Video-coaching as biofeedback tool to improve gated treatments: Possibilities and limitations

Four-Dimensional Computed Tomography Based Respiratory-Gated Radiotherapy with Respiratory Guidance System: Analysis of Respiratory Signals and Dosimetric Comparison

“…The audiovisual feedback system significantly reduced the breathing motion compared to the free or the audio-guided breathing according to George et al [16]. Crossmann [23] and Goossens et al [24] also confirmed that the reproducibility was improved by adding the visual component. Thus, most of the studies on the respiratory signals using audio and/or visual devices during RT showed positive results with the device-assisted breathing compared to free breathing.…”

Planning 4-Dimensional Computed Tomography (4DCT) Cannot Adequately Represent Daily Intrafractional Motion of Abdominal Tumors

“…However, the effect of breathing coaching on the stability of the breathing pattern is still controversial. Cossmann (13) found that the breathing pattern is more stable during 4DCT acquisition using a video coaching tool, and George et al (14) suggested that breathing could be more reproducible from 4DCT to daily treatment. However, other studies have indicated that audio/video coaching has a minimal, if not negative, effect on the regularity of breathing amplitude (15,16).…”

Breathing guidance in radiation oncology and radiology: A systematic review of patient and healthy volunteer studies

“…43,63,68,[76][77][78][79][80][81][82][83][84] To further improve the efficacy and reproducibility of breath-holds, measures have been taken to provide guidance to the patient to maintain breath-hold stability. 43,44,68,85 Wang utilized a buzzer signal to prompt patients to perform their breath-hold; such simple additions in this MR imaging study resulted in improved consistency of breathholds resulting in achieving their goal of improving image quality. 43 Locklin investigated a more-comprehensive guidance system by showing the patient their own breathing signal as well as the intended breath-hold level.…”

“…The main factor influencing the decision to exclude these articles was the control group criterion; while several studies investigated a breathing guidance intervention strategy, the control group was not of the same breathing type (see inclusion criterion 5). 81,[84][85][86][89][90][91][92] While the search undertaken and review of articles by the authors was performed as objectively as possible, it should be noted that two of the authors of this systematic review, Sean Pollock and Paul Keall, are either first-or co-authors of 3 and 9 of the 27 included articles, respectively, investigating the breathing guidance intervention: audiovisual biofeedback. Their familiarity with breathing guidance strategies led to the identification that a gap in the literature existed in that a review of such research had yet to be performed; however, unintentional bias may have permeated this review toward audiovisual biofeedback.…”