR assessments under four interface configurations using a within-subject Williams design. Performance differences, agreement metrics, generalized estimating equations (GEE), and survival analysis were applied. Performance in VR was consistently worse than in physical conditions (all p values < 0.001 ) with large systematic biases, wide limits of agreement, and near-zero reliability, indicating a lack of quantitative equivalence. GEE analyses revealed that performance depended on the interaction between display and interaction modalities (BBT: p = 0.026; 9HPT: p < 0.001), rather than on their isolated effects, and that these interactions were further modulated by age (BBT: p = 0.040; 9HPT: p = 0.010). These findings demonstrate that VR-based dexterity assessment is inherently interface-dependent and should not be interpreted as a direct surrogate of conventional tests. Instead, VR provides a distinct measurement environment capable of capturing multidimensional kinematic and interaction data, whose outcomes depend on both technological configuration and user characteristics.
Cisnal et al. (Fri,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: