Advertisement

Biofeedback in the Treatment of Neuromuscular Disorders

  • Pola Engel-Sittenfeld
Part of the NATO Conference Series book series (NATOCS, volume 2)

Abstract

In this chapter the published papers and few yet unpublished abstracts on the treatment of neuromuscular disorders through biofeedback are reviewed. The term “neuromuscular disorders” as it is used here includes some areas that usually are not treated by physical rehabilitation methods, but render themselves apparently to biofeedback treatment, e.g. recto-sphincter responses (Kohlenberg, 1973; Engel, Nikoomanesh, & Schuster, 1974). Here as in the other cases described in the review, a muscular response that in healthy persons is voluntary, has lost this property due to disease and an attempt is made to reinstitute regular activity through operant conditioning procedures. Since the first major review on clinical applications of biofeedback (Blanchard & Young, 1974) the literature in this specific part of biofeedback research has vastly grown, including a large variety of approaches. Where some researchers seem to be mainly design oriented, others try to use biofeedback methods from a more clinical point of view. The earlier articles focus strongly on the technical side of biofeedback and describe in detail the application of this new method to a variety of disorders, resulting in rather anecdotal case reports (e.g., Marinacci & Horande, 1960). This broad range of intentions and resulting designs make it difficult for the reader to find out which disorders have been treated, the nature of the treatment, and the success of the outcome. The present review is therefore organized around the clinical symptom, and is mainly descriptive in nature. Final conclusions are only drawn in areas where the accumulated evidence is large enough to allow such a decision. In quite a few instances, judgements are left to the reader, who might or might not be willing to accept the evidence for his particular intentions.

Keywords

Cerebral Palsy Peripheral Nerve Injury Neuromuscular Disorder Single Motor Unit Feedback Training 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Andrews, J. M. Neuromuscular re-education of the hemiphlegic with the aid of the electromyography. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 1964, 45, 530–532.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Amato, A., Hermsmeyer, C. A., & Kleinman, K. M. Use of electromyographic feedback to increase inhibitory control of spastic muscles. Physical Therapy, 1973, 53, 1063–1066.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Ballard, P., Doerr, H., & Varni, J. Arrest of a disabling eye disorder using biofeedback. Psychophysiology, 1972, 9, 271.Google Scholar
  4. Basmajian, J. V., Kukulka, Narayan, & Takebe. Biofeedback treatment of foot drop after stroke compared with standard rehabilitation technique: Effects on voluntary control and strength. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 1975, 56, 231–236.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Blanchard, E. B., & Young, L. D. Clinical applications of biofeedback training. Archives of General Psychiatry, 1974, 30, 573–589.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Booker, H. E., Rubow, R. T., & Coleman, P. J. Simplified feedback in neuromuscular retraining: An automated approach using electromyographic signals. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 1969, 50, 621–625.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Brudny, J., Grynbaum, B. B., & Korein, J. Spasmodic torticollis: Treatment by feedback display of the EMG. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 1974, 55, 403–408.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Brudny, J., Korein, J., Levidow, L., Grynbaum, B. B., Lieberman, A., & Friedman, L. W. Sensory feedback therapy as a modality of treatment in central nervous system disorders of voluntary movement. Neurology, 1974, 24, 925–932.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Brudny, J., Korein, J., Grynbaum, B. B., Friedman, L. W., Weinstein, S., Sachs-Frankel, G., & Belandres, P. V. EMG feedback therapy: Review of treatment of 114 patients. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 1976, 57, 55–61.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Cleeland, C. S. Behavioral technics in the modification of spasmodic torticollis. Neurology, 1973, 23, 1241–1247.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Engel, B. T., Nikoomanesh, P., & Schuster, M. M. Operant conditioning of rectosphincteric responses in the treatment of fecal incontinence. The New England Journal of Medicine, 1974, 646–649.Google Scholar
  12. Finley, W. W., Niman, C., Standley, J., & Ender, P. Frontal EMG biofeedback training of athetoid cerebral palsy patients: A report of six cases. Biofeedback & Self-regulation, 1976, in press.Google Scholar
  13. Finley, W. W., Niman, C., Standley, J., & Wansley, R. A. Electrophysiologic behavior modification of frontal EMG in cerebral palsy children (Manuscript). Tulsa, Oklahoma: Research Psychology Department Children’s Medical Center, 1976.Google Scholar
  14. Gavin, J., & Stephen, K. Biofeedback muscle re-education: A review of ten clinical cases. 1976.Google Scholar
  15. Harrison, A., & Connolly, K. The conscious control of fine levels of neuromuscular firing in spastic and normal subjects. Developmental Medicine and Child Neurology, 1971, 13, 762–771.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Jacobs, A., & Felton, G. S. Visual feedback of myoelectric output to facilitate muscle relaxation in normal persons and patients with neck injuries. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 1969, 1, 34–39.Google Scholar
  17. Johnson, H. E., & Garton, W. H. Muscle re-education in hemiphlegia by use of electromyographic device. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 1973, 54, 320–325.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Kohlenberg, R. J. Operant conditioning of human anal sphincter pressure. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1973, 6, 201–208.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. MacPherson, E. L. R. Control of involuntary movement. Behavior Research and Therapy, 1967, 5, 143–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Marinacci, A. A., & Horande, M. Electromyogram in neuromuscular re-education. Bulletin of the Los Angeles Neurological Society, 1960, 25, 57–71.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Netsell, R., & Cleeland, C. S. Modification of lip hypertonia in dysarthria using EMG feedback. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 1973, 38, 131–140.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Nusselt, L., & Legewie, H. Biofeedback and systematische Desensibilisierung bei Parkinson-Tremor: Eine Fallstudie. Zeitschrift für Klinische Psychologie, 1975, 4, 112–123.Google Scholar
  23. Simard, T. G., & Ladd, H. W. Differential control of muscle segments by quadriplegic patients: An electromyographic procedural investigation. Archives of Physical Therapy, 1971, 447–454.Google Scholar
  24. Spearing, D. L., & Poppen, R. Single case study: The use of feedback in the reduction of foot dragging in a cerebral palsied client. The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 1974, 159, 148–151.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Stephenson, N. L. Successful treatment of blepharospasm with relaxation training and biofeedback. Paper presented at the 7th Annual Meeting of the Biofeedback Research Society, Colorado Springs, February 27-March 2, 1976.Google Scholar
  26. Swaan, D., van Wieringer, P. C. W., & Fokkema, S. D. Auditory electromyographic feedback therapy to inhibit undesired motor activity. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 1974, 55, 251–254.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Press, New York 1977

Authors and Affiliations

  • Pola Engel-Sittenfeld
    • 1
  1. 1.Abteilung für Experimentelle und Klinische PsychologieNervenklinik der Universität MünchenGermany

Personalised recommendations