PubMed Health⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 12001886

Problems inherent in assessing biofeedback efficacy studies.

Carolyn B Yucha
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

This paper discusses some of the problems involved in drawing conclusions across studies about the efficacy of biofeedback. It focuses on biofeedback for the treatment of hypertension, but the same difficulties arise when considering the effect of biofeedback in other disorders. Large multicenter studies using the same inclusion and exclusion criteria, biofeedback protocol, and methodology are badly needed if biofeedback practitioners are ever going to demonstrate the real effectiveness of biofeedback.

Explore related subjects

Biofeedback, PsychologyClinical Trials as TopicHumansHypertensionMulticenter Studies as TopicReproducibility of ResultsResearch DesignTreatment OutcomeJournal ArticleResearch Support, U.S. Gov't, P.H.S.Review

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Carolyn B Yucha. 2002. Problems inherent in assessing biofeedback efficacy studies.. https://doi.org/10.1023/a%3A1014528622061

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2007

Verbal feedback from an expert is more effective than self-accessed feedback about motion efficiency in learning new surgical skills.

BACKGROUND: Teaching of technical surgical skills to undergraduate medical students in a laboratory setting away from the patient is not common practice. Because of the large volume of students and shortage of available teaching faculty new methods of teaching must be developed for this group of trainees. In this study we examined the effectiveness of computer-based video training, different types of computer-based motion efficiency feedback (with and without expert criteria), and expert feedback on learning of a basic technical skill in medical students. METHODS: Forty-five junior medical students were randomized into 3 groups and learned suturing and knot-tying skills. Group A received computer-generated feedback about the economy of their movements. Group B received the same motion economy feedback, as well as expert reference values. Group C received verbal feedback from an expert. All groups were pre-tested, allowed 18 practice trials, and post-tested, and their skill retention was retested after 1 month. Performance was assessed by expert analysis using an objective structured analysis of technical skill and by computer analysis (Imperial College Surgical Assessment Device [ICSAD]). RESULTS: All groups showed improvement from pre-test to post-test. However, only group C showed retention of skill on delayed performance testing. CONCLUSIONS: Verbal feedback from an expert instructor led to lasting improvements in technical skills performance. Providing information about motion efficiency did not lead to similar improvements.

Biofeedback, Psychology↗
PubMed2006

Efficacy of biofeedback for migraine: a meta-analysis.

In this article, we meta-analytically examined the efficacy of biofeedback (BFB) in treating migraine. A computerized literature search of the databases Medline, PsycInfo, Psyndex and the Cochrane library, enhanced by a hand search, identified 86 outcome studies. A total of 55 studies, including randomized controlled trials as well as pre-post trials, met our inclusion criteria and were integrated. A medium effect size (d =0.58, 95% CI=0.52, 0.64) resulted for all BFB interventions and proved stable over an average follow-up phase of 17 months. Also, BFB was more effective than control conditions. Frequency of migraine attacks and perceived self-efficacy demonstrated the strongest improvements. Blood-volume-pulse feedback yielded higher effect sizes than peripheral skin temperature feedback and electromyography feedback. Moderator analyses revealed BFB in combination with home training to be more effective than therapies without home training. The influence of the meta-analytical methods on the effect sizes was systematically explored and the results proved to be robust across different methods of effect size calculation. Furthermore, there was no substantial relation between the validity of the integrated studies and the direct treatment effects. Finally, an intention-to-treat analysis showed that the treatment effects remained stable, even when drop-outs were considered as nonresponders.

Biofeedback, Psychology↗