Neurosonic empirical study by Stress Management Centre Toivo

This empirical study has been conducted by Neurosonic's service provider and distributor, Stress Management Centre Toivo. The text has been created directly from the survey reports.


The empirical study was launched at Stress Management Centre Toivo in spring 2020, and the study was halfway through when the Covid restrictions came into force. Before the restrictions, the results of 17 customers and two low-frequency treatments were available, as well as one long-term individual study (10 weeks). The empirical study was conducted as part of the Vibrac Practitioner training: Level 2 Vibrac Practitioner training, University of Jyväskylä, Skille-Lehikoinen Centre for Vibroacoustic Therapy and Research, Eino Roiha Foundation, Jyväskylä, Finland. Thesis topic: Effectiveness of Neurosonic low-frequency vibration therapy in reducing stress-related symptoms.

After a two-year break, the effectiveness of Neurosonic low-frequency programmes was measured again with a revised mobile monitoring method: A Condition Analysis based on VNS (visual numeric scale) self-assessment. The aim is to collect 1,000 Condition Analyses by the beginning of 2023.

From March to May, 238 analyses have been collected. The analysis asks questions that are answered via a self-assessment form on a mobile device, using a numerical scale of 0 to 10.

Condition Analysis

The Condition Analysis is based on the self-assessment tool VNS (visual numeric scale), which contains 9 questions about the participant’s state and condition before and after the Neurosonic low-frequency treatment. The purpose of the analysis is to verify the effectiveness of low-frequency treatments. The self-assessment scale is a numerical scale of 0 to 10. In the analysis, a higher number represents a more positive result and a lower number represents a more negative result. The analysis works on mobile and PC devices and the self-assessment takes 2 to 4 minutes in total to complete, e.g. on a mobile phone. After completing the analysis, the participant receives immediate feedback on how they recovered during the low-frequency treatment.

Interim report: Results

The first report focuses on the effectiveness of recovery in terms of the immediate effect of Neurosonic low-frequency therapy. The effectiveness of recovery has been measured by changes in stress levels, anxiety and relaxation.

The effectiveness of recovery is divided into the following categories: Very good – good – fairly good – relatively good – moderately good – fairly poor

Based on the Condition Analyses (238), the recovery efficiency was positive or very positive in 98% of the measurements. The recovery did not improve for 1% and was slightly negative for 1%. The effectiveness of the recovery is crucially influenced by the correct Neurosonic programme selection and the body part-specific vibration intensity adjustment that promotes recovery. These 238 analyses include the effectiveness results of all eight different Neurosonic programmes. The analyses are mainly based on self-reported Neurosonic programme selections and intensity settings. The effectiveness of low-frequency treatments, for example, to promote recovery, can usually be improved with the help of expert programme recommendations and intensity control guidelines.