|
[
Back to ARTICLES ] [ What
is HEG? ]
WHY
DOES NEUROFEEDBACK WORK?
by Hershel Toomim
I have spent many hours trying to decipher just what we are doing
using Neurofeedback. |

|
In fact in the process of trying to find the basis of Neurofeedback.
I didn't believe Neurofeedback worked. I started a study. I'd find out if brain blood flow
changed with this process. I'd do a blood distribution map, a SPECT, before and after EEG
training.
I had everything underway when a radiologist at the chosen SPECT
hospital refused to do SPECTs for non-medical reasons. In that study one of the
dissertation candidates, Julie Weiner, found Britton Chance's papers on near infrared
spectroscopy. Building one was a snap.
In trying to find out what I could do with it, I discovered that
cerebral blood flow enhancement is a voluntary function. We do it all the time.
I could increase local cortical blood flow voluntarily. I could
exercise my brain! From this Hemoencephalography was born.
WHAT
MATTERS?
-
Electrode
placement?
-
Protocols?
-
Instruments?
-
Frequencies?
-
Therapist
skills?
|
I wanted to know what mattered in Neurofeedback. In my search for
what matters I found many opinions. I wasn't satisfied until I had a found a physiological
change that resulted from the training Attention Deficit Disorder (ADD/ADHD). I studied
the published articles on EEG training that used Test of Variables of Attention (TOVA) as
the dependent variable. TOVA has a reputation of test retest reliability so that retesting
after training should be free from learning effects.
The various papers were not a uniform number of sessions. To make
them comparable I calculated and plotted the TOVA point gain for each session as a
function of the initial TOVA scores. The result was very strange. The best in the better
EEG training group was only 3 % above the average for that group. The best in the lower
group was only 3% better than the average for its group. The lower group was 70% as good
as the upper group.
After developing this graph, I entered the results of my use of
Hemoencephalography (HEG), blood flow therapy, for 53 subjects. I was happy to learn that
HEG worked significantly better than EEG.
Most surprisingly the HEG group was twice as good as the higher EEG
group!
I was delighted when my very good friend, Paul Kwong, found the
correlation between HEG and TOVA for the forehead placement was about 0.7 and the chance
for error, p was less than .001.
I set out to find out why. For one thing I found it followed the
same law as EEG on number of sessions although the gain per session was much higher. TOVA
gain increased as the number of sessions increased. Also training was at the frontal lobe
near the eyebrows while EEG trained near the motor strip at the top of the head

The two EEG groups were differentiated by the experience of the
therapists. The inexperienced therapists did 70% as well as the most experienced
therapists. The only other reported variable determinant of gain in the EEG groups was the
number of sessions.
A surprise was that Audio Visual Training did as well as EEG. I
checked and found this paper by Joyce and Seiver had an 18-month follow up. The effect was
lasting! Clearly these were unexpected results. There was much that needed an explanation.
Now, I had a full plate.
WHAT
MATTERS?
What
we train.
Where
we train.
How
much we train.
Strangely!
Not
much else.
|
On the graph I had to decide what are the important variables? You
can see from the graph that mainly where, what, and how much we trained contributed to the
net effect.
HEG clearly outperformed EEG. EEG trained at the top of the head. HEG, blood flow
training, trained frontally. This has to account for some of the difference.
If placement is so important, why has EEG avoided frontal placement?
The problem is eye roll. The eyes are electrically charged spheres.
When eyes move they generate large electrical low frequency artifacts. Even the initial
TOVA score, that shows how much each group deviated from normal, does not affect the gain
from training.
Notice how experienced therapists all gained
about ½ of a TOVA point per session. The new and inexperienced
therapists gained 1/3 of a point, about 70 percent as much.
A good response for ADD/ADHD doesn't seem to require much expertise!
However, I can truthfully attest that keeping a child interested
in such a boring task as neurofeedback is daunting.
One can make up for that ineptitude with more sessions.
WHERE TRAIN?
The
accesible brain module
contributing most to dysfunction.
|
From
mouse models, angiogenesis, growth of new capillaries, results
from repetitive exercise. Synaptogenesis,
development of connections between neurons, results from
learning exercises. HEG is in the business of working with
hypoperfused, blood starved, brain areas.
It is probable EEG is best adapted to correcting
dysfunctional learned behaviors like
sleeplessness, anxiety, or stress of the competitive
over-achiever. HEG, a routine repetitive exercise may be best
with developmental disorders such as autism, schizophrenia,
unipolar and bipolar depression or ADD/ADHD.

This
figure emphasizes the dominance of the frontal cortex in
developmental dysfunctions. There should be similar graphs for
Bipolar Disorder, Depression, Ageing Dementia, Supranuclear
Palsy, Diabetes, Memory Loss, Traumatic Brain Injury, Stroke,
Alzheimers, and Parkinson’s Diseases. Note these are brain based.
They are characterized by depressed blood flow, not learned
behavioral disorders.
EEG
has a rich literature on correcting behavioral disorders such as
anxiety, sleepliness, PTSD. class A behavior. HEG is too young to
have developed approaches to these.
Repetition of demands
develops the brain!
Learning:
Learning = Synaptogenesis
Exercise = Angiogenesis
|
HEG
is clearly repetitive exercise with a minor learning component. EEG
is also a repetitive exercise, it has large body of work
illustrating effects on learned behaviors as befits its synaptogenic
component.
Neurofeedback is a
Brain Exercise
Exercise
repetition
makes the difference in
Angiogenesis and blood flow.
|
Exercise
Repetition makes the difference in angiogenesis as we have seen in
the earlier graph.
I have always felt that the degree of increase in blood flow
had a marked effect on the efficacy of HEG training.
Increases relative to awake, idling baseline of 20 % are
common.
Rarely one finds increases nearing 100 %. I suspect these
values are very much larger than the increase due to normal brain
use. I am checking this out in my current practice. If so, HEG may
well find use as a rehabilitation technique for TBI or stroke.

Here
we can see the effect of HEG repetition on various brain functions.
Note that accuracy is self-limiting and cannot progress much after
good accuracy is achieved.
The other bars show substantial gains up to 40 completed
sessions.
Saturation has not been a limiting factor.
Record keeping has always been a part of my work. Here it is
valuable in helping determine where to stop,
HEG = Blood flow
= Angiogenesis
SPECT
Blood Flow Map
Yellow = Normal Flow.
Blue = Very Low Flow.
|
These SPECT brain maps of blood distribution clearly show angiogenesis at work in HEG training in this bipolar patient.
In the SPECT blood distribution maps yellow is normal, red is two standard deviations
above normal. Light blue is two standard deviations below normal and dark blue is 4 standard deviations below normal

Here, lower left frontal view, note the dark temporal lobes. Blood flow here is more than two standard deviations below normal. Compare the changes after 23 sessions of HEG

Here we see angiogenesis at work. The temporal lobes are now normal.

Here is the working side of the headband. The two inboard light areas hide the optical receiver on the left. The red and infrared lights are on the right. The two black buttons hold an optional gauze towel in place.

It's as easy as putting on your hat!
|