Limits...
Better than sham? A double-blind placebo-controlled neurofeedback study in primary insomnia

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

ABSTRACT

See Thibault et al. (doi:10.1093/awx033) for a scientific commentary on this article.

Neurofeedback has been claimed to have therapeutic efficacy in multiple disorders. In a double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in insomnia, Schabus et al. report that sensorimotor rhythm neurofeedback (12–15 Hz) neither changes the EEG nor objectively improves sleep. While patients do report subjective improvements, these do not differ from those seen with placebo feedback.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

Short-term effects in the SMR band. A resting EEG (with eyes open) was recorded directly before and after each PFT and NFT training block. Analyses revealed that even directly following training, patients with insomnia and misperception insomniacs (here pooled) had SMR amplitude values (on the trained site C3) that did not differ from the values preceding the training blocks. Note that amplitude is normalized to the individual total-amplitude (1–30 Hz) to account for unspecific differences between participants.
© Copyright Policy - cc-by-nc
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC5382955&req=5

awx011-F3: Short-term effects in the SMR band. A resting EEG (with eyes open) was recorded directly before and after each PFT and NFT training block. Analyses revealed that even directly following training, patients with insomnia and misperception insomniacs (here pooled) had SMR amplitude values (on the trained site C3) that did not differ from the values preceding the training blocks. Note that amplitude is normalized to the individual total-amplitude (1–30 Hz) to account for unspecific differences between participants.

Mentions: The last and most important aim of this study was to shed light at the mechanisms underlying the efficacy of NFT by looking at objective measures of the EEG processes participants were to gain control of. Unfortunately, the existing NFT literature does not show a particularly strong tradition in reporting measures of this kind, although without doubt this would greatly benefit the field’s credibility. In the present study we found that despite NFT and, importantly also PFT, being beneficial on a subjective level, objective measures of EEG activity outside the training period remain unchanged even when evaluated only minutes after training (Fig. 3). The latter is also true for sleep spindles, which are the first logical candidates for parameters which should change as a consequence of SMR-NFT training (as they lie in the same 12–15 Hz frequency range).Figure 3


Better than sham? A double-blind placebo-controlled neurofeedback study in primary insomnia
Short-term effects in the SMR band. A resting EEG (with eyes open) was recorded directly before and after each PFT and NFT training block. Analyses revealed that even directly following training, patients with insomnia and misperception insomniacs (here pooled) had SMR amplitude values (on the trained site C3) that did not differ from the values preceding the training blocks. Note that amplitude is normalized to the individual total-amplitude (1–30 Hz) to account for unspecific differences between participants.
© Copyright Policy - cc-by-nc
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC5382955&req=5

awx011-F3: Short-term effects in the SMR band. A resting EEG (with eyes open) was recorded directly before and after each PFT and NFT training block. Analyses revealed that even directly following training, patients with insomnia and misperception insomniacs (here pooled) had SMR amplitude values (on the trained site C3) that did not differ from the values preceding the training blocks. Note that amplitude is normalized to the individual total-amplitude (1–30 Hz) to account for unspecific differences between participants.
Mentions: The last and most important aim of this study was to shed light at the mechanisms underlying the efficacy of NFT by looking at objective measures of the EEG processes participants were to gain control of. Unfortunately, the existing NFT literature does not show a particularly strong tradition in reporting measures of this kind, although without doubt this would greatly benefit the field’s credibility. In the present study we found that despite NFT and, importantly also PFT, being beneficial on a subjective level, objective measures of EEG activity outside the training period remain unchanged even when evaluated only minutes after training (Fig. 3). The latter is also true for sleep spindles, which are the first logical candidates for parameters which should change as a consequence of SMR-NFT training (as they lie in the same 12–15 Hz frequency range).Figure 3

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

ABSTRACT

See Thibault et al. (doi:10.1093/awx033) for a scientific commentary on this article.

Neurofeedback has been claimed to have therapeutic efficacy in multiple disorders. In a double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in insomnia, Schabus et al. report that sensorimotor rhythm neurofeedback (12–15 Hz) neither changes the EEG nor objectively improves sleep. While patients do report subjective improvements, these do not differ from those seen with placebo feedback.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus