The effects of biofeedback for the treatment of essential hypertension: a systematic review

Authors: Greenhalgh J, Dickson R, Dundar Y

Journal: Health Technology Assessment Volume: 13 Issue: 46

Publication date: October 2009

DOI: 10.3310/hta13460

Citation:

Greenhalgh J, Dickson R, Dundar Y.The effects of biofeedback for the treatment of essential hypertension: a systematic review. Health Technol Assess 2009;13(46)


Download: Citation (for this publication as a .ris file) (2.7 KB)


Journal issues* can be purchased by completing the form.


The cost of reports varies according to number of pages and postage address. The minimum cost for a copy sent to a UK address is £30.00. We will contact you on receipt of your completed form to advise you of actual cost. If you have any queries, please contact nihredit@southampton.ac.uk.


*We regret that unfortunately we are unable to supply bound print copies of Health Technology Assessment published before issue 12:31. However, PDFs are available to print from the "Downloads" tab of the issue page.

Responses

No responses have been published. If you would like to submit a response to this publication, please do so using the form below.

Comments submitted to the NIHR Journals Library are electronic letters to the editor. They enable our readers to debate issues raised in research reports published in the Journals Library. We aim to post within 2 working days all responses that contribute substantially to the topic investigated, as determined by the Editors.

Your name and affiliations will be published with your comment.

Once published, you will not have the right to remove or edit your response. The Editors may add, remove, or edit comments at their absolute discretion.

Post your response

Surname

Forename

Middle Initial

Occupation / Job title

Affiliation / Employer

Email

Address

Other authors

For example, if you are responding as a team or group. Please ensure you include full names and separate these using commas

Statement of competing interests

We believe that readers should be aware of any competing interests (conflicts of interest).

The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) define competing interests as including: financial relationships with industry (for example through employment, consultancies, stock, ownership, honoraria, and expert testimony), either directly or through immediate family; personal relationships; academic competition; and intellectual passion.

If yes, provide details below:

Enter response title

Enter response message

Enter CAPTCHA

Security key

Regenerate security key

By submitting your response, you are stating that you agree to the terms & conditions

The full text of this issue is available as a PDF document from the Downloads section on this page.

Abstract

Objectives

To assess the evidence for the long-term effectiveness of biofeedback for the treatment of essential hypertension in adults and to model any clinical benefits.

Data sources

Bibliographic databases including the Cochrane Library, EMBASE, MEDLINE, ISI Web of Knowledge/Web of Science, ISI Web of Knowledge/ISI Proceedings, the Cochrane Library 2007, CINAHL, AMED and PsycINFO were searched up to May 2007.

Review methods

A systematic review following accepted guidelines was conducted. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared biofeedback procedures with antihypertensive medication, placebo (sham biofeedback treatment), no intervention or other behavioural treatments were included. The outcome measure was change in blood pressure.

Results

A total of 927 non-duplicate references were identified by the search strategy and subsequently screened for inclusion in the review. From these, 41 publications (including three abstracts) reporting 36 RCTs with a total population of 1660 treated patients met the inclusion criteria of the review. Twenty-one trials employed biofeedback treatment with no adjunctive therapy and 15 trials used biofeedback treatment alongside another treatment. The majority of trials were small with no post-treatment follow-up or follow-up of less than 6 months. The poor quality of the trials, differences in interventions and inconsistencies in the measurement of outcomes meant that it was inappropriate to pool data across studies. A narrative summary of the data based on trial author conclusions is presented. No studies reported long-term (> 12 months) follow-up of patients. Data were grouped first by treatment type and then by comparator. Trial results were variable and conflicting, demonstrating no consistent benefits of biofeedback in relation to moderation of hypertension. The lack of evidence of clinical effectiveness negated the need to conduct an economic analysis.

Conclusions

No evidence was found that consistently demonstrated the effectiveness of any particular biofeedback treatment in the control of essential hypertension when compared with pharmacotherapy, placebo (sham biofeedback treatment), no intervention or other behavioural treatments. Given the current standards for the treatment of hypertension, further research is likely to be considered only as an adjunct to pharmacological interventions.

Publication updates

If you would like to receive information on publications and the latest news, click below to sign up.