Cargando…

The Current Evidence Levels for Biofeedback and Neurofeedback Interventions in Treating Depression: A Narrative Review

This article is aimed at showing the current level of evidence for the usage of biofeedback and neurofeedback to treat depression along with a detailed review of the studies in the field and a discussion of rationale for utilizing each protocol. La Vaque et al. criteria endorsed by the Association f...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Melnikov, Mikhail Ye.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Hindawi 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7878101/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33613671
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2021/8878857
_version_ 1783650290207031296
author Melnikov, Mikhail Ye.
author_facet Melnikov, Mikhail Ye.
author_sort Melnikov, Mikhail Ye.
collection PubMed
description This article is aimed at showing the current level of evidence for the usage of biofeedback and neurofeedback to treat depression along with a detailed review of the studies in the field and a discussion of rationale for utilizing each protocol. La Vaque et al. criteria endorsed by the Association for Applied Psychophysiology and Biofeedback and International Society for Neuroregulation & Research were accepted as a means of study evaluation. Heart rate variability (HRV) biofeedback was found to be moderately supportable as a treatment of MDD while outcome measure was a subjective questionnaire like Beck Depression Inventory (level 3/5, “probably efficacious”). Electroencephalographic (EEG) neurofeedback protocols, namely, alpha-theta, alpha, and sensorimotor rhythm upregulation, all qualify for level 2/5, “possibly efficacious.” Frontal alpha asymmetry protocol also received limited evidence of effect in depression (level 2/5, “possibly efficacious”). Finally, the two most influential real-time functional magnetic resonance imaging (rt-fMRI) neurofeedback protocols targeting the amygdala and the frontal cortices both demonstrate some effectiveness, though lack replications (level 2/5, “possibly efficacious”). Thus, neurofeedback specifically targeting depression is moderately supported by existing studies (all fit level 2/5, “possibly efficacious”). The greatest complication preventing certain protocols from reaching higher evidence levels is a relatively high number of uncontrolled studies and an absence of accurate replications arising from the heterogeneity in protocol details, course lengths, measures of improvement, control conditions, and sample characteristics.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7878101
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Hindawi
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-78781012021-02-19 The Current Evidence Levels for Biofeedback and Neurofeedback Interventions in Treating Depression: A Narrative Review Melnikov, Mikhail Ye. Neural Plast Review Article This article is aimed at showing the current level of evidence for the usage of biofeedback and neurofeedback to treat depression along with a detailed review of the studies in the field and a discussion of rationale for utilizing each protocol. La Vaque et al. criteria endorsed by the Association for Applied Psychophysiology and Biofeedback and International Society for Neuroregulation & Research were accepted as a means of study evaluation. Heart rate variability (HRV) biofeedback was found to be moderately supportable as a treatment of MDD while outcome measure was a subjective questionnaire like Beck Depression Inventory (level 3/5, “probably efficacious”). Electroencephalographic (EEG) neurofeedback protocols, namely, alpha-theta, alpha, and sensorimotor rhythm upregulation, all qualify for level 2/5, “possibly efficacious.” Frontal alpha asymmetry protocol also received limited evidence of effect in depression (level 2/5, “possibly efficacious”). Finally, the two most influential real-time functional magnetic resonance imaging (rt-fMRI) neurofeedback protocols targeting the amygdala and the frontal cortices both demonstrate some effectiveness, though lack replications (level 2/5, “possibly efficacious”). Thus, neurofeedback specifically targeting depression is moderately supported by existing studies (all fit level 2/5, “possibly efficacious”). The greatest complication preventing certain protocols from reaching higher evidence levels is a relatively high number of uncontrolled studies and an absence of accurate replications arising from the heterogeneity in protocol details, course lengths, measures of improvement, control conditions, and sample characteristics. Hindawi 2021-02-04 /pmc/articles/PMC7878101/ /pubmed/33613671 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2021/8878857 Text en Copyright © 2021 Mikhail Ye. Melnikov. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Review Article
Melnikov, Mikhail Ye.
The Current Evidence Levels for Biofeedback and Neurofeedback Interventions in Treating Depression: A Narrative Review
title The Current Evidence Levels for Biofeedback and Neurofeedback Interventions in Treating Depression: A Narrative Review
title_full The Current Evidence Levels for Biofeedback and Neurofeedback Interventions in Treating Depression: A Narrative Review
title_fullStr The Current Evidence Levels for Biofeedback and Neurofeedback Interventions in Treating Depression: A Narrative Review
title_full_unstemmed The Current Evidence Levels for Biofeedback and Neurofeedback Interventions in Treating Depression: A Narrative Review
title_short The Current Evidence Levels for Biofeedback and Neurofeedback Interventions in Treating Depression: A Narrative Review
title_sort current evidence levels for biofeedback and neurofeedback interventions in treating depression: a narrative review
topic Review Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7878101/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33613671
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2021/8878857
work_keys_str_mv AT melnikovmikhailye thecurrentevidencelevelsforbiofeedbackandneurofeedbackinterventionsintreatingdepressionanarrativereview
AT melnikovmikhailye currentevidencelevelsforbiofeedbackandneurofeedbackinterventionsintreatingdepressionanarrativereview