JMIR Publications

ABSTRACT

Background:

The use of virtual reality (VR) in brain injury rehabilitation is emerging. Recommendations for VR development in this field encourage end-user engagement to determine the benefits and challenges of VR use; however, existing literature on this topic is limited. Data from social networking sites, such as Twitter, may further inform development and clinical practice relating to the use of VR in brain injury rehabilitation.

Objective:

This study collected and analyzed VR-related tweets to: (1) explore the VR tweeting community to determine topics of conversation and network connections, (2) understand user opinions and experiences of VR, and (3) identify tweets related to VR use in health care and brain injury rehabilitation.

Methods:

Publicly available tweets containing the hashtags #virtualreality and #VR were collected up to twice weekly during a 6-week period in July to August 2020 using NCapture. The included tweets were analyzed using mixed methods. All tweets were coded using inductive content analysis. Tweets of relevance (ie, coded as ‘VR in health care’ or ‘talking about VR’) were further analyzed using Dann’s content coding. Biographies of users who sent tweets of relevance were examined descriptively. Tweet data networks were visualized with Gephi computational analysis.

Results:

A total of 260,715 were collected and 70,051 tweets were analyzed following eligibility screening. This sample comprised 23,596 original tweets and 46,455 retweets. Content analysis generated 10 main categories of tweets relating to VR. Approximately 4.5% (n=1065) of original tweets were related to VR use in health care, while 0.19% (n=45) referred to VR in brain injury rehabilitation. Approximately 15% (n=3506) of original tweets featured commentary on user opinion and experiences of VR applications, equipment, and software. The VR tweeting community comprised a large network of 26,001 unique Twitter users. User networks that posted tweets related to ‘VR in health care’ (n=2124) did not form an interconnected VR network, whereas many users ‘talking about VR’ (n=2057) were connected within a central network.

Conclusions:

This study provides valuable data from community-based experiences and opinions relating to VR. Tweets showcased various VR applications, including in health care, and identified important user-based considerations that can be used to inform VR use in brain injury rehabilitation. Limited discussions and small user networks related to VR in brain injury rehabilitation reflect the paucity of literature on this topic and the potential underutilization of this technology. These findings emphasize that further research is required to understand the specific needs and perspectives of people with brain injury and clinicians regarding VR use in rehabilitation.