NCT03324178

Brief Summary

Difficulty to sustain attention over a prolonged period of time is one of the core difficulties experienced by people who have undergone traumatic brain injury. Rehabilitation of attention is often based on compensatory strategies, because of the limited impact of cognitive training on improving attentional capacity after brain injury. New therapeutic approaches to explore the plastic recovery of the brain after injury, and consequent performance improvement, are warranted. Neurofeedback (NFB) allows the self-regulation of brain activity using visual feedback. Very recently, it has been demonstrated that NFB training targeted at reducing alpha power (alpha desynchronization NFB), can induce initial plastic changes in brain networks associated with attention. It has been proposed that NFB can improve cognitive performance by tuning oscillatory activity of the brain towards a more healthy balance between neural network flexibility and stability. It is speculated that the use of alpha desynchronization NFB training, with people who present with brain injury, can enhance sustained attention in as much as the training promotes neural variability during resting state (i.e. more flexible network configuration) and neural stability during a sustained attention task (i.e. more stable network configuration). However, before assessing the effectiveness of the intervention, it is necessary to evaluate the feasibility and acceptability thereof. This study will recruit 14 participants and randomly assign them to two groups: a NFB group and a video games control group. Long-term changes will be evaluated at two time points for both groups: baseline and post-intervention. The NFB group will have a follow-up session one week after the intervention, to evaluate whether there are long lasting changes after NFB training. In addition, short-term changes of NFB will be evaluated for the experimental group, contrasting EEG activity immediately before and after the last NFB session.

Trial Health

87
On Track

Trial Health Score

Automated assessment based on enrollment pace, timeline, and geographic reach

Enrollment
8

participants targeted

Target at below P25 for not_applicable

Timeline
Completed

Started Feb 2018

Shorter than P25 for not_applicable

Geographic Reach
1 country

1 active site

Status
completed

Health score is calculated from publicly available data and should be used for screening purposes only.

Trial Relationships

Click on a node to explore related trials.

Study Timeline

Key milestones and dates

First Submitted

Initial submission to the registry

October 24, 2017

Completed
3 days until next milestone

First Posted

Study publicly available on registry

October 27, 2017

Completed
3 months until next milestone

Study Start

First participant enrolled

February 2, 2018

Completed
6 months until next milestone

Primary Completion

Last participant's last visit for primary outcome

July 17, 2018

Completed
Same day until next milestone

Study Completion

Last participant's last visit for all outcomes

July 17, 2018

Completed
Last Updated

February 27, 2019

Status Verified

February 1, 2019

Enrollment Period

6 months

First QC Date

October 24, 2017

Last Update Submit

February 26, 2019

Conditions

Keywords

NeurofeedbackAttention

Outcome Measures

Primary Outcomes (1)

  • Attentional performance - MAAS

    Change in score on Mindful Attention Awareness Scale (MAAS) 1. Mindful Attention Awareness Scale (MAAS), (Brown et al. 2003). It is a 15-item questionnaire that assesses day-to-day experiences of mind wandering. 2. Each of the 15 questions is rated with a number between 1 to 6, with 1 being "almost always" and 6 being "almost never". The total score is calculated by averaging the answers across the 15 items. The minimum score is 1 and the maximum score is 6. The questionnaire does not have subscales. 3. Higher scores reflect higher levels of mindfulness, this is considered to be a better outcome. Instead, lower scores reflect higher levels of mind wandering, this is considered to be a worst outcome. 4. No subscales are combined.

    Baseline and week 4

Secondary Outcomes (2)

  • Attentional performance - CTET

    Baseline, week 4 and week 5

  • Attentional performance - TEA

    Baseline and week 4

Study Arms (2)

Neurofeedback training

EXPERIMENTAL

Sixteen 30-minute sessions of neurofeedback training performed once a day over the course of four weeks (four sessions each week)

Behavioral: Neurofeedback training

Video game control group

ACTIVE COMPARATOR

Sixteen 30-minute sessions of playing video games once a day over the course of four weeks (four sessions each week)

Behavioral: Video game

Interventions

Sixteen 30-minute sessions of neurofeedback training over four weeks: 7 x 3-minute blocks of training flanked by a 3-minute resting state block with eyes-open.

Neurofeedback training
Video gameBEHAVIORAL

Sixteen 30-minute sessions of video game playing over four weeks: 7 x 3-minute blocks flanked by a 3-minute seated relaxation.

Video game control group

Eligibility Criteria

Age18 Years - 50 Years
Sexall
Healthy VolunteersNo
Age GroupsAdult (18-64)

You may qualify if:

  • normal or corrected to normal vision
  • able to provide consent
  • non-progressive brain injury
  • impairment of sustained attention
  • stable medication regime (expected not to change during the period of the study)
  • minimum computer literacy (owning a computer, laptop, tablet, ipad etc)
  • native English-speakers

You may not qualify if:

  • epilepsy
  • co-morbid progressive neurological or neurodegenerative condition
  • aggressive behaviour
  • unhealed scalp wounds
  • unable to give informed consent
  • unable to cooperate with the study protocol (e.g. severe aphasia, uncorrected impairment of hearing or vision, illiteracy or unable to understand English)
  • clinically unstable (e.g. due to major intercurrent illness)
  • undertaking changes in the existing treatment

Contact the study team to confirm eligibility.

Sponsors & Collaborators

Study Sites (1)

Brain Injury Rehabilitation Trust

Glasgow, United Kingdom

Location

MeSH Terms

Conditions

Brain Injuries

Condition Hierarchy (Ancestors)

Brain DiseasesCentral Nervous System DiseasesNervous System DiseasesCraniocerebral TraumaTrauma, Nervous SystemWounds and Injuries

Study Officials

  • Jon Evans, PhD

    Professor of Applied Neuropsychology

    STUDY DIRECTOR

Study Design

Study Type
interventional
Phase
not applicable
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Masking
NONE
Purpose
SUPPORTIVE CARE
Intervention Model
PARALLEL
Model Details: A pilot two-armed, parallel-design, individually randomised controlled trial, using stratified randomization with blocking
Sponsor Type
OTHER
Responsible Party
PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
PI Title
Professor of Applied Neuropsychology

Study Record Dates

First Submitted

October 24, 2017

First Posted

October 27, 2017

Study Start

February 2, 2018

Primary Completion

July 17, 2018

Study Completion

July 17, 2018

Last Updated

February 27, 2019

Record last verified: 2019-02

Locations