{"title":"生物反馈作为癫痫患者的补充治疗——一种被低估的治疗选择?回顾,结果,讨论","authors":"C. Uhlmann, W. Fröscher","doi":"10.1515/JOEPI-2016-0013","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Summary Background Biofeedback methods represent side effect free complementary options in the treatment of epilepsy. In this paper we review the current status of these methods in terms of clinical study results and their evaluation by systematic review papers. Possible mechanisms of action in biofeedback methods are discussed. Aim To present the current status of biofeedback methods applied to patients with epilepsy. Material and Methods With a literature search up to 10/2016 we screened publications containing the search terms “biofeedback”, “neurofeedback” or “neurotherapy” and “epilepsy” or “seizure” for intervention and population search terms respectively. Results Four different techniques of biofeedback were used to improve seizure frequency in patients with epilepsy. Three of these techniques, measuring EEG (slow cortical potentials and sensory motor rhythm) or electrodermal activity (galvanic skin response, GSR) seem to be promising methods for successful seizure control. Nevertheless, methodological standards in the conducted trials were too low for assured empirical evidence in their efficacy. Conclusions Biofeedback methods could be applied to patients to a greater extent. Probably due to the missing empirical evidence of efficacy and the high demand on patients’ and therapists’ time and commitment and therefore low cost effectiveness, these methods are hardly offered. Especially the relatively new approach of GSR biofeedback represents a promising option here.","PeriodicalId":15683,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Epileptology","volume":"100 1","pages":"173 - 180"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Biofeedback as complementary treatment in patients with epilepsy – an underestimated therapeutic option? Review, results, discussion\",\"authors\":\"C. Uhlmann, W. Fröscher\",\"doi\":\"10.1515/JOEPI-2016-0013\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Summary Background Biofeedback methods represent side effect free complementary options in the treatment of epilepsy. In this paper we review the current status of these methods in terms of clinical study results and their evaluation by systematic review papers. Possible mechanisms of action in biofeedback methods are discussed. Aim To present the current status of biofeedback methods applied to patients with epilepsy. Material and Methods With a literature search up to 10/2016 we screened publications containing the search terms “biofeedback”, “neurofeedback” or “neurotherapy” and “epilepsy” or “seizure” for intervention and population search terms respectively. Results Four different techniques of biofeedback were used to improve seizure frequency in patients with epilepsy. Three of these techniques, measuring EEG (slow cortical potentials and sensory motor rhythm) or electrodermal activity (galvanic skin response, GSR) seem to be promising methods for successful seizure control. Nevertheless, methodological standards in the conducted trials were too low for assured empirical evidence in their efficacy. Conclusions Biofeedback methods could be applied to patients to a greater extent. Probably due to the missing empirical evidence of efficacy and the high demand on patients’ and therapists’ time and commitment and therefore low cost effectiveness, these methods are hardly offered. Especially the relatively new approach of GSR biofeedback represents a promising option here.\",\"PeriodicalId\":15683,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Epileptology\",\"volume\":\"100 1\",\"pages\":\"173 - 180\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Epileptology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1515/JOEPI-2016-0013\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Epileptology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/JOEPI-2016-0013","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Biofeedback as complementary treatment in patients with epilepsy – an underestimated therapeutic option? Review, results, discussion
Summary Background Biofeedback methods represent side effect free complementary options in the treatment of epilepsy. In this paper we review the current status of these methods in terms of clinical study results and their evaluation by systematic review papers. Possible mechanisms of action in biofeedback methods are discussed. Aim To present the current status of biofeedback methods applied to patients with epilepsy. Material and Methods With a literature search up to 10/2016 we screened publications containing the search terms “biofeedback”, “neurofeedback” or “neurotherapy” and “epilepsy” or “seizure” for intervention and population search terms respectively. Results Four different techniques of biofeedback were used to improve seizure frequency in patients with epilepsy. Three of these techniques, measuring EEG (slow cortical potentials and sensory motor rhythm) or electrodermal activity (galvanic skin response, GSR) seem to be promising methods for successful seizure control. Nevertheless, methodological standards in the conducted trials were too low for assured empirical evidence in their efficacy. Conclusions Biofeedback methods could be applied to patients to a greater extent. Probably due to the missing empirical evidence of efficacy and the high demand on patients’ and therapists’ time and commitment and therefore low cost effectiveness, these methods are hardly offered. Especially the relatively new approach of GSR biofeedback represents a promising option here.