Key result
Neurofeedback training significantly improved physical stress biomarkers, including increased heart rate variability (p=0.036) and decreased skin conductance (p=0.029), compared to no intervention in late adolescents.
Why the study?
Does neurofeedback training improve physical and psychoemotional stress responses and self-regulation in late adolescents?
Does neurofeedback training improve physical and psychoemotional stress responses and self-regulation in late adolescents?
Absolute Event Rate: 105.66% vs 83.37%
p-value: p=0.036
Neurofeedback training significantly improved physiological stress biomarkers (HRV and skin conductance) and psychoemotional stress responses in late adolescents, suggesting it may be an effective non-pharmacological nursing intervention for stress management.
Neurofeedback may support stress management in late adolescents; extends RCT evidence on autonomic biomarker changes.
PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to analyze the effects of neurofeedback training for reducing stress and enhancing self-regulation in late adolescence to identify the possibility of use for nursing intervention. METHODS: A nonequivalent control group pre-post quasi-experimental design was used. Participants were 78 late adolescents assigned to the experimental group (n=39) that received the neurofeedback training and the control group (n=39). Data were collected on heart rate variability (HRV) and skin conductance level (SCL) to assess stress-biomarker response. The questionnaire contained 164 items from: Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS), Symptom Checklist-90-Revised (SCL-90-R) and Self-regulatory Ability scale. The neurofeedback training was based on the general adaptation syndrome and body-mind medicine. The intervention was conducted in a total of 10 sessions for 30 minutes per session with high-beta, theta and sensory motor rhythm training on scalp at central zero. RESULTS: There were significant difference in standard deviation of normal to normal interval (p=.036) in HRV and SCL (p=.029) of stress-biomarker response between the two groups. Negative affect (p=.036) in PANAS and obsessive compulsive (p=.023) and depression (p<.001) in SCL-90-R were statistically significant. Self-regulation mode (p=.004) in self-regulation ability scale showed a significant difference between the two groups. CONCLUSION: The results indicated that the neurofeedback training is effective in stress-biomarkers, psychoemotional stress response and self-regulation. Therefore, neurofeedback training using neuroscientific approach based on brain-mind-body model can be used as an effective nursing intervention for late adolescents in clinics and communities for effective stress responses.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Choi et al. (2018) studied Stress in late adolescence (n=78). Neurofeedback training vs. No intervention was evaluated on Standard deviation of normal to normal interval (SDNN) in heart rate variability (p=0.036). Neurofeedback training significantly improved physical stress biomarkers, including increased heart rate variability (p=0.036) and decreased skin conductance (p=0.029), compared to no intervention in late adolescents.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: