Why the study?
Does biofeedback training improve psychological stress, salivary cortisol, and regional gray matter volume in participants?
Does biofeedback training improve psychological stress, salivary cortisol, and regional gray matter volume in participants?
Biofeedback training for 5 minutes daily over 28 days improves psychological stress markers and increases gray matter volume in brain regions vulnerable to stress.
Supports short daily biofeedback for stress management; extends RCT evidence of gray matter plasticity in stress-vulnerable regions.
BACKGROUND: The day-to-day causes of stress are called daily hassles. Daily hassles are correlated with ill health. Biofeedback (BF) is one of the tools used for acquiring stress-coping skills. However, the anatomical correlates of the effects of BF with long training periods remain unclear. In this study, we aimed to investigate this. METHODS: PARTICIPANTS WERE ASSIGNED RANDOMLY TO TWO GROUPS: the intervention group and the control group. Participants in the intervention group performed a biofeedback training (BFT) task (a combination task for heart rate and cerebral blood flow control) every day, for about 5 min once a day. The study outcomes included MRI, psychological tests (e.g., Positive and Negative Affect Schedule, Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale, and Brief Job Stress Questionnaire), and a stress marker (salivary cortisol levels) before (day 0) and after (day 28) the intervention. RESULTS: We observed significant improvements in the psychological test scores and salivary cortisol levels in the intervention group compared to the control group. Furthermore, voxel-based morphometric analysis revealed that compared to the control group, the intervention group had significantly increased regional gray matter (GM) volume in the right lateral orbitofrontal cortex, which is an anatomical cluster that includes mainly the left hippocampus, and the left subgenual anterior cingulate cortex. The GM regions are associated with the stress response, and, in general, these regions seem to be the most sensitive to the detrimental effects of stress. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that our BFT is effective against the GM structures vulnerable to stress.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kotozaki et al. (2014) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: