UDC

612.821

DOI

10.37482/2687-1491-Z025

Authors

Yuliya S. Dzhos* ORCID: 0000-0003-1635-5140
Irina A. Men’shikova** ORCID: 0000-0002-6323-8329
*Okkervil Paediatric Centre (Leningrad Region, Russian Federation)
**Northern (Arctic) Federal University named after M.V. Lomonosov (Arkhangelsk, Russian Federation)
Corresponding author: Irina Men’shikova, address: nab. Severnoy Dviny 17, Arkhangelsk, 163002, Russian Federation; e-mail: Irinamen2014@yandex.ru

Abstract

This article presents the results of the study on spectral electroencephalogram (EEG) characteristics in 7–10-year-old children (8 girls and 22 boys) having difficulties with voluntary regulation of activity after 10 and 20 neurofeedback sessions using beta-activating training. Brain bioelectric activity was recorded in 16 standard leads using the Neuron-Spectrum-4/VPM complex. The dynamics was assessed by EEG beta and theta bands during neurofeedback. An increase in the total power of beta band oscillations was established both after 10 and after 20 sessions of EEG biofeedback in the frontal (p ≤ 0.001), left parietal (p ≤ 0.036), and temporal (p ≤ 0.003) areas of the brain. A decrease in the spectral characteristics of theta band oscillations was detected: after 10 neurofeedback sessions in the frontal (p ≤ 0.008) and temporal (p ≤ 0.006) areas of both hemispheres, as well as in the parietal area of the left hemisphere (p ≤ 0.005); after 20 sessions, in the central (p ≤ 0.004), frontal (p ≤ 0.001) and temporal (p ≤ 0.001) areas of both hemispheres, as well as in the occipital (p ≤ 0.047) and parietal (p ≤ 0.001) areas of the left hemisphere. The study into the dynamics of bioelectric activity during biofeedback using EEG parameters in 7–10-year-old children with impaired voluntary regulation of higher mental functions allowed us to prove the advisability of 20 sessions, as the increase in high-frequency activity and decrease in low-frequency activity do not stop with the 10th session. Changes in these parameters after 10 EEG biofeedback sessions are expressed mainly in the frontotemporal areas of both hemispheres, while after a course of 20 sessions, in both the frontotemporal and central parietal areas of the brain.

Keywords

primary school-age children, neurofeedback, electroencephalogram, spectral analysis, impaired voluntary regulation

References

1. Semenova O.A., Machinskaya R.I., Lomakin D.I. The Influence of the Functional State of Brain Regulatory Systems on the Programming, Selective Regulation and Control of Cognitive Activity in Children: I. Neuropsychological and EEG Analysis of Age-Related Changes in Brain Regulatory Functions in Children Aged 9–12 Years. Hum. Physiol., 2015, vol. 41, no. 4, pp. 345–355. DOI: 10.1134/S036211971504012X
2. Pankov M.N., Gribanov A.V., Deputat I.S., Startseva L.F., Nekhoroshkova A.N. Kliniko-fiziologicheskie proyavleniya sindroma defitsita vnimaniya s giperaktivnost’yu u detey (obzor literatury) [Clinical and Physiological Characteristics of Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder in Children (Review)]. Vestnik novykh meditsinskikh tekhnologiy, 2013, vol. 20, no. 3, pp. 91–97.
3. Machinskaya R.I., Krupskaya E.V. Mezhdistsiplinarnyy podkhod k issledovaniyu i differentsiatsii variantov SDVG u detey mladshego shkol’nogo vozrasta [Interdisciplinary Approach to the Study and Differentiation of ADHD Variants in Primary School Children]. Vestnik Pomorskogo universiteta, 2007, no. 4, pp. 8–15.
4. Gribanov A.V. (ed.). Ocherki psikhofiziologii detey s sindromom defitsita vnimaniya s giperaktivnost’yu [Essays on Psychophysiology of Children with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder]. Arkhangelsk, 2009. 242 p.
5. Soyko K.V. Osobennosti razvitiya funktsiy programmirovaniya, regulyatsii i kontrolya mladshikh shkol’nikov s trudnostyami obucheniya [Features of Development of Programming, Regulation and Control Functions in Primary Schoolchildren]. Nauchnye stremleniya, 2016, no. 19, pp. 84–88.
6. Dzhafarova O.A., Danilenko E.N. Neyrobioupravlenie v korrektsii sindroma defitsita vnimaniya i giperaktivnosti shkol’nikov [Neurobiofeedback in the Correction of Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder in Schoolchildren]. Otkrytoe obrazovanie, 2016, no. 2, pp. 93–96. DOI: 10.21686/1818-4243-2016-2-93-96
7. Grin’-Yatsenko V.A., Kropotov Yu.D., Ponomarev V.A., Chutko L.S., Yakovenko E.A. Ispol’zovanie metoda biologicheskoy obratnoy svyazi po elektroentsefalogramme v korrektsii narusheniy vnimaniya u detey [The Use of Neurofeedback in Correcting Attention Deficit in Children]. Shtark M.B., Shvarts M. (eds.). Bioupravlenie-4: Teoriya i praktika [Biofeedback-4: Theory and Practice]. Novosibirsk, 2002, pp. 108–116.
8. Danilenko E.N., Dzhafarova O.A. Korrektsiya sindroma defitsita vnimaniya i giperaktivnosti u mladshikh shkol’nikov [Correction of Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder in Primary Schoolchildren]. Aktual’nye problemy psikhologii i pedagogiki: diagnostika, preventsiya, korrektsiya [Current Issues of Psychology and Pedagogy: Diagnosis, Prevention, Correction]. Pt. 1. Novosibirsk, 2016, pp. 73–76.
9. Schmitt G. Veränderungen des QEEG bei Kindern mit einer ADHS nach Neurofeedback-Training der langsamen kortikalen Potentiale. Dissertation der Eberhard Karls Universität zu Tübingen. Erlangen, 2014. 75 p.
10. Dzhos Yu.S., Men’shikova I.A. Possible Use of Neurofeedback to Increase the Functional Capacity of the Brain (Review). J. Med. Biol. Res., 2019, vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 338–348. DOI: 10.17238/issn2542-1298.2019.7.3.338
11. Thompson L., Thompson M., Reid A. Neurofeedback Outcomes in Clients with Asperger’s Syndrome. Appl. Psychophysiol. Biofeedback, 2010, vol. 35, no. 1, pp. 63–81.
12. Shtark M.B., Skok A.B. Primenenie elektroentsefalograficheskogo bioupravleniya v klinicheskoy praktike (literaturnyy obzor) [The Use of Neurofeedback in Clinical Practice (Literature Review)]. Shtark M.B., Koll R. (eds.). Bioupravlenie-3: Teoriya i praktika [Biofeedback-3: Theory and Practice]. Novosibirsk, 1998, pp. 131–139.
13. Drechsler R. Ist Neurofeedbacktraining eine wirksame Therapiemethode zur Behandlung von ADHS? Ein Überblick über aktuelle Befunde. Z. Neuropsychol., 2011, vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 131–146.
14. Fokina Yu.O., Pavlenko V.B., Kulichenko A.M. Vozmozhnye mekhanizmy deystviya biologicheskoy obratnoy svyazi po elektroentsefalogramme [The Possible Mechanisms of Neurofeedback Action]. Uchenye zapiski Tavricheskogo natsional’nogo universiteta im. V.I. Vernadskogo. Ser.: Biologiya, khimiya, 2008, vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 107–116.
15. Kahana M.J., Seelig D., Madsen J.R. Theta Returns. Curr. Opin. Neurobiol., 2001, vol. 11, no. 6, pp. 739–744.