Neurofeedback for obsessive compulsive disorder: A randomized, double-blind trial.

We aim to develop fMRI neurofeedback as a treatment for obsessive compulsive disorder (OCD). In prior work, we found that providing neurofeedback of activity in the anterior prefrontal cortex (aPFC) improved control over contamination anxiety in a subclinical population. Here, we present the results of a randomized, double-blind clinical trial (NCT02206945) testing this intervention in patients with OCD. We recruited patients with primary symptoms in the fear-of-harm/checking or contamination/washing domains. During neurofeedback, they viewed symptom provocative images and attempted to up- and down-regulate the aPFC during different blocks of time. The active group received two sessions of neurofeedback and the control group received yoked sham feedback. The primary outcome measure was the Yale-Brown Obsessive-Compulsive Symptom scale. The secondary outcome was control over aPFC. Thirty-six participants completed feedback training (18 active, 18 control). The active group had a slightly but significantly greater reduction of obsessive-compulsive symptoms after neurofeedback compared to the control group (p<.05) but no significant differences in control over the aPFC. These data demonstrate that neurofeedback targeting the aPFC can reduce symptoms in OCD. Future investigations should seek to optimize the training protocol to yield larger effects and to clarify the mechanism of action.

Amygdala downregulation training using fMRI neurofeedback in post-traumatic stress disorder: a randomized, double-blind trial.

Hyperactivation of amygdala is a neural marker for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and improvement in control over amygdala activity has been associated with treatment success in PTSD. In this randomized, double-blind clinical trial we evaluated the efficacy of a real-time fMRI neurofeedback intervention designed to train control over amygdala activity following trauma recall. Twenty-five patients with PTSD completed three sessions of neurofeedback training in which they attempted to downregulate the feedback signal after exposure to personalized trauma scripts. For subjects in the active experimental group (N = 14), the feedback signal was from a functionally localized region of their amygdala associated with trauma recall. For subjects in the control group (N = 11), yoked-sham feedback was provided. Changes in control over the amygdala and PTSD symptoms served as the primary and secondary outcome measurements, respectively. We found significantly greater improvements in control over amygdala activity in the active group than in the control group 30-days following the intervention. Both groups showed improvements in symptom scores, however the symptom reduction in the active group was not significantly greater than in the control group. Our finding of greater improvement in amygdala control suggests potential clinical application of neurofeedback in PTSD treatment. Thus, further development of amygdala neurofeedback training in PTSD treatment, including evaluation in larger samples, is warranted.

Randomized, Sham-Controlled Trial of Real-Time Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging Neurofeedback for Tics in Adolescents With Tourette Syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Activity in the supplementary motor area (SMA) has been associated with tics in Tourette syndrome (TS). The aim of this study was to test a novel intervention-real-time functional magnetic resonance imaging neurofeedback from the SMA-for reduction of tics in adolescents with TS. METHODS: Twenty-one adolescents with TS were enrolled in a double-blind, randomized, sham-controlled, crossover study involving two sessions of neurofeedback from their SMA. The primary outcome measure of tic severity was the Yale Global Tic Severity Scale administered by an independent evaluator before and after each arm. The secondary outcome was control over the SMA assessed in neuroimaging scans, in which subjects were cued to increase/decrease activity in SMA without receiving feedback. RESULTS: All 21 subjects completed both arms of the study and all assessments. Participants had significantly greater reduction of tics on the Yale Global Tic Severity Scale after real neurofeedback as compared with the sham control (p < .05). Mean Yale Global Tic Severity Scale Total Tic score decreased from 25.2 ± 4.6 at baseline to 19.9 ± 5.7 at end point in the neurofeedback condition and from 24.8 ± 8.1 to 23.3 ± 8.5 in the sham control condition. The 3.8-point difference is clinically meaningful and corresponds to an effect size of 0.59. However, there were no differences in changes on the secondary measure of control over the SMA. CONCLUSIONS: This first randomized controlled trial of real-time functional magnetic resonance imaging neurofeedback in adolescents with TS suggests that this neurofeedback intervention may be helpful for improving tic symptoms. However, no effects were found in terms of change in control over the SMA, the hypothesized mechanism of action.

Time course of clinical change following neurofeedback.

Neurofeedback - learning to modulate brain function through real-time monitoring of current brain state - is both a powerful method to perturb and probe brain function and an exciting potential clinical tool. For neurofeedback effects to be useful clinically, they must persist. Here we examine the time course of symptom change following neurofeedback in two clinical populations, combining data from two ongoing neurofeedback studies. This analysis reveals a shared pattern of symptom change, in which symptoms continue to improve for weeks after neurofeedback. This time course has several implications for future neurofeedback studies. Most neurofeedback studies are not designed to test an intervention with this temporal pattern of response. We recommend that new studies incorporate regular follow-up of subjects for weeks or months after the intervention to ensure that the time point of greatest effect is sampled. Furthermore, this time course of continuing clinical change has implications for crossover designs, which may attribute long-term, ongoing effects of real neurofeedback to the control intervention that follows. Finally, interleaving neurofeedback sessions with assessments and examining when clinical improvement peaks may not be an appropriate approach to determine the optimal number of sessions for an application.