Z Score biofeedback comments from clinicians

Comments on z-scores are being compiled in the following article:

The following is from a recent post to a large list group, from a clinician in Germany:

I have been using z-score training for 6 months – it makes for a lot more effectiveness in certain cases – to my experience, firstly in cases of marked deviations at all in qeeg.  Here it is a strong tool for initial "normalisation", which means also "stabilisation".

Secondly, I prefer training with z-scores, when measures of connectivity in specificity, especially coherence, show deviations from what is expected.  With live z-scores there is an instant control for training up or down, where I previously never was certain beyond thumb rules to train coherence up or down. and, as we learned again from dr. Robert Thatcher at the z-score workshop in January/Cleveland, coherence seems to be one of the strongest indicators for brain stability.  It is always fascinating for  me to see that deviations can normalize within a shorter time than expected, sometimes within one session.  I have done some 4×4 channel z-score trainings within one session – with remarkable effects, which where called by patients/patient’s parents as "milestones" in therapy. 

Unfortunately I am just a clinician and have not much time for a more controlled study on this…

Some of my students are calling z-score training to be more than a milestone –

Doerte Klein, Dipl.-Psych./Psychotherapeutin PP, KJP
EEG-TRAIN   EEG-Biofeedback Trainingszentrum Hannover – Germany
www.eegbiofeedback.de   info@eegbiofeedback.de


The following comment came in on a neuroguide post:

I use the Atlantis I and II and find them not only very user friendly (as is also the staff at BrainMaster) but I am using them mostly with Z score training, which works extremely well.  I’m relatively new and have not used other equipment to compare, but the Z score training is very rapid.  I read and hear from others who have used other equipment and not Z score training that this is faster.  I use the 2-channel mainly for remote training as it is harder for untrained people to put 4 channels on themselves or other trainees.  But 4 channels works quite a bit faster, usually, than the 2 channel.
You can use your own protocols with either machine, but you have to use the same frequency bands as does Neuroguide in order to use the Z score training module.  The protocols for that training use a special sub-program that is complicated, but you can design your own or use the ones from BrainMaster and modify them to your own treatment design needs.
The animations are not the greatest, but they are interesting enough and it is possible to use other animations, such as Inner Tube from Somatic Vision with any protocol, including now with the Z score protocols.  My clients train quite well with the included visuals and sounds; watching the Z scores changing on the screens works quite well too for some clients.