Cited by 7Health Policy Implementation SciencePsychotherapy Techniques and ApplicationsPsychosomatic Disorders and Their Treatments

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

Open access
Schmidt, Kira, Barac-Dammeyer, Drazena, Kowalski, Axel, Teigelack, Per, Pfeiffer, Corinna, Robitzsch, Anita, Dörrie, Nora, Skoda, Eva-Maria +3 more·2023·Frontiers in Psychiatry

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.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3389/fpsyt.2023.1140880

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 31 · Cited by 7

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [24]Edmonds WA Kennedy TD. An applied guide to research designs: Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods. United States: Sage Publications (2016).

Authors
Schmidt, K., Barac-Dammeyer, D., Kowalski, A., Teigelack, P., Pfeiffer, C., Robitzsch, A., Dörrie, N., Skoda, E.-M., Bäuerle, A., Fink, M., & Teufel, M.
Affiliations
  • University of Duisburg-Essen (DE)
  • Bielefeld University (DE)
Corresponding author
Schmidt, Kira
Venue
Frontiers in Psychiatry
Published
2023-05-24
Volume
14
Pages
1140880-1140880
ISSN
1664-0640 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4378072486
Cited by
7
References
31
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 1
FWCI
2.48
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Frontiers in Psychiatry (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DuEPublico (University of Duisburg-Essen) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Universitätsbibliographie, Universität Duisburg-Essen (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Policy Implementation Science
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Psychosomatic Disorders and Their Treatments
Keywords
biofeedback, treatment implementation, patient acceptance, patient satisfaction, feasibility, staff nurses, workload, manualized treatment, mental illness, implementation barriers

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review