A seven-year interdisciplinary case study of co-designing an immersive VR kitchen environment for speech-language pathology rehabilitation and aging-in-place

Harvey-Northrop J et al. · 2025 · Journal of Enabling Technologies · Case Study · n = 36 · Case study of a co-design process (collaborators, not a clinical cohort) · DOI
Evidence certainty: Low certainty
How this was rated

Case study of an interdisciplinary design process rather than a controlled clinical trial. Peer-reviewed in Journal of Enabling Technologies (Emerald Publishing). No quantitative clinical outcomes on patients are reported in the body of the paper - the work focuses on the interdisciplinary design process, project logistics, and lessons learned across a seven-year multi-phase development. Useful as procedural and implementation evidence; not appropriate as clinical efficacy evidence.

Ratings use a simplified four-tier scheme (High, Moderate, Low, Very Low) informed by the GRADE working group. Learn more about how studies are rated.

A multi-phase, multi-disciplinary case study describing the seven-year design, development, and feasibility testing of an immersive VR kitchen environment for speech-language pathology rehabilitation and aging-in-place practice. The collaboration brought together speech-language pathologists, interior designers (aging-in-place specialists), VR programrs, and technology consultants. The paper describes the design-thinking methodology, phase-by-phase development, HIPAA-aware infrastructure choices, and lessons for interdisciplinary VR co-development - rather than reporting clinical outcome data on patients.

Clinical bottom line

A peer-reviewed methodology and case-study paper documenting how a multi-disciplinary team built an immersive kitchen VR environment for SLP rehabilitation and aging-in-place support. The paper's contribution is procedural rather than clinical: it offers a playbook for the interdisciplinary collaboration patterns needed to develop clinically useful VR environments. For clinicians or researchers planning to develop their own VR scenarios this is a useful reference; for clinicians deciding whether to ADOPT an existing VR product it offers little clinical efficacy evidence.

Key findings

  • Seven-year, multi-phase interdisciplinary collaboration developing an immersive VR kitchen environment for SLP rehabilitation - the kitchen was chosen because kitchen-related instrumental activities of daily living predict overall aging-in-place success
  • Project team: 2 speech-language pathologists, 1 technology specialist, 1 interior design / aging-in-place specialist, 2 technology consultants, 4 speech-language pathology consultants - emphasizing that VR-for-SLP development is not a single-discipline effort
  • Design-thinking methodology used to define a point-of-view (POV) statement targeting client needs; the design loop ran across multiple prototype walk-over reviews
  • Significant obstacles flagged for VR-in-SLP deployment include HIPAA-compliant infrastructure, the tension between regulatory privacy requirements and the design flexibility (sandbox affordances) needed for individualized treatment, and the cross-disciplinary communication overhead
  • Recommendations cluster around three areas: end-user-centerd technology development, competency development for clinicians, and facilitated implementation in clinical settings - mirroring themes in the broader VR-rehabilitation knowledge-translation literature

Background

VR has been proposed for speech-language pathology rehabilitation and aging-in-place (AIP) support for over a decade, but most published VR-for-SLP work to date has focused on clinical efficacy of pre-built systems rather than the design and development process by which those systems come into being. Without published examples of the interdisciplinary collaboration required, clinicians and research groups planning their own VR scenarios face a steep learning curve. The authors set out to document a multi-phase, multi-disciplinary VR development project so that future teams have a methodological reference.

What the researchers did

An interdisciplinary team comprising two speech-language pathologists, one technology specialist, one interior designer / aging-in-place specialist, two technology consultants, and four SLP consultants embarked on a seven-year, multi-phase collaboration to build an immersive VR kitchen environment for SLP rehabilitation. The kitchen was selected because kitchen-related instrumental activities of daily living (meal preparation, kitchen navigation) require executive functions, working memory, and attention - and the ability to manage kitchen tasks predicts overall aging-in-place success.

The team used a design-thinking methodology: a point-of-view (POV) statement was developed to define target user needs, preliminary prototypes were iteratively walked through with the team and refined, and administrative buy-in across disciplines was sought to secure resources and networking support. HIPAA-aware infrastructure constraints were navigated alongside the sandbox flexibility needed to individualize interventions.

What they found

The paper does not report clinical outcomes on patients. Instead, it reports lessons and recommendations across the design process:

Why this matters

The clinical VR literature is heavily biased toward efficacy studies of pre-built systems. Process-and-design papers like this one fill a gap for teams wanting to develop their own scenarios. The paper is useful as a procedural reference, not as clinical-efficacy evidence. Clinicians considering whether to ADOPT an existing VR product should turn to outcome studies (e.g., Leyns 2025, Bouchard 2017, McCleery 2026), not to a development methodology paper.

Limitations

Implications for practice

This is a process-and-design paper, not a clinical-outcomes paper. For clinicians or research groups planning to develop their own VR scenarios, it provides a useful reference on team composition, design methodology, and HIPAA-aware infrastructure decisions. For clinicians evaluating whether to ADOPT an off-the-shelf VR product like Therapy withVR for their caseload, this paper does not provide direct efficacy evidence and should not be cited as such. Its main clinical use is to make the case to administrators and procurement teams that VR-for-SLP requires multi-disciplinary support, not a one-person decision.

Cite this study

If you reference this study in your work, the canonical citation formats are:

APA 7th
Harvey-Northrop, J., Chang, Y. I., Cuellar, M., & Fonseca Pereira, G. (2025). Designing virtual reality applications for speech-language pathology: an interdisciplinary collaboration for aging-in-place practices and rehabilitation services. Journal of Enabling Technologies. https://doi.org/10.1108/JET-08-2024-0052.
AMA 11th
Harvey-Northrop J, Chang YI, Cuellar M, Fonseca Pereira G. Designing virtual reality applications for speech-language pathology: an interdisciplinary collaboration for aging-in-place practices and rehabilitation services. Journal of Enabling Technologies. 2025. doi:10.1108/JET-08-2024-0052.
BibTeX
@article{harveynorthrop2025,
  author = {Harvey-Northrop, J. and Chang, Y. I. and Cuellar, M. and Fonseca Pereira, G.},
  title = {Designing virtual reality applications for speech-language pathology: an interdisciplinary collaboration for aging-in-place practices and rehabilitation services},
  journal = {Journal of Enabling Technologies},
  year = {2025},
  doi = {10.1108/JET-08-2024-0052},
  url = {https://withvr.app/evidence/studies/harvey-northrop-2025}
}
RIS
TY  - JOUR
AU  - Harvey-Northrop, J.
AU  - Chang, Y. I.
AU  - Cuellar, M.
AU  - Fonseca Pereira, G.
TI  - Designing virtual reality applications for speech-language pathology: an interdisciplinary collaboration for aging-in-place practices and rehabilitation services
JO  - Journal of Enabling Technologies
PY  - 2025
DO  - 10.1108/JET-08-2024-0052
UR  - https://withvr.app/evidence/studies/harvey-northrop-2025
ER  - 

Know of research that should be in this hub? If a relevant peer-reviewed study is not listed here, send the reference to hello@withvr.app. The hub is kept up to date as the literature grows.

Funding & independence

Funding sources for the seven-year project not explicitly itemised in the published paper. Affiliations: George Washington University. No withVR BV involvement in funding, study design, or authorship. Summary prepared independently by withVR using the published peer-reviewed paper. The VR application described (an immersive kitchen for SLP rehabilitation) is NOT Therapy withVR or Research withVR; it is a custom development of the authors' team.

Last reviewed: 2026-05-17 Next review due: 2027-05-17 Reviewed by: Gareth Walkom