EEG Biofeedback: A Generalized Approach to Neuroregulation

By Siegfried Othmer, Susan F. Othmer, and David A. Kaiser

To appear in "APPLIED NEUROPHYSIOLOGY
& BRAIN BIOFEEDBACK"
Edited by Rob Kall, Joe Kamiya, and Gary Schwartz

Page 12 of 13

Major Head Injury
The distinction between major and minor head trauma is a medical one. It is a question of whether there was a skull fracture or other major organic injury such as a hematoma. In the absence of such gross organic injury, it is referred to as minor head trauma, irrespective of symptom severity, as already mentioned. The reason, therefore, that major head injury is listed in the category of our most difficult challenges, relates to the variety in which major head injury manifests as a result of the specific organic injury, and because such organic injury may limit the extent of the recovery.

By virtue of such specific loss of function, much of the work needs to be directed to the evaluation and remediation of the specific deficits traceable to such injury. Many of the issues, however, are identical to those that predominate in minor head injury, and respond just as readily and quickly. A hierarchy emerges in which the general effects of head injury'major or minor'are treated with the standard protocols as a first order of business. The residual specific effects traceable to the organic injury are usually addressed last.

Chronic Fatigue Syndrome

EEG biofeedback training has been found to be helpful with Chronic Fatigue Syndrome, or Chronic Fatigue Immune Deficiency Syndrome (CFIDS), as well as with its diagnostic cousin, Fibromyalgia. The benefits of the training are the most dramatic in those who are not totally disabled by CFIDS. However, nearly everyone can benefit to a certain extent from the training, particularly in the context of a multi- dimensional program of recovery.

Herein lay the clue for EEG biofeedback training. CFS sufferers did not so much need beta training for higher energy level and a higher level of functioning. Beta training did indeed confer those benefits, but they were usually transitory, and often met with an adverse rebound later. CFS was not an ordinary depressive syndrome, although it had depressive features. There appeared to be in many CFS sufferers a considerable efforting in spite of their condition. Thus, EEG training became a matter of getting them to ease up on themselves and learn to work out of a more relaxed state. Hence, lower frequency (SMR) training was introduced, and now predominates in our approach to CFS.

Fibromyalgia has already been discussed in terms of chronic pain. It is observed that the pain component of fibromyalgia responds primarily to the higher-frequency (beta) training, to which it often responds quite readily. Other aspects of fibromyalgia such as fatigue and anger require the lower- frequency training, and may have more ambiguous outcomes.

In summary, chronic fatigue and fibromyalgia should be addressed in the context of a multi-disciplinary approach involving medical management, nutritional support, and other interventions. In such a context, EEG biofeedback can be a significant aid in recovery. Nevertheless, it should be made clear that there is no suggestion that EEG training addresses the core issues of CFS or fibromyalgia, which remain obscure.

Autoimmune Dysfunction

It is been a fairly consistent though quite remarkable observation that EEG biofeedback training can be helpful in the management of autoimmune diseases such as Crohn's disease, lupus, multiple sclerosis, Type I diabetes, and in some cases rheumatoid arthritis. There is no implication that EEG biofeedback in any sense addresses the core issue here of autoimmune disease. However, the training does frequently improve the level of function in afflicted individuals. Thus, in Type I diabetes we have seen reductions in symptoms traceable to peripheral neuropathy in long-term diabetics; we have seen reduction in the incidence and severity of lupus episodes; we have seen essentially complete symptom regression in Crohn's disease; other researchers using the same methods have observed significant remediation of M/S symptomatology in some cases; and we have observed diminution of pain in some cases of rheumatoid arthritis.

The level of clinical experience from which the above has been drawn is indicated in Table 7. The categories here may be overlapping. That is, a person may be counted in the ADHD category and also in the migraine category. Also, reference is to the key symptomatology that the person manifests, irrespective of whether established clinical diagnostic criteria are met. This means that in our clinical practice no such threshold is applied as to whether a person qualifies for training; hence there is no need to make a specific determination regarding diagnostic threshold criteria. In actual experience, it is found that the persons referred for training manifest rather severe forms of these various disorders. For many, coming to biofeedback is the end of a very long road of unsatisfactory remedies. Hence, there is usually very little question about their meeting clinical criteria. More than likely, it would be a matter of multiple diagnoses.

Table 7. Conditions Impacted Favorably with EEG Biofeedback Training.

Click for Next Page