Impact of Mobile Neurofeedback on Internet Addiction and Neurocognitive Function in Neurotypical Children: Double-Blind, Sham-Controlled Randomized Clinical Trial

Abstract

Objective The purpose of this study was to evaluate the positive impact of mobile neurofeedback (MNF) in neurotypical children compared to sham mobile neurofeedback. Methods Neurotypical children aged 10–15 participated in the study. All subjects were assessed using the Kiddie Schedule for Affective Disorders and Schizophrenia Present and Lifetime Version Korean Version (K-SADS-PL-K) and confirmed to have no psychiatric symptoms. The participants were randomly assigned to the MNF active (N=31) or sham control (N=30) groups. The MNF program was administered using a mobile app for 30 min/day, 3 days/week, for 3 months. All participants and their parents completed self-report scales and participants complete neurocognitive function assessments including the continuous performance test, Stroop, children’s color trails test-1 and 2, and intelligence test at baseline and after the 3-month MNF program. Results This study involved 61 participants (mean [SD] age, 11.24 [1.84] years; 30 male participants [49.2%]). To verify the difference between the MNF group and the sham group, 2(MNF-Sham) X 2(Pre-Post) repeated measures ANOVA was performed. The main effect of the K-scale (Korea Internet addiction scale) between-group factor (MNF vs Sham) was not significant, but the main effect of the within-group factor (Pre vs Post) was significant (F=7.595, p=0.008). The interaction effect of between-group factors and within-group factors was also significant (F=5.979, p=0.017). In other self-reported scales of children and parents and neurocognitive function assessments, there was no significant difference between the two groups. Conclusion Active mobile neurofeedback significantly improved children’s K-scale score compared to the sham group. Therefore, mobile neurofeedback could be an easy-to-access therapeutic option for children at risk of Internet addiction. On the other hand, there was no significant difference in other scales and neurocognitive function. A 3-month intervention may not have been long enough to cause change, so longer interventions are needed for confirmation.