Neurofeedback for Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

IF 22.5 1区 医学 Q1 PSYCHIATRY
Samuel J Westwood, Pascal-M Aggensteiner, Anna Kaiser, Peter Nagy, Federica Donno, Dóra Merkl, Carla Balia, Allison Goujon, Elisa Bousquet, Agata Maria Capodiferro, Laura Derks, Diane Purper-Ouakil, Sara Carucci, Martin Holtmann, Daniel Brandeis, Samuele Cortese, Edmund J S Sonuga-Barke
{"title":"Neurofeedback for Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.","authors":"Samuel J Westwood, Pascal-M Aggensteiner, Anna Kaiser, Peter Nagy, Federica Donno, Dóra Merkl, Carla Balia, Allison Goujon, Elisa Bousquet, Agata Maria Capodiferro, Laura Derks, Diane Purper-Ouakil, Sara Carucci, Martin Holtmann, Daniel Brandeis, Samuele Cortese, Edmund J S Sonuga-Barke","doi":"10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2024.3702","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Importance: </strong>Neurofeedback has been proposed for the treatment of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) but the efficacy of this intervention remains unclear.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To conduct a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) using probably blinded (ie, rated by individuals probably or certainly unaware of treatment allocation) or neuropsychological outcomes to test the efficacy of neurofeedback as a treatment for ADHD in terms of core symptom reduction and improved neuropsychological outcomes.</p><p><strong>Data sources: </strong>PubMed (MEDLINE), Ovid (PsycInfo, MEDLINE, Embase + Embase Classic), and Web of Science, as well as the reference lists of eligible records and relevant systematic reviews, were searched until July 25, 2023, with no language limits.</p><p><strong>Study selection: </strong>Parallel-arm RCTs investigating neurofeedback in participants of any age with a clinical ADHD or hyperkinetic syndrome diagnosis were included.</p><p><strong>Data extraction and synthesis: </strong>Standardized mean differences (SMDs) with Hedges g correction were pooled in random effects meta-analyses for all eligible outcomes.</p><p><strong>Main outcomes and measures: </strong>The primary outcome was ADHD total symptom severity assessed at the first postintervention time point, focusing on reports by individuals judged probably or certainly unaware of treatment allocation (probably blinded). Secondary outcomes were inattention and/or hyperactivity-impulsivity symptoms and neuropsychological outcomes postintervention and at a longer-term follow-up (ie, after the last follow-up time point). RCTs were assessed with the Cochrane risk of bias tool version 2.0.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 38 RCTs (2472 participants aged 5 to 40 years) were included. Probably blinded reports of ADHD total symptoms showed no significant improvement with neurofeedback (k = 20; n = 1214; SMD, 0.04; 95% CI, -0.10 to 0.18). A small significant improvement was seen when analyses were restricted to RCTs using established standard protocols (k = 9; n = 681; SMD, 0.21; 95% CI, 0.02 to 0.40). Results remained similar with adults excluded or when analyses were restricted to RCTs where cortical learning or self-regulation was established. Of the 5 neuropsychological outcomes analyzed, a significant but small improvement was observed only for processing speed (k = 15; n = 909; SMD, 0.35; 95% CI, 0.01 to 0.69). Heterogeneity was generally low to moderate.</p><p><strong>Conclusions and relevance: </strong>Overall, neurofeedback did not appear to meaningfully benefit individuals with ADHD, clinically or neuropsychologically, at the group level. Future studies seeking to identify individuals with ADHD who may benefit from neurofeedback could focus on using standard neurofeedback protocols, measuring processing speed, and leveraging advances in precision medicine, including neuroimaging technology.</p>","PeriodicalId":14800,"journal":{"name":"JAMA Psychiatry","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":22.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JAMA Psychiatry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2024.3702","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Importance: Neurofeedback has been proposed for the treatment of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) but the efficacy of this intervention remains unclear.

Objective: To conduct a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) using probably blinded (ie, rated by individuals probably or certainly unaware of treatment allocation) or neuropsychological outcomes to test the efficacy of neurofeedback as a treatment for ADHD in terms of core symptom reduction and improved neuropsychological outcomes.

Data sources: PubMed (MEDLINE), Ovid (PsycInfo, MEDLINE, Embase + Embase Classic), and Web of Science, as well as the reference lists of eligible records and relevant systematic reviews, were searched until July 25, 2023, with no language limits.

Study selection: Parallel-arm RCTs investigating neurofeedback in participants of any age with a clinical ADHD or hyperkinetic syndrome diagnosis were included.

Data extraction and synthesis: Standardized mean differences (SMDs) with Hedges g correction were pooled in random effects meta-analyses for all eligible outcomes.

Main outcomes and measures: The primary outcome was ADHD total symptom severity assessed at the first postintervention time point, focusing on reports by individuals judged probably or certainly unaware of treatment allocation (probably blinded). Secondary outcomes were inattention and/or hyperactivity-impulsivity symptoms and neuropsychological outcomes postintervention and at a longer-term follow-up (ie, after the last follow-up time point). RCTs were assessed with the Cochrane risk of bias tool version 2.0.

Results: A total of 38 RCTs (2472 participants aged 5 to 40 years) were included. Probably blinded reports of ADHD total symptoms showed no significant improvement with neurofeedback (k = 20; n = 1214; SMD, 0.04; 95% CI, -0.10 to 0.18). A small significant improvement was seen when analyses were restricted to RCTs using established standard protocols (k = 9; n = 681; SMD, 0.21; 95% CI, 0.02 to 0.40). Results remained similar with adults excluded or when analyses were restricted to RCTs where cortical learning or self-regulation was established. Of the 5 neuropsychological outcomes analyzed, a significant but small improvement was observed only for processing speed (k = 15; n = 909; SMD, 0.35; 95% CI, 0.01 to 0.69). Heterogeneity was generally low to moderate.

Conclusions and relevance: Overall, neurofeedback did not appear to meaningfully benefit individuals with ADHD, clinically or neuropsychologically, at the group level. Future studies seeking to identify individuals with ADHD who may benefit from neurofeedback could focus on using standard neurofeedback protocols, measuring processing speed, and leveraging advances in precision medicine, including neuroimaging technology.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
JAMA Psychiatry
JAMA Psychiatry PSYCHIATRY-
CiteScore
30.60
自引率
1.90%
发文量
233
期刊介绍: JAMA Psychiatry is a global, peer-reviewed journal catering to clinicians, scholars, and research scientists in psychiatry, mental health, behavioral science, and related fields. The Archives of Neurology & Psychiatry originated in 1919, splitting into two journals in 1959: Archives of Neurology and Archives of General Psychiatry. In 2013, these evolved into JAMA Neurology and JAMA Psychiatry, respectively. JAMA Psychiatry is affiliated with the JAMA Network, a group of peer-reviewed medical and specialty publications.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信