ADD and ADHD - there is a natural and non-invasive way to them. Cheaper, safer, natural, BETTER.
Biofeedback now a Level 1 “Best Support” Intervention for ADHD according to the American Pediatric Assoc.
The body of knowledge surrounding ADD and ADHD is ever growing with support for the fact that neurofeedback like that at An Open Mind can have dramatic impact on the concerns that trouble these children and the adults who suffer with attention and focus issues.
Many parents are becoming increasingly wary of the effects and side effects of phamaceutical amphetamines on the developing brain, and rightly so. Evidence both scholarly and anacdotally abound that supports the notion that there may need to be a better way. NeuroSpa NeurOptimal brain training is that better way.
The list of supporting research below is just a sample of the body of knowledge out there that supportst the fact that the developing brain can be better served through training than stimulants. Our clients are often the type of parents who see prescriptions as a last resort, only after all else has been exhausted. Because you are here, you are likely in that same camp and we are here to help.
To get the complete report on the complete the form below and it will be emailed directly to your inbox. To schedule an appointment and consultation call the office at 208-232-2263.
We will gladly meet with you to discuss options and plans to make this accessible to you.
Request ADD Packet
Consensus On Brainwave Biofeedback: “Level 1 – Best Support”
Recently, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) revised its “Evidence-based Child and Adolescent Psycho-social Interventions” and elevated Brainwave Biofeedback to “Level 1 — Best Support” as an intervention for Attention & Hyperactivity Behaviors. This recognition of the value of brainwave biofeedback will be published in the next revision of this guideline document by PracticeWise, the company that manages clinical research reviews for AAP. The other brain training intervention referred to as Working Memory Training continued to stay at Level 2 – Good Support. The studies that PracticeWise cited as supporting their decision were:
- Beauregard, M., & Levesque, J. (2006). Functional magnetic resonance imaging investigation of the effects of neurofeedback training on neural bases of selective attention and response inhibition in children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Applied Psychology and Biofeedback, 31, 3–20.
- Gevensleben, H., Holl, B., Albrecht, B., Vogel, C., Schlamp, D., et al. (2009). Is neurofeedback an efficacious treatment for ADHD?: A randomized con¬trolled clinical trial. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 50, 780–789.
- Levesque, J., Beauregard, M., & Men¬sour, B. (2006). Effect of neurofeedback training on the neural substrates of selective attention in children with attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder: A functional magnetic resonance imaging study. Neuroscience Letters, 394, 216–221.
- Omizo, M. M., & Michael, W. B. (1982). Biofeedback-induced relaxation training and impulsivity, attention to task, and locus of control among hyperactive boys. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 15, 414–416. Rivera, E., & Omizo, M. M. (1980). The effects of relaxation and biofeedback on attention to task and impulsivity among male hyperactive children. The Exceptional Child, 27, 41–51.
A newly published study finds that Neurofeedback and cognitive training were effective in overcoming the symptoms of ADHD.
The 111 subjects, 98 children (age 5 to 17) and 13 adults (ages 18 to 63), attended forty 50-min sessions, usually twice a week. Feedback was contingent on decreasing slow wave activity (usually 4–7 Hz, occasionally 9–11 Hz) and increasing fast wave activity (15–18 Hz for most subjects but initially 13–15 Hz for subjects with impulsivity and hyperactivity). Metacognitive strategies related to academic tasks were taught when the feedback indicated the client was focused. Some clients also received temperature and/or EDR biofeedback during some sessions. Initially, 30 percent of the children were taking stimulant medications (Ritalin), whereas 6 percent were on stimulant medications after 40 sessions. All charts were included where pre- and post-testing results were available for one or more of the following: the Test of Variables of Attention (TOVA, n=76), Wechsler Intelligence Scales (WISC-R, WISC-III, or WA1S-R, n=68), Wide Range Achievement Test (WRAT 3, n=99), and the electroencephalogram assessment (QEEG) providing a ratio of theta (4–8 Hz) to beta (16–20 Hz) activity (n=66). Significant improvements (p<.001) were found in ADD symptoms (inattention, impulsivity, and variability of response times on the TOVA), in both the ACID pattern and the full-scale scores of the Wechsler Intelligence Scales, and in academic performance on the WRAT 3. The average gain for the full scale IQ equivalent score was 12 points. A decrease in the EEG ratio of theta/beta was also observed. These data are important because they provide an extension of results from earlier studies (Lubar, Swartwood, Swartwood, & O'Donnell, 1995; Linden, Habib, & Radojevic, 1996). They also demonstrate that systematic data collection in a private educational setting produces helpful information that can be used to monitor students' progress and improve programs. Because this clinical work is not a controlled scientific study, the efficacious treatment components cannot be determined. Nevertheless, the positive outcomes of decreased ADD symptoms plus improved academic and intellectual functioning suggest that the use of neurofeedback plus training in metacognitive strategies is a useful combined intervention for students with ADD. Further controlled research is warranted.
http://link.springer.com/article/10.1023/A:1022213731956
|
|
