Insurance companies often do not cover QEEG's for two reasons.

The neuro-therapy crowd has overplayed the usefulness of the QEEG by using it to diagnose conditions. It has not been approved by the FDA as a diagnostic tool in the hands of a non-MD. Many therapists have also claimed it as a treatment outside the approval of the FDA. Lexicor, one of the first to try to commercialize the QEEG, sold many systems and diagnostic services using it. Many therapists with only a BA/BS or MS degree in counseling made improper claims. Thus the FDA shut down or restricted a good part of the industry.

Also, back in 1997, a neurologist, writing in the Journal of Neurology, wrote a scathing negative review of the validity of the QEEG. This was widely published and used by defendants' attorneys to muddy the waters. There have been numerous responses to the unscientific method of analysis used by the discrediting author showing how erroneous his article was. None the less, it has been a long road to get the QEEG to be accepted as valid.

The many statements that continue to be made about using a QEEG for neuro-therapy that go far beyond any scientific basis has kept the waters muddy.

It continues to be sold as a device to direct a patient in patient controlled neuro-feedback. In this situation, the patient is making all of the efforts to change the specific waveform.

The passive patient systems (LENS, ROSHI, and similar systems) have been sold as relaxation devices but have been used to treat head injuries by electronically stimulating the brain with lights or electro-magnetic pulses. In these systems, the patient does nothing and lets the system impact the brain with the various stimuli.

This attempt to circumvent the FDA approval process has also muddied the waters. Again, it has been the overstated claims that have caused the problem. If the practitioners would not make such inappropriate commercial claims, they would probably still be allowed to continue therapy without FDA interference.

Simply put, the claims of fact are only based on anecdotal evidence. If they were based on proper clinical trials and statistics, the FDA may approve them as valid and factual claims

There are databases that have been validated for use as diagnostic references with the QEEG. Most practitioners are still not using them, most likely due to cost.