Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University Hospital Tuebingen, Calwerstr.14, D-72076 Tuebingen, Germany.
Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University Hospital Tuebingen, Calwerstr.14, D-72076 Tuebingen, Germany; Department for Biomedical Resonance, University Hospital Tuebingen, Otfried-Müller-Str.51, D-72076 Tuebingen, Germany.
Neuroimage Clin. 2020;27:102301. doi: 10.1016/j.nicl.2020.102301. Epub 2020 May 28.
Neurofeedback (NF), a training tool aimed at enhancing neural self-regulation, has been suggested as a complementary treatment option for neuropsychiatric disorders. Despite its potential as a neurobiological intervention directly targeting neural alterations underlying clinical symptoms, the efficacy of NF for the treatment of mental disorders has been questioned recently by negative findings obtained in randomized controlled trials (e.g., Cortese et al., 2016). A possible reason for insufficient group effects of NF trainings vs. placebo could be related to the high rate of participants who fail to self-regulate brain activity by NF ("non-learners"). Another reason could be the application of standardized NF protocols not adjusted to individual differences in pathophysiology. Against this background, we have summarized information on factors determining training and treatment success to provide a basis for the development of individualized training protocols and/or clinical indications. The present systematic review included 25 reports investigating predictors for the outcome of NF trainings in healthy individuals as well as patients affected by mental disorders or epilepsy. We selected these studies based on searches in EBSCOhost using combinations of the keywords "neurofeedback" and "predictor/predictors". As "NF training" we defined all NF applications with at least two sessions. The best available evidence exists for neurophysiological baseline parameters. Among them, the target parameters of the respective training seem to be of particular importance. However, particularities of the different experimental designs and outcome criteria restrict the interpretability of some of the information we extracted. Therefore, further research is needed to gain more profound knowledge about predictors of NF outcome.
神经反馈（NF）是一种旨在增强神经自我调节的训练工具，被认为是神经精神疾病的一种补充治疗选择。尽管它作为一种直接针对临床症状背后神经改变的神经生物学干预具有潜力，但最近随机对照试验（例如 Cortese 等人，2016 年）的阴性结果对 NF 治疗精神障碍的疗效提出了质疑。NF 训练与安慰剂相比，其群体效应不足的一个可能原因与未能通过 NF 自我调节大脑活动的参与者比例较高（“非学习者”）有关。另一个原因可能是应用了未根据病理生理学个体差异进行调整的标准化 NF 协议。在此背景下，我们总结了决定训练和治疗成功的因素信息，为制定个体化训练方案和/或临床适应症提供了依据。本系统评价包括 25 项研究，这些研究调查了健康个体以及受精神障碍或癫痫影响的患者中 NF 训练结果的预测因素。我们根据 EBSCOhost 中的搜索，使用“神经反馈”和“预测因素/预测因素”的组合，选择了这些研究。我们将“NF 训练”定义为至少进行两次的所有 NF 应用。目前针对神经生理学基线参数存在最佳的可用证据。其中，各自训练的目标参数似乎尤为重要。然而，不同实验设计和结果标准的特殊性限制了我们提取的一些信息的可解释性。因此，需要进一步研究以获得关于 NF 结果预测因素的更深入的知识。
