This unit covers the Clinical uses and efficacy of EEG biofeedback (VI-D).
Students completing this unit will be able to discuss:
Clinicians monitor EEG activity using the International 10-20 System for
standardized electrode placement. They often record from several sites
and measure the amplitude of EEG signals within frequency bands (like
alpha and theta) to provide a more complete picture of brain activity.
The Quantitative EEG (QEEG) measures EEG amplitudes within selected
frequency bands. EEG topography displays the QEEG on a cortical surface
map to show the spatial distribution of EEG activity.
The International 10-20 System is a standardized system for EEG electrode
placement based on the distance from the nasion to the inion (front to
back of the skull) and left preauricular notch to the right preauricular
notch (side to side). The standard 19 active electrode positions are
found taking either 10% or 20% of the two distances. The two reference
electrodes are usually placed on the earlobes.
Neurofeedback training procedures can be divided into amplitude control
and frequency control methods. Frequency control is preferred because it
results in more precise EEG control.
Amplitude control methods train patients to increase EEG amplitude
(signal strength) instead of frequency. This training strategy can raise
the amplitude of both a target rhythm (beta) and an unwanted rhythm
(alpha) since it does not teach frequency discrimination. This may result
in worse clinical outcomes than a frequency control strategy since
control is less refined (Fahrion, 1988).
Frequency control methods teach patients to increase the amplitude of one
frequency (SMR) while suppressing another (theta). This procedure refines
EEG control and may result in better clinical outcomes than amplitude
control (learning to raise the amplitude of one or more frequencies)
(Fahrion, 1988).
Below is a BioTrace+ / NeXus-10 EEG assessment screen showing the raw EEG signal, spectral amplitudes, and a three-dimensional topographical plot of amplitude, frequency, and time that can be viewed in real-time. The raw EEG signal display is critical because it can reveal contamination by artifact.
Menninger ON-OFF-ON EEG training teaches a patient to increase the
amplitude within a frequency band, reduce the amplitude, and then
increase the amplitude again during 100 s or 200 s segments. Example, a
patient may increase 8-13 Hz alpha activity for 100 s, decrease it for
100 s, and then increase it for 100 s. This approach may produce superior
control when compared to procedures that only train alpha or theta
increase (Norris, 1988).
The Menninger alpha-theta protocol, places the active electrode 1 cm
above and left of the inion (the bony prominence located on the back of
the head) with a reference on the left earlobe. This protocol teaches EEG
control using 100-s or 200-s “ON-OFF-ON” exercises.
Temperature and frontal SEMG biofeedback precede alpha-theta training.
Patients receive 3-4 weekly sessions of temperature biofeedback followed
by 3-4 weekly sessions of frontal SEMG biofeedback. Judy Green has
likened the temperature and SEMG biofeedback sessions to settling
elementary school students in their seats so they can pay attention
without distraction. These sessions also teach patients the strategy of passive volition (allowing), which is critical to alpha-theta training.
The patient then receives 10-12 bi-weekly sessions of alpha-theta
biofeedback using ON-OFF-ON exercises. Training attempts to gradually
slow the EEG until the patient can increase alpha and theta amplitude
without falling asleep.
Egner, Strawson, and Gruzelier (2002) addressed the question of whether the effects of alpha-theta
neurofeedback depend on with-session EEG changes or are nonspecific and
shared with other relaxation procedures. They compared the effect of
contingent and noncontingent alpha-theta neurofeedback on theta/alpha
ratios within and across sessions.
The contingent group achieved
increased within-session theta/alpha ratios, while the noncontingent
group did not. The contingent group also achieved higher theta/alpha
ratios than the noncontingent group during some of the training sessions.
There were no group differences in subjective reports of activation,
since both groups reported significantly lower activation following
training. Both contingent and noncontingent neurofeedback were relaxing.
This study validated the assumption underlying alpha-theta neurofeedback
that accurate feedback results in higher within-session theta/alpha
ratios than does noncontingent neurofeedback.
The National Comorbidity Survey estimated that the lifetime prevalence for alcohol dependence exceeded 20% for men and 8% for women (Kessler et al., 1994).
Researchers often observe deficient slow-wave activity (delta, theta, and
alpha) and excessive beta activity in alcoholics. Alcohol consumption
slows their alpha frequency and increases its amplitude (Peniston &
Kulkosky, 1990).
The Peniston-Kulkosky (1989) addiction protocol is a multimodal approach that
incorporates both biofeedback and non-biofeedback components. Patients
start with visualization training, receive 6 temperature biofeedback
sessions, learn rhythmic breathing techniques, participate in autogenic
training exercises, learn to construct personalized imagery, and
experience guided imagery (where the therapist directs the patient's
visualization). This training prepares the patient for 30 alpha-theta
sessions in which the patient learns to slow the EEG to increase alpha
and theta amplitude using the Menninger alpha-theta training procedure.
Following the alpha-theta biofeedback sessions, the supervising physician
may need to adjust patient medication.
Experimental patients who received Peniston and Kulkosky’s alpha-theta
protocol for alcoholism and control patients were assessed over a
24-month follow-up period. Across this period, 8 of the 10 experimental
patients and none of the 10 controls maintained abstinence from alcohol.
Due to the multimodal nature of the Peniston-Kulkosky addiction
protocol, we cannot identify the components responsible for clinical
improvement. Further clinical research that "dismantles" this protocol
will be required to isolate the active treatment components.
Evidence-Based Practice in
Biofeedback and Neurofeedback (2004) rates neurofeedback
for alcoholism at level 3 efficacy, probably efficacious. The
criteria for level 3 efficacy include "Multiple observational studies,
clinical studies, wait list controlled studies, and within subject and
intrasubject replication studies that demonstrate efficacy" (pp. 6-7).
Peniston and Kulkosky (1990) reported
that patients who received alpha-theta neurofeedback achieved
significantly greater decreases on Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory
factors than those who received conventional medical treatment.
Alcoholics who received alpha-theta neurofeedback improved on schizoid,
avoidant, passive-aggressive, schizotypal, borderline, paranoid, anxiety,
somatoform, dysthymic, alcohol abuse, psychotic thinking, psychotic
depression, and psychotic delusional factors.
Schneider et al. (1993) reported that
6 of 10 male alcoholics remained abstinent 4 months after completion of
slow cortical potential neurofeedback.
Taub and colleagues (1994)
randomly assigned 118 chronic alcoholics to one of four treatments:
Alcoholics Anonymous and counseling (RTT), RTT combined with
Transcendental Meditation, RTT combined with SEMG biofeedback, or RTT plus
sham neurotherapy. The sham neurofeedback condition involved "electrocranial stimulation" and not alpha-theta biofeedback. Rates of
self-reported abstinence were 25%, 65%, 55%, and 28%, respectively. While
the addition of Transcendental Meditation and EMG biofeedback seemed to
increase abstinence, sham neurotherapy did not. The addition of
Transcendental Meditation or EMG biofeedback to RTT produced abstinence
rates comparable to those reported for the addition of alpha-theta
biofeedback.
Saxby and Peniston (1995) demonstrated in a controlled study that alpha-theta neurofeedback can
reduce depression in alcoholics and increase the rate of abstinence
assessed over a 21-month follow-up period.
Kelley’s (1997) three-year
follow-up study of 20 Native American alcoholic inpatients reported the
following changes: increased EEG synchrony and alpha-theta amplitudes,
extinction of drinking behavior, less personally damaging behavior (81%),
and lower Beck Depression Inventory scores.
There are about 1.9 million cases of skull fracture or intracranial injury in the United States each year. In 1992, firearms caused the most deaths from traumatic brain injury (Vinas & Pilitsis, 2004).
Ayers (1995) reported treating 32 level two coma patients, who were comatose for
more than 2 months, noninvasively with neurofeedback. In a level two coma
on the Rancho Los Amigos Cognitive Scale, there is a generalized response
where patients move aimlessly and inconsistently. If they open their
eyes, patients do not focus on objects.
Twenty-five of 32 patients emerged from their comas after 1-6 treatments.
Neurofeedback for coma involved inhibiting 4-7 Hz activity and then
reinforcing the replacement of 4-7 Hz with 15-18 Hz activity.
Ayers and colleagues started neurofeedback for open head trauma at the
somatosensory cortex. They trained these patients to decrease 4-7 Hz
activity and increase 15-18 Hz activity.
About 6.6% of Americans (13-14 million adults) suffer from a depressive disorder each year (Kessler et al., 2003). The lifetime prevalence of major depressive disorder (MDD) is 20% in women and 12% in men. MDD is diagnosed twice as often in women as in men (Aronson, 2005).
If untreated, 25-30% of adult depressive attempt or commit suicide.Most cases of major depression involve another comorbid psychological disorder that is primary (Zimmerman et al., 2002). Only 21% of annual cases of depression are adequately treated (Kessler et al., 2003).
The rationale for alpha asymmetry neurofeedback for mood disorders is
that the left frontal cortex mediates approach behavior, while the right
mediates negative affect.
Clinical depression is associated
with less activation of the left frontal lobe than the right. Since alpha
is an "idling frequency," this asymmetry is seen when alpha amplitude is
greater in the left (F3) than the right frontal
lobe (F4). The goal of alpha asymmetry
neurofeedback for depression is to correct this imbalance, decreasing
left frontal alpha with respect to right frontal alpha.
Before EEG asymmetry training, patients are trained using diaphragmatic
breathing and autogenic phrases to teach them to relax and warm their
hands. The hand-warming criterion is 95 degrees F.
Patients are seen once or twice a week for one-hour sessions, which
consist of 30 minutes of EEG training followed by 30 minutes of
psychotherapy. Scalp sites F3 and F4 are used and are referenced to CZ. A bell or
clarinet tone reinforces behavior when the asymmetry score exceeds
0 (right alpha amplitude exceeds left).
The two BioTrace+ /NeXus-10 graphs below show the asymmetry between sensor placements F3 and F4 using two separate EEG channels.
The upper graph represents asymmetry in the 15-18 Hz band and the lower graph represents asymmetry in the 8-11 Hz band. When the tracing rises above zero (positive value), this represents higher amplitude at F3 compared to F4. When the tracing falls below zero (negative value), this represents lower amplitude at F3 compared to F4.
Typically, it is desirable for 15-18 Hz amplitude to be higher and 8-11 Hz amplitude to be lower at F3 compared to F4. Notice that the reverse is true in this example. This movie was generously provided by John S. Anderson.
Evidence-Based Practice in
Biofeedback and Neurofeedback (2004) rates neurofeedback
for depressive disorder at level 2 efficacy, possibly efficacious.
The criteria for level 2 efficacy include "At least one study of
sufficient statistical power with well identified outcome measures, but
lacking randomized assignment to a control condition internal to the
study" (p. 116).
A level 2 rating was awarded due to lack of controlled studies.
Baehr et al. (1999) reported that 3
of 6 patients discontinued antidepressant medication before the close of
the fourth treatment quarter and that their proportion of A (alpha
asymmetry) scores remained stable.
Case
studies reported by Kumano et al. (1996)
and Rosenfeld (2000), and a pilot
study by Waldkoetter and Sanders (1997)
support the Baehr et al. (1999)
finding that neurofeedback can reduce the symptoms of clinical
depression.
Corrado and Gottlieb (1999) compared
biofeedback-assisted relaxation with a wait-list control condition in
chronic pain patients. The biofeedback-assisted relaxation group
achieved improved Beck Depression Inventory scores.
DSM-IV-TR (2000) identifies five main categories of anxiety disorders: Phobia, Panic Disorder, Generalized Anxiety Disorder, Stress Disorders (Posttraumatic Stress Disorder and Acute Stress Disorder), and Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder. Excessive anxiety and worry are core features of Generalized Anxiety Disorder.
Estimated lifetime prevalence rates for anxiety disorders in the United States are panic disorder (2.3-2.7%), generalized anxiety disorder (4.1-6.6%), OCD (2.3-2.6%), PTSD (1-9.3%), and social phobia (2.6-13.3%). The male-to-female ratio for a lifetime anxiety disorder is 3 to 2 (Yates, 2005).
Evidence-Based Practice in
Biofeedback and Neurofeedback (2004) rates biofeedback for
anxiety at level 4 efficacy, efficacious. The
criteria for level 4 efficacy include:"
The majority of controlled, randomized experiments have found that
biofeedback (electrodermal, neurofeedback, SEMG, and temperature)
produces comparable anxiety reductions to relaxation procedures like
meditation and Progressive Relaxation. Biofeedback and relaxation
procedures may achieve equivalent results because anxiety involves
disordered attention and cognition in addition to abnormal physiological
arousal.
Rice, Blanchard, and Purcell (1993)
studied 45 patients with generalized anxiety. Thirty-eight of these
patients satisfied the DSM-III criteria for Generalized Anxiety Disorder
(GAD) and 7 were subclinical for GAD and only met 2 of these criteria.
They randomly assigned patients to one of five conditions: frontal EMG
biofeedback, EEG biofeedback to increase alpha, EEG biofeedback to
decrease alpha, pseudomeditation, or a wait-list control. For the two
EEG biofeedback conditions, the electrodes were placed at OZ, the right
mastoid process, and the forehead. All four treatment groups received
eight 60-minute sessions and achieved significant reductions on
STAI-Trait Anxiety scores and Psychosomatic Symptom Checklist (PSC)
scores.
Only the alpha-increase condition decreased heart rate reactivity to
stressors. Subjects in the frontal EMG, alpha-increase, and alpha
suppression conditions maintained improvement in STAI-Trait Anxiety and
PSC scores at 6 weeks posttreatment. The alpha-increase and
alpha-suppression groups actually showed further improvement in
Psychosomatic Symptom Checklist scores at 6 weeks posttreatment.
Vanathy, Sharma, and Kumar (1998) randomly assigned subjects who met the diagnostic criteria for Generalized Anxiety Disorder (GAD) to a wait-list control, alpha-increase biofeedback, or theta-increase biofeedback. EEG biofeedback consisted of 15 sessions of training to enhance alpha or theta and suppress beta.
Both the alpha-increase and theta-increase groups reduced self-reported (STAI-State Anxiety) and blind observer-rated anxiety (Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale) in comparison to the control group. These results may have been due to Type 1 error caused by the use of multiple t-tests without statistical correction. The authors' failure to observe changes in EEG power in the alpha or theta bands following EEG training suggests that non-specific treatment components, and not EEG training, may have produced clinical improvement, assuming that the findings of symptom improvement were valid.
Epilepsy is a family of neurological disorders featuring short, periodic
attacks of motor, sensory, or cognitive malfunction. Epileptic seizures
have been divided into (1) partial or focal seizures, (2) primary
generalized seizures, (3) status epilepticus, and (4) recurrence
patterns.
Petit mal seizures feature loss of consciousness without
abnormal movement (patient appears to be daydreaming). The patient,
typically a child, may suffer hundreds of these seizures daily for
periods lasting up to 30 seconds.
Tonic-clonic seizures (grand mal seizures)
are primary generalized seizures featuring a peculiar cry, loss of consciousness, fall,
tonic-clonic convulsions of all extremities, incontinence, and amnesia
for the episode. These seizures are diagnosed in fewer than 20% of adult
epileptics.
The sensorimotor cortex is a central cortical area defined by the central
sulcus (fissure of Rolando) separating the frontal and parietal lobes.
Sterman (1977) recorded the EEG over the left sensorimotor cortex from
sites 10% and 30% lateral to the vertex (slightly medial to C3 and T3).
The sensorimotor rhythm (SMR) is an EEG rhythm from 12-14 Hz located over
the sensorimotor cortex (central sulcus). This rhythm is associated with
inhibition of movement and reduced muscle tone.
In the United States, the lifetime probability of experiencing an epileptic seizure is about 9% and of receiving a diagnosis of epilepsy is about 3%. The prevalence of active epilepsy is 0.8%. Seizures result in death in a minority of cases and most result from accidents caused by impaired consciousness (Cavazos & Lum, 2005).
Sterman's protocol trains an epileptic patient to increase SMR (12-14 Hz) amplitude
and duration while theta (4-7 Hz), beta (20+ Hz), epileptiform spikes,
and EMG artifact are suppressed during 36 sessions. The aim is to
normalize the waking and sleep EEG with elevated SMR and suppressed theta
and beta activity.
Sterman (2000) summarized 18
peer-reviewed studies in which 174 patients were trained using his SMR
protocol. The outcome data were impressive; 82% clinically improved,
reducing seizures by more than 30%. The average seizure reduction was
greater than 50%. Many studies found decreased seizure severity. Five
percent of patients remained seizure free for as long as one year. In those studies where researchers recorded pretreatment and
posttreatment EEG amplitudes, 66% normalized their EEG power spectra.
La Vaque (2003) considers
slow cortical potential (SCP) training
to be highly effective in controlling "drug-resistant" epilepsy.
Kotchoubey, Schneider, et al. (1996) reported that
SCP neurofeedback decreased the baseline seizure frequency in
drug-resistant epileptics and Kotchoubey,
Blankenhorn, et al. (1997) showed that this improvement was
maintained 6 months post-treatment.
Kotchoubey, Busch, Strehl, and Birbaumer (1999) concluded that
both SMR and SCP protocols improve epilepsy control in about 66% of
patients. While the mechanism underlying SCP training remains unclear, it
may involve increased 6.0-7.9 Hz theta activity during training trials
without feedback.
Joy Andrews, Reiter, et al. (2000)
found that a neurofeedback protocol, involving 5 consecutive days of
training, enabled 79% of patients to control their seizures.
Kotchoubey, Strehl, et al. (2001)
treated patients with refractory epilepsy with an anti-epileptic drug and
psychosocial counseling, a breathing training control group, or SCP
neurofeedback in a controlled clinical study. Only the drug and SCP
groups significantly reduced seizure frequency.
Evidence-Based Practice in
Biofeedback and Neurofeedback (2004) rates neurofeedback
for epilepsy at level 3 efficacy, probably efficacious. The
criteria for level 3 efficacy include "Multiple observational studies,
clinical studies, wait list controlled studies, and within subject and
intrasubject replication studies that demonstrate efficacy" (pp.
18-19).
Ramaratnam, Baker, and Goldstein (2001),
in a Cochrane Database Systematic Review, challenged the efficacy of
neurofeedback for epilepsy due to methodological flaws and small sample
size.
DSM-IV-TR (2000) identifies three subtypes of ADHD: Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder, Combined Type;
Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder, Predominantly Inattentive Type; and Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder, Predominantly Hyperactive-Impulsive Type.
314.00 Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder, Predominantly Inattentive Type requires that the following criteria are met and the criteria for the Predominantly Hyperactive-Impulsive Type are not met during this time for the past 6 months.
314.01 Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder, Predominantly Hyperactive-ImpulsiveType requires that the following criteria are met and the criteria for the Predominantly Inattentive Type are not met during this time for the past 6 months.
314.01 Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder, Combined Type requires that both sets of criteria are met for the past 6 months.
In the United States, estimates of the incidence of ADHD in school-age children range from 3-7%. In children, ADHD is diagnosed 3-5 times more often in boys than in girls. The inattentive subtype of ADHD is more often diagnosed in girls than in boys. About 15-20% of children diagnosed with ADHD retain this diagnosis as adults. In adults, the ratio between men and women is almost even. In adults, the prevalence rate is approximately 2-7% (Chang, 2005).
Monastra, Lynn, Linden, Lubar, Gruzelier, and La Vaque (2005) summarized three main protocols for ADHD treatment that had been evaluated in controlled group studies.
The following tables were adapted from the Appendix.
Evidence-Based Practice in
Biofeedback and Neurofeedback (2004) rates neurofeedback for
ADD and ADHD at level 4 efficacy, efficacious. The
criteria for level 4 efficacy include:"
Monastra and colleagues (2005) assigned a more conservative rating of probably efficacious for EEG biofeedback for ADHD in an AAPB White Paper. Despite significant improvement in about 75% of patients in the published studies they examined, the authors concluded that more randomized, controlled group studies that control for therapist and patient characteristics are needed to calculate the percentage of patients diagnosed with ADHD who will achieve these gains in typical clinical settings.
Neurofeedback appears to be superior to no treatment and comparable to
stimulant medication. Patients require at least 20 sessions, and as many
as 50 sessions, to produce clinical improvement. The table below is adapted from Table 2.
Lubar, Swartwood, Swartwood, and O'Donnell
(1995) reported that training to reduce slow EEG activity
increased WISC-R and Test of Variables of Attention (TOVA) scores. Full-scale
WISC-R scores increased about 12 points. The increase in TOVA scores
correlated with decreased slow EEG activity.
Lubar (1995) followed 52 patients
treated with neurofeedback for as long as 10 years. Their improvement on the
Connors scale, used to measure attention, remained stable at follow-up.
Rossiter and La Vaque (1995) matched
and randomly assigned 46 subjects to either Ritalin or neurofeedback.
Both groups improved on TOVA measures of inattention, impulsivity,
information processing, and response variability.
Linden, Habib, and Radojevic's (1996)
controlled study of 18 children demonstrated that neurofeedback to
increase beta and suppress theta activity increased intelligence scores
and reduced inattention rated by their parents, when compared to a
wait-list control group.
Thompson and Thompson (1998) reported
the successful treatment of 98 children and 13 adults over 40 50-minute
sessions using Lubar's ADHD protocol. The percentage of children using
Ritalin declined from 30% at the start of the study to 6% posttreatment.
Theta/beta ratios significantly declined for children, but not for
adults. Study participants achieved impressive pretreatment to
posttreatment gains on intelligence, TOVA, and Wide Range Achievement
Test scores.
Case studies by Ramos (1998) and
Wadhwani, Radvanski and Carmody (1998)
support the efficacy of neurofeedback for ADD and ADHD.
Camp (1999) reported that theta
suppression biofeedback training compared favorably with cognitive
behavior modification, based on pretreatment to posttreatment changes in
48 children on TOVA, parent and teacher ratings, and ADHD scales.
The Kaiser and Othmer (2000)
multi-center study involved 1,089 patients ranging from 5-67 years and
demonstrated that SMR-beta neurofeedback training produced significant
gains on TOVA measures of attentiveness, impulse control, and response
variability.
Carmody and colleagues (2001) randomly assigned 16 children (ages 8-10) to either EEG biofeedback or a wait-list control condition. Eight of the 16 children were diagnosed with ADHD and 8 had received no diagnosis of any disorder. In the EEG biofeedback condition, participants received 3-4 weekly sessions of EEG biofeedback (using a synthesis of Protocols 1 and 3) for 6 months and completed 36-48 sessions. The children diagnosed with ADHD who received EEG biofeedback decreased impulsivity as measured by the T.O.V.A. and their teachers' ratings of attentiveness on the School Version of the ADDES improved. Selected QEEG measures did not consistently validate improvement by participants in the EEG biofeedback condition.
Monastra, Monastra, and George (2002)
compared 49 children diagnosed with ADHD who participated in 1-year
multimodal program (Ritalin, parent counseling, and academic
consultation) with 51 children who participated in the multimodal program
combined with neurofeedback (weekly 30 to 40-min sessions using the Lubar
protocol with a cash reward for increased frontal cortical arousal). Both
groups significantly improved performance on TOVA and the Attention
Deficit Disorders Evaluation Scale when medicated with Ritalin, but only
the group that received neurofeedback maintained performance gains when
unmedicated. A QEEG scan only showed reduced cortical slowing in children
who received neurofeedback. Parenting style moderated behavioral symptoms
at home, but not in the classroom.
Fuchs, Birbaumer, Lutzenberger, Gruzelier, and
Kaiser (2003) compared the efficacy of 3 months of
sensorimotor rhythm (12-15 Hz) and beta1 (15-18 Hz) neurofeedback against
methylphenidate in 46 ADHD children. The children were assigned to the
neurofeedback (22) and medication (12) based on their parents' preference
(assignment was nonrandom). Both treatment groups improved on all TOVA
subscales, and on speed and accuracy on the d2 Attention Endurance Test.
Teacher and parent ratings of ADHD behaviors on the IOWA-Conners Behavior
Rating Scale also improved for both groups.
Below is a BioTrace+ / NeXus-10 ADHD neurofeedback training screen that is used to teach children to decrease theta activity and increase SMR and beta activity.
Now that you have completed this module, describe your personal training
experience with EEG biofeedback. Which training approach (e.g., amplitude
control or frequency control) did you use? Which placement did you use?
Which EEG biofeedback application interests you the most? Why?
American Psychiatric Association (2000). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (4th ed., DSM-IV-TR). Washington, DC: Author.
Andreassi, J. L. (2000). Psychophysiology: Human behavior and physiological
response. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum and Associates, Inc.
Aronson, S. C. (2005). Depression. eMedicine.
Ayers, M. E. (1995). EEG neurofeedback to bring individuals out of level 2 coma [Abstract]. Biofeedback and Self-Regulation, 20(3), 304-305.
Ayers, M. E. (1995). Long-term follow-up of EEG neurofeedback with absence seizures. Biofeedback & Self-Regulation, 20(3), 309-310.
Baehr, E., Miller, E., Rosenfeld, J. P., & Baehr, R. (2004). Changes in frontal brain asymmetry associated with premenstrual dysphoric disorder: A single case study. Journal of Neurotherapy, 8(1), 29-42.
Baehr, E., Rosenfeld, J. P., & Baehr, R. (1997). The clinical use of an alpha asymmetry protocol in the neurofeedback treatment of depression: Two case studies. Journal of Neurotherapy, 2(3), 10-23.
Baehr, E., Rosenfeld, J. P., & Baehr, R. (2001). Clinical use of an alpha asymmetry neurofeedback protocol in the treatment of mood disorders: Follow-up study one to five years post therapy. Journal of Neurotherapy, 4(4), 11-18.
Camp, B. W. (1999). Attention deficit hyperactivity disorders: Studies of
EEG patterns and biofeedback training (Final Report, Grant No.
H113G40130), Washington, DC: U.S. Office of Education.
Carmody, D. P., Radvanski, D. C., Wadhwani, S., Sabo, M. J., & Vergara, L. (2001). EEG biofeedback training and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder in an elementary school setting. Journal of Neurotherapy, 4(3), 5-27.
Cavazos, J. E., & Lum, F. (2005). Seizures and epilepsy: Overview and classification. eMedicine.
Chang, K. D. (2005). Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder. eMedicine.
Corrado, P., & Gottlieb, H. (1999). The effect of biofeedback and
relaxation training on depression in chronic pain patients. American
Journal of Alternative Medicine, 9, 18-21.
Egner, T., Strawson, E., & Gruzelier, J. H. (2002). EEG signature and
phenomenology of alpha/theta neurofeedback training versus mock feedback. Applied Psychophysiology and Biofeedback, 27(4), 261-270.
Evans, J. R., & Abarbanel, A. (1999). Introduction to quantitative EEG
and neurofeedback. San Diego: Academic Press.
Fuchs, T., Birbaumer, N., Lutzenberger, W., Gruzelier, J. H., & Kaiser,
J. (2003). Neurofeedback treatment for Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity
Disorder in children: A comparison with methylphenidate. Applied
Psychophysiology and Biofeedback, 28(1).
Hammond, D. C. (2001). Neurofeedback treatment of depression with the Roshi. Journal of Neurotherapy, 4(2), 45-56.
Hammond, D. C. (2001). Neurofeedback training for anger control. Journal of Neurotherapy, 5(4), 98-103.
Hammond, D. C. (2005). Neurofeedback with anxiety and affective disorders. Child & Adolescent Psychiatric Clinics of North America, 14(1), 105-123.
Joy Andrews, D., Reiter, J. M., Schonfeld, W., Kastl, A., & Denning, P.
(2000). A neurobehavioral treatment for unilateral complex partial
seizure disorders: A comparison of right- and left-hemisphere patients. Seizure, 9(3), 189-197.
Kaiser, D. A., & Othmer, S. (2000). Effect of neurofeedback on variables
of attention in a large multi-center trial. Journal of Neurotherapy, 4(1),
5-15.
Kelley, M. J. (1997). Native Americans, neurofeedback, and substance
abuse theory. Three year outcome of alpha/theta neurofeedback training
in the treatment of problem drinking among Dine’ (Navajo) people.
Journal of Neurotherapy, 2, 24–60.
Kessler, R. C., McGonagle, K. A., Zhao, S., Nelson, C. B., Hughes, M., Eshleman, S., Wittchen, H. U., & Kendler, K. S. (1994). Lifetime and 12-month prevalence of DSM-III-R psychiatric disorders in the United States. Results from the National Comorbidity Survey. Archives of General Psychiatry, 51(1), 8-19.
Kessler, R. C., et al. (2003). The epidemiology of major depressive disorder: Results from the National Comorbidity Survey Replication (NCS-R). JAMA, 289, 3095-3105.
Kotchoubey, B., Blankenhorn, V., Froscher, W., Strehl, U., & Birbaumer,
N. (1997). Stability of cortical self-regulation in epilepsy patients.
Neuroreport, 27(8), 1867-1870.
Kotchoubey, B., Blankenhorn, V., Froscher, W., Strehl, U., Uhlmann, C.,
Blankenhorn, V., et al. (1996).Self-regulation of slow cortical
potentials in epilepsy: A retrial with analysis of influencing factors. Epilepsy Research, 25(3), 269-276.
Kotchoubey, B., Busch, S., Strehl, U., & Birbaumer, N. (1999). Changes
in EEG power spectra during biofeedback of slow cortical potentials in
epilepsy. Applied Psychophysiology and Biofeedback, 24(4),
213-233.
Kotchoubey, B., Schneider, D., Schleichert, H., Strehl, U., Uhlmann, C.,
Blankenhorn, V., et al. (1996). Stability of cortical self-regulation in
epilepsy patients. Neuroreport, 27(8), 1867-1870.
Kotchoubey, B., Strehl, U., Holzapfel, S., Blankenhorn, V., Froscher, W.,
& Birbaumer, N. (1999). Negative potential shifts and the prediction of
the outcome of neurofeedback therapy in epilepsy. Clinical
Neurophysiology, 110(4), 683-686.
Kotchoubey, B., Strehl, U., Uhlmann, C., Holzapfel, S., Konig, M.,
Froscher, W., et al. (2001). Modification of slow cortical potentials in
patients with refractory epilepsy: A controlled outcome study.
Epilepsia, 42(3), 406-416.
Kumano, H., Horie, H., Shidara, T., Kuboki, T., Suematsu, H., & Yasushi,
M. (1996). Treatment of a depressive disorder patient with EEG-driven
photic stimulation. Biofeedback and Self-Regulation, 21(4),
323-334.
La Vaque, T. J. (2003). Neurofeedback, neurotherapy, and quantitative EEG.
In D. Moss, A. McGrady, T. Davies, and I. Wickramasekera (Eds.), Handbook
of mind-body medicine for primary care. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Publications, Inc.
Lubar, J. F. (1985). EEG biofeedback and learning disabilities. Theory into Practice, 26, 106-111
Lubar, J. F. (1995). Neurofeedback for the management of
attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. In M. S. Schwartz & Associates
(Eds.), Biofeedback: A practitioner's guide (2nd ed.). New
York: Guilford.
Lubar, J. F. (2003). Neurofeedback for the management of attention‑deficit / hyperactivity disorders. In M. S. Schwartz, & F. Andrasik (Eds.), Biofeedback: A practitioner's guide (3rd ed.). New York: Guilford.
Lubar, J. O., & Lubar, J. F. (1984). Electroencephalographic biofeedback of SMR and beta for treatment of attention deficit disorders in a clinical setting. Biofeedback and Self-Regulation, 9, 1-23.
Lubar, J. F., Swartwood, M. O., Swartwood, J. N., & O'Donnell, P. (1995).
Evaluation of the effectiveness of EEG neurofeedback training for ADHD
in a clinical setting as measured by changes in TOVA scores, behavioral
ratings, and WISC-R performance. Biofeedback and Self-Regulation, 20,
83-99.
Mann, C., Lubar, J., Zimmerman, A., Miller, C., & Nuenchen, R. (1992). Quantitative analysis of EEG in boys with attention-deficit-hyperactivity disorder: Controlled study with clinical implications. Pediatric Neurology, 8, 30-36.
Monastra, V. J., Lynn, S., Linden, M., Lubar, J. F., Gruzelier, J., &
LaVaque, T. J. (2005). Electroencephalographic biofeedback in the
treatment of Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder. Applied
Psychophysiology and Biofeedback, 30(2), 95-114.
Monastra, V. J., Monastra, D. M., & George S. (2002). The effects of
stimulant therapy, EEG biofeedback, and parenting style on the primary
symptoms of Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder. Applied
Psychophysiology and Biofeedback, 27(4), 231-249.
Peniston, E. G., & Kulkosky, P. J. (1989). Alpha-theta brainwave training
and beta-endorphin levels in alcoholics. Alcoholism, Clinical and
Experimental Research,13(2), 271-279.
Peniston, E. G., & Kulkosky, P. J. (1990). Alcoholic personality and
alpha-theta brainwave training. Medical Psychotherapy, 3, 37-55.
Peniston, E. G., Marrinan, D. A., Deming, W. A., & Kulkosky, P. J. (1993). EEG alpha-theta brainwave synchronization in Vietnam theater veterans with combat-related post-traumatic stress disorder and alcohol abuse. Advances in Medical Psychotherapy, 6, 37-50.
Ramaratnam, S., Baker, G. A., & Goldstein, L. (2001). Psychological
treatments for epilepsy. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
Online Update Software, 4, CD002029.
Ramos, F. (1998). Frequency band interaction in ADD/ADHD neurotherapy.
Journal of Neurotherapy, 3(1), 26-41.
Rice, K. M., Blanchard, E. B., & Purcell, M. (1993). Biofeedback
treatments of generalized anxiety disorder: Preliminary results.
Biofeedback and Self-Regulation, 18(2), 93-105.
Rosenfeld, J. P. (2000). An EEG Biofeedback protocol for affective
disorders. Clinical Electroencephalography, 31(1), 7-12.
Rosenfeld, J. P., Baehr, E., Baehr, R., Gotlib, I. H., & Ranganath, C. (1996). Preliminary evidence that daily changes in frontal alpha asymmetry correlate with changes in affect in therapy sessions. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 23, 137-141.
Rossiter, T. R. (1998). Patient-directed neurofeedback for AD/HD.
Journal of Neurotherapy, 2(4), 54-63.
Rossiter, T. R., & La Vaque, T. J. (1995). A comparison of EEG
biofeedback and psychostimulants in treating attention
deficit/hyperactivity disorders. Journal of Neurotherapy, 1(1),
48-59.
Saxby, E., & Peniston, E. G. (1995). Alpha-theta brainwave neurofeedback
training: An effective treatment for male and female alcoholics with
depressive symptoms. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 51(5),
685-693.
Schneider, F., Elbert, T., Heimann, H., Welker, A., Stetter, F., Mattes,
R., et al.
(1993). Self-regulation of slow cortical potentials in psychiatric
patients: Alcohol dependency. Biofeedback and Self-Regulation, 18(1),
23-32.
Sterman, M. B. (1973a). Neurophysiological and clinical studies of sensorimotor EEG biofeedback training: Some effects on epilepsy. Seminars in Psychiatry, 5(4), 507-525.
Sterman, M. B. (1973b). Neurophysiological and clinical studies of sensorimotor EEG biofeedback training: Some effects on epilepsy. L. Birk (Ed.), Biofeedback: Behavioral Medicine. New York: Grune & Stratton, pp. 147-165.
Sterman, M. B. (1977). Sensorimotor EEG operant conditioning: Experimental and clinical effects. Pavlovian Journal of Biological Sciences, 12(2), 63-92.
Sterman, M. B. (1986). Epilepsy and its treatment with EEG feedback therapy. Annals of Behavioral Medicine, 8, 21-25.
Sterman, M. B. (1997).The challenge of EEG biofeedback in the treatment of epilepsy: A view from the trenches. Biofeedback, 25(1), 6-7, 20-21, 23.
Sterman, M. B. (2000). Basic concepts and clinical findings in the treatment of seizure disorders with EEG operant conditioning. Clinical Electroencephalography, 31(1), 45-55.
Sterman, M. B., & Friar, L. (1972). Suppression of seizures in epileptics following sensorimotor EEG feedback training. Electroencephalography & Clinical Neurophysiology, 33, 89-95.
Sterman, M. B., & Lantz, D. (2001). Changes in lateralized memory performance in subjects with epilepsy following neurofeedback training. Journal of Neurotherapy, 5, 63-72.
Sterman, M. B., & Macdonald, L. R. (1978). Effects of central cortical EEG feedback training on incidence of poorly controlled seizures. Epilepsia, 19(3), 207-222.
Sterman, M. B., Macdonald, L. R., & Stone, R. K. (1974). Biofeedback training of the sensorimotor electroencephalogram rhythm in man: Effects on epilepsy. Epilepsia, 15(3), 395-416.
Sterman, M. B., & Shouse, M. N. (1980). Quantitative analysis of training, sleep EEG and clinical response to EEG operant conditioning in epileptics. Electroencephalography & Clinical Neurophysiology, 49, 558-576.
Taub, E., Steiner, S. S., Weingarten, E., & Walton, K. G. (1994).
Effectiveness of broad spectrum approaches to relapse prevention in
severe alcoholism: A long-term, randomized, controlled trial of
Transcendental Meditation, EMG biofeedback and electronic neurotherapy. Alcoholism Treatment Quarterly, 11(1-2), 187-220.
Thompson, L., & Thompson, M. (1998). Neurofeedback combined with training
in metacognitive strategies: Effectiveness in students with ADD. Applied
Psychophysiology and Biofeedback, 23(4), 243-263.
Thompson, M., & Thompson, L. (2003). The biofeedback book: An
introduction to basic concepts in applied psychophysiology. Wheat
Ridge, CO: Association for Applied Psychophysiology and Biofeedback.
Vanathy, S., Sharma, P. S. V. N., & Kumar, K. B. (1998). The efficacy of alpha and theta neurofeedback training in treatment of generalized anxiety disorder. Indian Journal of Clinical Psychology, 25(2), 136-143.
Vinas, F. C., & Pilitsis, J. (2004). Penetrating head trauma. eMedicine.
Wadhwani, S., Radvanski, D. C., & Carmody, D. P. (1998). Neurofeedback
training in a case of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder.
Journal of Neurotherapy, 3(1), 42-49.
Waldkoetter, R. O., & Sanders, G. O. (1997). Auditory brainwave
stimulation in treating alcoholic depression. Perceptual and Motor
Skills, 84(1), 226.
Yates, W. R. (2005). Anxiety disorders. eMedicine.
Yucha, C. B., & Gilbert, C. D. (2004). Evidence-based practice in
biofeedback and neurofeedback. Wheat Ridge: AAPB.
Zimmerman, M., et al. (2002). Major depressive disorder and Axis I diagnostic comorbidity. Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, 63, 187-193.