Evidence Hub

Theta/SMR Neurofeedback Training Works Well for Some Forensic Psychiatric Patients, But Not for Others: A Sham-Controlled Clinical Case Series

Sandra Fielenbach, F. Donkers, M. Spreen, A. Smit, S. Bogaerts

International journal of offender therapy and comparative criminology, 2019

8 citations

Abstract

Electroencephalographic (EEG) neurofeedback could be a promising treatment for forensic psychiatric patients. Increasing evidence shows some patients are unable to regulate cortical activity. Before neurofeedback can be applied successfully, research is needed to investigate the interpersonal mechanisms responsible for patients’ ability to respond to neurofeedback. A single-case experimental design allows for close monitoring of individual patients, providing valuable information about patients’ response to the intervention and the time frame in which changes in clinical symptoms can be observed. Four patients with Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (4th ed., text rev.; DSM-IV-TR) substance use disorder and various comorbidities participated in a sham-controlled clinical case study. Self-report level of impulsivity and craving were assessed. Results indicate that one patient showed more improvements on behavioral measures after the neurofeedback training than did the others. This patient reported less impulsivity and reduced levels of self-reported craving. However, these findings could not be attributed to the neurofeedback intervention. The findings suggest that there is insufficient evidence for the beneficial effects of a theta/sensorimotor rhythm (SMR) neurofeedback intervention on measures of impulsivity and craving, and that there may be great interindividual differences in patients’ ability to regulate cortical activity.

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a case series, done in people. Its evidence level is 5 of 5 (Very low · case / narrative / animal / in vitro / in silico). Case reports, narrative reviews, and animal, cell or computer-model studies give the weakest evidence for human health.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free