Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37293401›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychiatry2023

Implementing biofeedback treatment in a psychosomatic-psychotherapeutic inpatient unit: a mixed methods evaluation of acceptance, satisfaction, and feasibility.

Kira Schmidt, Drazena Barac-Dammeyer, Axel Kowalski, Per Teigelack, Corinna Pfeiffer, Anita Robitzsch, Nora Dörrie, Eva-Maria Skoda, Alexander Bäuerle, Madeleine Fink and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychiatry, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 24% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Kira SchmidtDepartment for Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, LVR-University Hospital Essen, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany.
Drazena Barac-DammeyerDepartment for Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, LVR-University Hospital Essen, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany.
Axel KowalskiNeuroFit GmbH, Krefeld, Germany.
Per TeigelackDepartment for Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, LVR-University Hospital Essen, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany.
Corinna PfeifferDepartment for Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, LVR-University Hospital Essen, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany.
Anita RobitzschDepartment for Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, LVR-University Hospital Essen, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany.
Nora DörrieDepartment for Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, LVR-University Hospital Essen, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany.
Eva-Maria SkodaDepartment for Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, LVR-University Hospital Essen, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany.
Alexander BäuerleDepartment for Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, LVR-University Hospital Essen, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany.
Madeleine FinkDepartment for Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, LVR-University Hospital Essen, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany.
Martin TeufelDepartment for Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, LVR-University Hospital Essen, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany.
University of Duisburg-Essen · DEIB Hochschule · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Feedback-based therapies such as biofeedback have a benefit in patients with mental health disorders. While biofeedback is heavily researched in outpatient settings, it has been rarely investigated in psychosomatic inpatient settings. The implementation of an additional treatment option in inpatient settings holds special requirements. The aim of this pilot study is the evaluation of additional biofeedback treatment in an inpatient psychosomatic-psychotherapeutic unit to derive clinical implications and recommendations for the future implementation of biofeedback offers. Methods: The evaluation of the implementation process was investigated using a convergent parallel mixed methods approach (following MMARS guidelines). Quantitative questionnaires measured patients' acceptance and satisfaction with biofeedback treatment after receiving 10 sessions in addition to treatment as usual. After 6 months during implementation, qualitative interviews were conducted with biofeedback practitioners, i.e., staff nurses, examining acceptance and feasibility. Data analysis was conducted using either descriptive statistics or Mayring's qualitative content analysis. Results: In total, 40 patients and 10 biofeedback practitioners were included. Quantitative questionnaires revealed high satisfaction and acceptance in patients regarding biofeedback treatment. Qualitative interviews showed high acceptance in biofeedback practitioners but revealed several challenges that were encountered during the implementation process, e.g., increased workload due to additional tasks, organizational and structural difficulties. However, biofeedback practitioners were enabled to expand their own competencies and take over a therapeutic part of the inpatient treatment. Discussion: Even though patient satisfaction and staff motivation are high, the implementation of biofeedback in an inpatient unit requires special actions to be taken. Not only should personnel resources be planned and available in advance of implementation but also be the workflow for biofeedback practitioners as easy and quality of biofeedback treatment as high as possible. Consequently, the implementation of a manualized biofeedback treatment should be considered. Nevertheless, more research needs to be done about suitable biofeedback protocols for this patient clientele.

Indexed as

biofeedbackimplementationinpatientmixed methodsneurofeedbackpsychosomatic

Identifiers

PMID37293401
PMCPMC10244572
OpenAlexW4378072486

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.