The Effects of QEEG-Informed Neurofeedback in ADHD: An Open-Label Pilot Study

Arns, Martijn; Drinkenburg, Wilhelmus; Kenemans, J. Leon

doi:10.1007/s10484-012-9191-4

Cited by 121 publications

(118 citation statements)

References 38 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

114

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As standardization of all procedures is the regular practice in research, we do not have enough empirical data to assure the efficacy of personalized methods planned in accordance with each individual EEG pattern. Nevertheless, recently a small, open-label pilot study showed a significant clinical improvement and electrophysiological normalization after neurofeedback sessions [67]. This is compatible with empirical data showing that different behavioral profiles of children with ADHD present different patterns of EEG activity [34].…”

Section: What Treatment Protocol Is the Best?supporting

confidence: 75%

Evidence-Based Information on the Clinical Use of Neurofeedback for ADHD

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary Neurofeedback (NF) is a training to enhance selfregulatory capacity over brain activity patterns and consequently over brain mental states. Recent findings suggest that NF is a promising alternative for the treatment of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). We comprehensively reviewed literature searching for studies on the effectiveness and specificity of NF for the treatment of ADHD. In addition, clinically informative evidence-based data are discussed. We found 3 systematic review on the use of NF for ADHD and 6 randomized controlled trials that have not been included in these reviews. Most nonrandomized controlled trials found positive results with medium-to-large effect sizes, but the evidence for effectiveness are less robust when only randomized controlled studies are considered. The direct comparison of NF and sham-NF in 3 published studies have found no group differences, nevertheless methodological caveats, such as the quality of the training protocol used, sample size, and sample selection may have contributed to the negative results. Further data on specificity comes from electrophysiological studies reporting that NF effectively changes brain activity patterns. No safety issues have emerged from clinical trials and NF seems to be well tolerated and accepted. Follow-up studies support long-term effects of NF. Currently there is no available data to guide clinicians on the predictors of response to NF and on optimal treatment protocol. In conclusion, NF is a valid option for the treatment for ADHD, but further evidence is required to guide its use.

show abstract

Section: What Treatment Protocol Is the Best?supporting

confidence: 75%

Evidence-Based Information on the Clinical Use of Neurofeedback for ADHD

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This seems particularly problematic for QEEG (frequency band) training, whereby recent evidence no longer supports the presumption that increased theta and beta or SMR reduction are reliable ADHD markers (discussed above). These findings question the standard unidirectional "normalization" rationale of QEEG neurofeedback and suggest instead the adoption of bidirectional, 52 individualized, 46,53 or SCP-based regulation approaches. In addition, allowing "probably blinded" rather than strictly blinded measures in the largest studies may well have counterbalanced this bias in this meta-analysis.…”

Section: Methodological Issuesmentioning

confidence: 92%

Neurofeedback for ADHD

Holtmann

Sonuga‐Barke

Cortese

et al. 2014

Child and Adolescent Psychiatric Clinics of North America

110

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

KEYWORDS ADHD Treatment Neurofeedback Slow cortical potentials Frequency bands Reward KEY POINTSAmong alternative treatment approaches for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), neurofeedback has gained empirical support in recent years.Via neurofeedback, children with ADHD are trained to regulate their neurophysiologic profile or to bring it closer to that of nonaffected children; learning of self-regulation is thus a key mechanism.According to recent meta-analytic evidence, neurofeedback leads to significant decreases of ADHD core symptoms; however, if only probably blinded ratings are applied, these effects were reduced to a statistical trend. The evidence remains inconclusive because subsequent studies could demonstrate neither learning of self-regulation nor significant effects for the best blinded assessments.There is a strong need for more evidence from well-blinded, methodologically sound, and sensitive trials demonstrating also learning of self-regulation, before neurofeedback can be assigned the highest level of evidence as a front-line treatment of ADHD. ContinuedChild Adolesc Psychiatric Clin N Am -(2014) ---http://dx

show abstract

“…10 Neurofeedback therefore trains users to monitor and change their brainwave patterns, leading to behavioral changes. 11 Some studies have found that neurofeedback can decrease symptoms of ADHD, [12][13][14][15][16][17] including improved attention, 18 behavior, 19 and cognitive improvements 20 up to 6 months postintervention as well as at 2 years postintervention. 21 However, the evidence for its sustainability remains unclear, because there are limited studies examining follow-up data, and those that do have small sample sizes or no control condition.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…21 However, the evidence for its sustainability remains unclear, because there are limited studies examining follow-up data, and those that do have small sample sizes or no control condition. [13][14][15] In contrast, CT uses specifically designed exercises to train attention, working memory, and impulsivity through ongoing feedback to reinforce correct responses. Several studies suggest that CT improves performance on working memory tasks and decreases inattentiveness, hyperactivity, and disruptive behaviors.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

In-School Neurofeedback Training for ADHD: Sustained Improvements From a Randomized Control Trial

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

WHAT'S KNOWN ON THIS SUBJECT: An estimated 9.5% of children are diagnosed with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), which affects academic and social outcomes. We previously found significant improvements in ADHD symptoms immediately after neurofeedback training at school. WHAT THIS STUDY ADDS:This randomized controlled trial included a large sample of elementary school students with ADHD who received in-school computer attention training with neurofeedback or cognitive training. Students who received neurofeedback were reported to have fewer ADHD symptoms 6 months after the intervention. abstract OBJECTIVE: To evaluate sustained improvements 6 months after a 40-session, in-school computer attention training intervention using neurofeedback or cognitive training (CT) administered to 7-to 11-year-olds with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). METHODS:One hundred four children were randomly assigned to receive neurofeedback, CT, or a control condition and were evaluated 6 months postintervention. A 3-point growth model assessed change over time across the conditions on the Conners 3-Parent Assessment Report (Conners 3-P), the Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function Parent Form (BRIEF), and a systematic double-blinded classroom observation (Behavioral Observation of Students in Schools). Analysis of variance assessed community-initiated changes in stimulant medication.RESULTS: Parent response rates were 90% at the 6-month follow-up. Six months postintervention, neurofeedback participants maintained significant gains on Conners 3-P (Inattention effect size [ES] = 0.34, Executive Functioning ES = 0.25, Hyperactivity/Impulsivity ES = 0.23) and BRIEF subscales including the Global Executive Composite (ES = 0.31), which remained significantly greater than gains found among children in CT and control conditions. Children in the CT condition showed delayed improvement over immediate postintervention ratings only on Conners 3-P Executive Functioning (ES = 0.18) and 2 BRIEF subscales. At the 6-month follow-up, neurofeedback participants maintained the same stimulant medication dosage, whereas participants in both CT and control conditions showed statistically and clinically significant increases (9 mg [P = .002] and 13 mg [P , .001], respectively).CONCLUSIONS: Neurofeedback participants made more prompt and greater improvements in ADHD symptoms, which were sustained at the 6-month follow-up, than did CT participants or those in the control group. This finding suggests that neurofeedback is a promising attention training treatment for children with ADHD. Pediatrics 2014;133:483-492 AUTHORS:

show abstract

The Effects of QEEG-Informed Neurofeedback in ADHD: An Open-Label Pilot Study

Cited by 121 publications

References 38 publications

Evidence-Based Information on the Clinical Use of Neurofeedback for ADHD

Evidence-Based Information on the Clinical Use of Neurofeedback for ADHD

Neurofeedback for ADHD

In-School Neurofeedback Training for ADHD: Sustained Improvements From a Randomized Control Trial

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About