Feasibility of using a biofeedback device in mindfulness training - a pilot randomized controlled trial.
Biofeedback
College students
Meditation
Randomized controlled trial
Stress
Training
Journal
Pilot and feasibility studies
ISSN: 2055-5784
Titre abrégé: Pilot Feasibility Stud
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101676536
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
24 Mar 2021
24 Mar 2021
Historique:
received:
14
03
2019
accepted:
01
03
2021
entrez:
25
3
2021
pubmed:
26
3
2021
medline:
26
3
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Stress can negatively impact an individual's health and well-being and high levels of stress are noted to exist among college students today. While traditional treatment methods are plagued with stigma and transfer problems, newly developed wearable biofeedback devices may offer unexplored possibilities. Although these products are becoming commonplace and inexpensive, scientific evidence of the effectiveness of these products is scarce and their feasibility within research contexts are relatively unexplored. Conversely, companies are not required, and possibly reluctant, to release information on the efficacy of these products against their claims. Thus, in the present pilot, we assess the feasibility of using a real-time respiratory-based biofeedback device in preparation for a larger study. Our main aims were to assess device-adherence and collaboration with the company that develops and sells the device. Data were collected from 39 college students who self-identified as experiencing chronic stress at a Southwestern university in the USA. Students were randomized into either a mindfulness-only control group without a biofeedback device (n = 21), or an experimental group with biofeedback device (n = 18). Both groups received mindfulness meditation training. Pre-test and post-test procedures were conducted 2 weeks apart. Further, both participant compliance and company compliance were assessed and collaboration with the company was evaluated. Participant device-adherence as well as the company's collaboration necessary for a full-scale study was determined to be low. This may also have affected our results which showed a strong main effect for time for all outcome variables, suggesting all groups showed improvement in their levels of stress after the intervention period. No group by time effects were identified, however, indicating no added benefit of the biofeedback device. Our findings suggest feasibility of future studies requires full collaboration and detailed and agreed upon data sharing procedures with the biofeedback company. The particular device under investigation added no value to the intervention outcomes and it was not feasible to continue a larger-scale study. Further, as the technology sector is innovating faster than it can validate products, we urge for open science collaborations between public and private sectors to properly develop evidence-based regulations that can withstand technological innovation while maintaining product quality, safety, and effectiveness. NCT02837016 . Registered 19 July 2016.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Stress can negatively impact an individual's health and well-being and high levels of stress are noted to exist among college students today. While traditional treatment methods are plagued with stigma and transfer problems, newly developed wearable biofeedback devices may offer unexplored possibilities. Although these products are becoming commonplace and inexpensive, scientific evidence of the effectiveness of these products is scarce and their feasibility within research contexts are relatively unexplored. Conversely, companies are not required, and possibly reluctant, to release information on the efficacy of these products against their claims. Thus, in the present pilot, we assess the feasibility of using a real-time respiratory-based biofeedback device in preparation for a larger study. Our main aims were to assess device-adherence and collaboration with the company that develops and sells the device.
METHOD
METHODS
Data were collected from 39 college students who self-identified as experiencing chronic stress at a Southwestern university in the USA. Students were randomized into either a mindfulness-only control group without a biofeedback device (n = 21), or an experimental group with biofeedback device (n = 18). Both groups received mindfulness meditation training. Pre-test and post-test procedures were conducted 2 weeks apart. Further, both participant compliance and company compliance were assessed and collaboration with the company was evaluated.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Participant device-adherence as well as the company's collaboration necessary for a full-scale study was determined to be low. This may also have affected our results which showed a strong main effect for time for all outcome variables, suggesting all groups showed improvement in their levels of stress after the intervention period. No group by time effects were identified, however, indicating no added benefit of the biofeedback device.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Our findings suggest feasibility of future studies requires full collaboration and detailed and agreed upon data sharing procedures with the biofeedback company. The particular device under investigation added no value to the intervention outcomes and it was not feasible to continue a larger-scale study. Further, as the technology sector is innovating faster than it can validate products, we urge for open science collaborations between public and private sectors to properly develop evidence-based regulations that can withstand technological innovation while maintaining product quality, safety, and effectiveness.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
BACKGROUND
NCT02837016 . Registered 19 July 2016.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33762016
doi: 10.1186/s40814-021-00807-1
pii: 10.1186/s40814-021-00807-1
pmc: PMC7988913
doi:
Banques de données
ClinicalTrials.gov
['NCT02837016']
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
84Références
Appl Psychophysiol Biofeedback. 2007 Mar;32(1):19-30
pubmed: 17333315
Appl Psychophysiol Biofeedback. 2015 Dec;40(4):257-68
pubmed: 26111942
Med Biol Eng Comput. 2003 Jul;41(4):377-83
pubmed: 12892358
J Pers Soc Psychol. 1979 Apr;37(4):564-71
pubmed: 448632
Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 2000 Jan;24(1):48-52
pubmed: 10656192
Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci. 2007 Jun;7(2):109-19
pubmed: 17672382
J Adolesc Health. 2010 Jan;46(1):3-10
pubmed: 20123251
J Abnorm Psychol. 1998 Feb;107(1):17-26
pubmed: 9505035
Med Care Res Rev. 2009 Oct;66(5):522-41
pubmed: 19454625
Ann Emerg Med. 2005 Jan;45(1):68-76
pubmed: 15635313
Emotion. 2010 Feb;10(1):72-82
pubmed: 20141304
Perspect Psychol Sci. 2018 Jan;13(1):36-61
pubmed: 29016274
Clin Psychol Rev. 2014 Mar;34(2):130-40
pubmed: 24487344
BMC Public Health. 2013 Aug 06;13:724
pubmed: 23919651
IEEE J Biomed Health Inform. 2017 Mar;21(2):361-371
pubmed: 28055927
J Affect Disord. 2015 Mar 1;173:90-6
pubmed: 25462401
Int J Psychophysiol. 1994 Jul;17(2):103-28
pubmed: 7995774
Appl Psychophysiol Biofeedback. 2008 Mar;33(1):55-61
pubmed: 18286369
World Psychiatry. 2014 Feb;13(1):56-67
pubmed: 24497254
Exp Physiol. 2008 Sep;93(9):1011-21
pubmed: 18487316
J Nurs Educ. 1995 Jan;34(1):5-10
pubmed: 7876913
Eur Arch Psychiatry Clin Neurosci. 2003 Dec;253(6):313-20
pubmed: 14714121
Asian Nurs Res (Korean Soc Nurs Sci). 2012 Dec;6(4):121-7
pubmed: 25031113
J Health Soc Behav. 1983 Dec;24(4):385-96
pubmed: 6668417
Dialogues Clin Neurosci. 2017 Jun;19(2):93-107
pubmed: 28867934
Med Care. 2007 Jul;45(7):594-601
pubmed: 17571007
J Neurosci. 2006 Apr 19;26(16):4415-25
pubmed: 16624961
Depress Anxiety. 2013 Jul;30(7):654-61
pubmed: 23592556
Psychophysiology. 1983 May;20(3):284-300
pubmed: 6408680
Biol Psychol. 1992 Nov;34(2-3):93-130
pubmed: 1467397
Br J Psychol. 2004 Nov;95(Pt 4):509-21
pubmed: 15527535
Cleve Clin J Med. 2008 Mar;75 Suppl 2:S31-4
pubmed: 18540143
J Nurs Educ. 2015 Sep;54(9):520-4
pubmed: 26334339
Colorectal Dis. 2015 Apr;17(4):335-41
pubmed: 25406932
J Genet Psychol. 1994 Sep;155(3):321-30
pubmed: 7964658
J Pers Soc Psychol. 1993 Oct;65(4):781-91
pubmed: 8229650
World Psychiatry. 2016 Oct;15(3):245-258
pubmed: 27717254
Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2008 Dec;65(12):1429-37
pubmed: 19047530
Psychol Sch. 2017 Jan;54(1):29-52
pubmed: 28458403
Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol. 2008 Aug;43(8):667-72
pubmed: 18398558
Psychol Assess. 2015 Sep;27(3):944-54
pubmed: 25774638
Dtsch Arztebl Int. 2014 Jul 7;111(27-28):473-80
pubmed: 25138725
J Health Psychol. 2016 Jul;21(7):1415-25
pubmed: 25370569
J Nerv Ment Dis. 2007 Jun;195(6):521-31
pubmed: 17568301
Int J Psychophysiol. 1997 Sep;27(2):153-9
pubmed: 9342646
Issues Ment Health Nurs. 2012 Mar;33(3):149-56
pubmed: 22364426
J Psychosom Res. 2004 Jul;57(1):35-43
pubmed: 15256293
Addict Behav. 2009 Feb;34(2):134-45
pubmed: 18851897
Appl Psychophysiol Biofeedback. 2009 Jun;34(2):135-43
pubmed: 19396540
Appl Psychophysiol Biofeedback. 2018 Sep;43(3):217-225
pubmed: 29971702
J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 2016 Jan;57(1):30-38
pubmed: 25981677
Big Data. 2013 Jun;1(2):85-99
pubmed: 27442063
J Sports Sci Med. 2016 Aug 05;15(3):540-547
pubmed: 27803634
Monogr Soc Res Child Dev. 1994;59(2-3):167-86
pubmed: 7984159
Teach Learn Med. 2003 Spring;15(2):88-92
pubmed: 12708065
Am J Physiol. 1981 Oct;241(4):H620-9
pubmed: 7315987
PLoS One. 2015 Sep 23;10(9):e0137173
pubmed: 26397109
J Affect Disord. 2000 Dec;61(3):201-16
pubmed: 11163422
Annu Rev Clin Psychol. 2005;1:167-95
pubmed: 17716086