This study compared changes in quantitative EEG (QEEG) and CNV (contingent negative variation) of children suffering from ADHD treated by SCP (slow cortical potential) neurofeedback (NF) with the effects of group therapy (GT) to separate specific from non-specific neurophysiological effects of NF. Twenty-six children (age: 11.1 +/- 1.15 years) diagnosed as having ADHD were assigned to NF (N = 14) or GT (N = 12) training groups. QEEG measures at rest, CNV and behavioral ratings were acquired before and after the trainings and statistically analyzed. For children with ADHD-combined type in the NF group, treatment effects indicated a tendency toward improvement of selected QEEG markers. We could not find the expected improvement of CNV, but CNV reduction was less pronounced in good NF performers. QEEG changes were associated with some behavioral scales. Analyses of subgroups suggested specific influences of SCP training on brain functions. To conclude, SCP neurofeedback improves only selected attentional brain functions as measurable with QEEG at rest or CNV mapping. Effects of neurofeedback including the advantage of NF over GT seem mediated by both specific and non-specific factors.
"In children with ADHD, increased CNV amplitudes after SCP training compared to a waiting-list group had also been reported previously (Heinrich et al., 2004). Even though in a study by Doehnert et al. (2008) in children with ADHD a decrease in CNV amplitudes was observed after both SCP training and group therapy, this decrease was less pronounced in those children who successfully learned SCP self-regulation. Also in adults with ADHD, preliminary results after 15 SCP sessions indicated a trend toward a CNV amplitude increase (Mayer et al., 2012a,b). "
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Neurofeedback (NF) is being successfully applied, among others, in children with ADHD and as a peak performance training in healthy subjects. However, the neuronal mechanisms mediating a successful NF training have not yet been sufficiently uncovered for both theta/beta (T/B), and slow cortical potential (SCP) training, two protocols established in NF in ADHD. In the present randomized controlled investigation in adults without a clinical diagnosis (n = 59), the specificity of the effects of these two NF protocols on attentional processes, and motor system excitability were to be examined, focusing on the underlying neuronal mechanisms. NF training consisted of 10 double sessions, and self-regulation skills were analyzed. Pre- and post-training assessments encompassed performance and event-related potential measures during an attention task, and motor system excitability assessed by transcranial magnetic stimulation. Some NF protocol specific effects have been obtained. However, due to the limited sample size medium effects didn’t reach the level of significance. Self-regulation abilities during negativity trials of the SCP training were associated with increased contingent negative variation amplitudes, indicating improved resource allocation during cognitive preparation. Theta/beta training was associated with increased response speed and decreased target-P3 amplitudes after successful theta/beta regulation suggested reduced attentional resources necessary for stimulus evaluation. Motor system excitability effects after theta/beta training paralleled the effects of methylphenidate. Overall, our results are limited by the non-sufficiently acquired self-regulation skills, but some specific effects between good and poor learners could be described. Future studies with larger sample sizes and sufficient acquisition of self-regulation skills are needed to further evaluate the protocol specific effects on attention and motor system excitability reported.
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 07/2014; 8:555. DOI:10.3389/fnhum.2014.00555 · 2.99 Impact Factor
"Prior research classified the subjects into learners or non-learners according to their learning ability. Some studies reported the cases of non-learners even after repeated training sessions (Kotchoubey et al., 1999; Hanslmayr et al., 2005; Kropotov et al., 2005; Doehnert et al., 2008; deBeus and Kaiser, 2011; Escolano et al., 2011; Weber et al., 2011; Zoefel et al., 2011; Enriquez-Geppert et al., 2013b; Kouijzer et al., 2013). In Weber et al. (2011), about 50% of subjects were non-learners in sensorimotor rhythm (SMR; 12–15 Hz) neurofeedback. "
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Individuals differ in their ability to learn how to regulate the brain activity by neurofeedback. This study aimed to investigate whether the resting alpha activity can predict the learning ability in alpha neurofeedback. A total of 25 subjects performed 20 sessions of individualized alpha neurofeedback and the learning ability was assessed by three indices respectively: the training parameter changes between two periods, within a short period and across the whole training time. It was found that the resting alpha amplitude measured before training had significant positive correlations with all learning indices and could be used as a predictor for the learning ability prediction. This finding would help the researchers in not only predicting the training efficacy in individuals but also gaining further insight into the mechanisms of alpha neurofeedback.
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 07/2014; 8:500. DOI:10.3389/fnhum.2014.00500 · 2.99 Impact Factor
"' capabilities to success - fully conclude neurofeedback training . Data across studies suggest that about a third of the participants ultimately can be classified as so - called non - responders : subjects who do not learn to significantly modulate their brain activity over the course of the training in accor - dance with instructions ( e . g . , Doehnert et al . , 2008 ; Drechsler et al . , 2007 ; Fuchs et al . , 2003 ; Kotchoubey et al . , 1999 ) . Correspondingly , non - responding participants also tend not to show changes in behav - ioral outcome measures ( e . g . , Hanslmayr et al . , 2005 ; Lubar et al . , 1995 ) . Yet , one also has to acknowledge that there is no real consensus on how to actu"
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Neurofeedback training procedures designed to alter a person's brain activity have been in use for nearly four decades now and represent one of the earliest applications of brain computer interfaces (BCI). The majority of studies using neurofeedback technology relies on recordings of the electroencephalogram (EEG) and applies neurofeedback in clinical contexts, exploring its potential as treatment for psychopathological syndromes. This clinical focus significantly affects the technology behind neurofeedback BCIs. For example, in contrast to other BCI applications, neurofeedback BCIs usually rely on EEG-derived features with only a minimum of additional processing steps being employed. Here, we highlight the peculiarities of EEG-based neurofeedback BCIs and consider their relevance for software implementations. Having reviewed already existing packages for the implementation of BCIs, we introduce our own solution which specifically considers the relevance of multi-subject handling for experimental and clinical trials, for example by implementing ready-to-use solutions for pseudo-/sham-neurofeedback.
International journal of psychophysiology: official journal of the International Organization of Psychophysiology 09/2013; 91(1). DOI:10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2013.08.011 · 2.88 Impact Factor
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.