Zachary M. Meehan, F. Shaffer, Christopher L. Zerr
{"title":"抑郁症","authors":"Zachary M. Meehan, F. Shaffer, Christopher L. Zerr","doi":"10.5298/1081-5937-50.2.03","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The purpose of this article is to review the evidence for the efficacy of treating major depressive disorder with neurofeedback using an electroencephalogram (EEG) and/or functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), as well as with biofeedback using electromyography (EMG) and heart rate variability (HRV). We summarized 33 peer-reviewed manuscripts reporting on the efficacy of one or more of these protocols, organized by randomized control trials (RCTs), quasi-experimental designs, and case studies of various designs. We evaluated these manuscripts by mapping them onto the “Template for Developing Guidelines for the Evaluation of Clinical Efficacy of Psychophysiological Interventions” (LaVaque et al., 2002). In summary, at least two RCTs have shown that both neurofeedback and biofeedback are superior to bona fide treatments in treating participants diagnosed with major depressive disorder. As such, both neurofeedback and biofeedback meet the LaVaque and colleagues' criteria for Level 5 – Efficacious and Specific. The details for efficacy are discussed within the context of the protocols, participant characteristics, and study design.","PeriodicalId":75596,"journal":{"name":"Biofeedback and self-regulation","volume":"33 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Depression\",\"authors\":\"Zachary M. Meehan, F. Shaffer, Christopher L. Zerr\",\"doi\":\"10.5298/1081-5937-50.2.03\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The purpose of this article is to review the evidence for the efficacy of treating major depressive disorder with neurofeedback using an electroencephalogram (EEG) and/or functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), as well as with biofeedback using electromyography (EMG) and heart rate variability (HRV). We summarized 33 peer-reviewed manuscripts reporting on the efficacy of one or more of these protocols, organized by randomized control trials (RCTs), quasi-experimental designs, and case studies of various designs. We evaluated these manuscripts by mapping them onto the “Template for Developing Guidelines for the Evaluation of Clinical Efficacy of Psychophysiological Interventions” (LaVaque et al., 2002). In summary, at least two RCTs have shown that both neurofeedback and biofeedback are superior to bona fide treatments in treating participants diagnosed with major depressive disorder. As such, both neurofeedback and biofeedback meet the LaVaque and colleagues' criteria for Level 5 – Efficacious and Specific. The details for efficacy are discussed within the context of the protocols, participant characteristics, and study design.\",\"PeriodicalId\":75596,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Biofeedback and self-regulation\",\"volume\":\"33 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Biofeedback and self-regulation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5298/1081-5937-50.2.03\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Biofeedback and self-regulation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5298/1081-5937-50.2.03","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
本文的目的是回顾脑电图(EEG)和/或功能性磁共振成像(fMRI)神经反馈以及肌电图(EMG)和心率变异性(HRV)生物反馈治疗重度抑郁症疗效的证据。我们通过随机对照试验(rct)、准实验设计和不同设计的案例研究,总结了33篇同行评议的报告这些方案中一个或多个方案疗效的手稿。我们通过将这些手稿映射到“制定心理生理干预临床疗效评估指南模板”(LaVaque et al., 2002)来评估这些手稿。总之,至少有两项随机对照试验表明,神经反馈和生物反馈在治疗被诊断为重度抑郁症的参与者方面都优于真诚的治疗。因此,神经反馈和生物反馈都符合LaVaque和同事的5级标准-有效和特异性。疗效的细节将在方案、参与者特征和研究设计的背景下讨论。
The purpose of this article is to review the evidence for the efficacy of treating major depressive disorder with neurofeedback using an electroencephalogram (EEG) and/or functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), as well as with biofeedback using electromyography (EMG) and heart rate variability (HRV). We summarized 33 peer-reviewed manuscripts reporting on the efficacy of one or more of these protocols, organized by randomized control trials (RCTs), quasi-experimental designs, and case studies of various designs. We evaluated these manuscripts by mapping them onto the “Template for Developing Guidelines for the Evaluation of Clinical Efficacy of Psychophysiological Interventions” (LaVaque et al., 2002). In summary, at least two RCTs have shown that both neurofeedback and biofeedback are superior to bona fide treatments in treating participants diagnosed with major depressive disorder. As such, both neurofeedback and biofeedback meet the LaVaque and colleagues' criteria for Level 5 – Efficacious and Specific. The details for efficacy are discussed within the context of the protocols, participant characteristics, and study design.