Article

Is neurofeedback an efficacious treatment for ADHD? A randomised controlled clinical trial.

Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, University of Göttingen, Germany.
Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry (Impact Factor: 5.67). 02/2009; 50(7):780-9. DOI: 10.1111/j.1469-7610.2008.02033.x
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT For children with attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), a reduction of inattention, impulsivity and hyperactivity by neurofeedback (NF) has been reported in several studies. But so far, unspecific training effects have not been adequately controlled for and/or studies do not provide sufficient statistical power. To overcome these methodological shortcomings we evaluated the clinical efficacy of neurofeedback in children with ADHD in a multisite randomised controlled study using a computerised attention skills training as a control condition.
102 children with ADHD, aged 8 to 12 years, participated in the study. Children performed either 36 sessions of NF training or a computerised attention skills training within two blocks of about four weeks each (randomised group assignment). The combined NF treatment consisted of one block of theta/beta training and one block of slow cortical potential (SCP) training. Pre-training, intermediate and post-training assessment encompassed several behaviour rating scales (e.g., the German ADHD rating scale, FBB-HKS) completed by parents and teachers. Evaluation ('placebo') scales were applied to control for parental expectations and satisfaction with the treatment.
For parent and teacher ratings, improvements in the NF group were superior to those of the control group. For the parent-rated FBB-HKS total score (primary outcome measure), the effect size was .60. Comparable effects were obtained for the two NF protocols (theta/beta training, SCP training). Parental attitude towards the treatment did not differ between NF and control group.
Superiority of the combined NF training indicates clinical efficacy of NF in children with ADHD. Future studies should further address the specificity of effects and how to optimise the benefit of NF as treatment module for ADHD.

3 Followers
 · 
146 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background: Complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) in psychiatry or integrative psychiatry covers a wide range of biological, psychological and mind-body treatments that enhance standard medical practices and patient outcomes. While CAM approaches are popular among patients, health professionals have received limited education in these interventions and they are often unaware of their patients’ use of CAM treatments. Method: This overview highlights evidence-based CAM treatments for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) including dietary interventions, phytomedicines, mind-body practices and neurofeedback. Results: While conventional treatments are the mainstays for ADHD, there are a large number of available treatments that can be used to enhance treatment response. Conclusion: With improved education and further scientific and clinical research, validated integrative treatments will provide more effective, lower risk and lower cost care for patients with ADHD.
    04/2015; 5(2). DOI:10.2174/221067660502150430154937
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background Many non-pharmacological treatments for children and adolescents with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) have been attempted, but reports indicate that most are ineffective. Although neurofeedback (NF) is a treatment approach for children with ADHD that remains promising, a variety of appropriate measures have been used in reporting and evaluating its effect. Objective To report the self-evaluations of NF treatment by children and adolescents with ADHD. Methods Randomized controlled trial in 91 children and adolescents with ADHD, aged less than 18 years (mean, 11.2 years) participated in a 30-session program of intensive NF treatment. Participants were randomized and allocated by sequentially numbered sealed envelopes into three groups: methylphenidate (MPH) as an active control group, and two trial groups NF with MPH, and NF alone. ADHD core symptoms and school performance were given on a scale of 1 to 10 using a self-reporting questionnaire, and the changes in these scores after treatment were used as the self-reported evaluation. Basic statistical methods (descriptive, analyses of variance, exact χ2 test, and paired t-test) were used to investigate the baseline data. Changes in ADHD core symptoms and treatment effects were investigated using a general linear model for repeated measures. Results Eighty participants completed the treatment study and 73 (91%) responded sufficiently on the self-reporting questionnaires. The treatment groups were comparable in age, sex, and cognition as well as in the baseline levels of core ADHD symptoms. All treatments resulted in significant improvements regarding attention and hyperactivity (P<0.001), and did not differ from each other in effectiveness. However, a significant treatment effect in school performance was observed (P=0.042), in which only the NF group showed a significant improvement. Conclusion The self-reported improvements in ADHD core symptoms and school performance shortly after treatment indicate NF treatment being promising in comparison with medication, suggesting NF as an alternative treatment for children and adolescents who do not respond to MPH, or who suffer side effects. Further long-term follow-up is needed.
    Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment 09/2014; 10:1645. DOI:10.2147/NDT.S66466 · 2.15 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: While issues of efficacy and specificity are crucial for the future of neurofeedback training, there may be alternative designs and control analyses to circumvent the methodological and ethical problems associated with double-blind placebo studies. Surprisingly, most NF studies do not report the most immediate result of their NF training, i.e., whether or not children with ADHD gain control over their brain activity during the training sessions. For the investigation of specificity, however, it seems essential to analyze the learning and adaptation processes that take place in the course of the training and to relate improvements in self-regulated brain activity across training sessions to behavioral, neuropsychological and electrophysiological outcomes. To this aim, a review of studies on neurofeedback training with ADHD patients which include the analysis of learning across training sessions or relate training performance to outcome is presented. Methods on how to evaluate and quantify learning of EEG regulation over time are discussed. "Non-learning" has been reported in a small number of ADHD-studies, but has not been a focus of general methodological discussion so far. For this reason, selected results from the brain-computer interface (BCI) research on the so-called "brain-computer illiteracy", the inability to gain control over one's brain activity, are also included. It is concluded that in the discussion on specificity, more attention should be devoted to the analysis of EEG regulation performance in the course of the training and its impact on clinical outcome. It is necessary to improve the knowledge on characteristic cross-session and within-session learning trajectories in ADHD and to provide the best conditions for learning.
    Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 03/2015; 9:135. DOI:10.3389/fnhum.2015.00135 · 2.90 Impact Factor