| Literature DB >> 28086991 |
Carina Grafetstätter1, Martin Gaisberger2,3,4, Johanna Prossegger1, Markus Ritter2,3,4, Predrag Kolarž5, Christina Pichler1, Josef Thalhamer6, Arnulf Hartl7.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The specific microclimate of alpine waterfalls with high levels of ionized water aerosols has been suggested to trigger beneficial immunological and psychological effects. In the present three-armed randomized controlled clinical study, we focused on effects on (i) immunological reagibility, on (ii) physiological stress responses, and on (iii) stress-related psychological parameters.Entities:
Keywords: Alpine space; Burnout prevention; Chronic stress; Green exercise; High-altitude climate therapy; Ionized water aerosol; Mountain hiking; Mucosal immune response; Waterfall
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28086991 PMCID: PMC5237191 DOI: 10.1186/s40101-016-0117-3
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Physiol Anthropol ISSN: 1880-6791 Impact factor: 2.867
Fig. 1Study schedule. Schematic chronological process of the controlled clinical trial
Fig. 2IgA levels of all groups. Antigen-specific salivary IgA levels of responders. Linear mixed model (LMM1) of both intervention groups compared to the control group. Significance are indicated by p values. Data are shown in percentage change (±SD) from baseline (pre-serum)
Antigen-specific salivary IgA-levels
| Day 6 | Day 16 | Day 66 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| WF+ | Photon counts | 498 583.8 | 458 859 | 374 034.3 |
| % change | 163.1 | 142.1 | 97.4 | |
| WF− | Photon counts | 365 445.3 | 465 156.6 | 293 012.7 |
| % change | 42.2 | 80.9 | 14 | |
| CO | Photon counts | 615 312.5 | 438 061.5 | 385 653.7 |
| % change | 83.6 | 30.7 | 15.1 | |
Data of the intervention groups (WF+ and WF-) and the control group are given in photon counts. % change indicates the increase of IgA titers after immunization compared to the baseline (pre-serum)
Fig. 3IgA levels of the two intervention groups. Antigen-specific salivary IgA levels of responders. Linear mixed model (LMM2) of the waterfall group (WF+) compared to the non-waterfall group (WF−). Significances are indicated by p values. Data are shown in percentage change (±SD) from baseline (pre-serum)
Fig. 4Subjective stress perception. Visual analog scale of subjective stress perception. Stress levels in the WF+ group were significantly decreased (compared to control) and shown a trend to a specific waterfall effect (WF+ to CO p = 0.000, R 2 = 0.615; WF+ to WF−: p = 0.054, R 2 = 0.179; WF– to CO p = 0.066, R 2 = 0.496). Data shown in means (±SD). Statistical analysis calculated with linear regression
Fig. 5SCL-90 questionnaire. Results of the SCL-90 questionnaire shown in percentage change from baseline. The data indicate beneficial effects of both interventions, with stronger significances for the waterfall group. Linear mixed models of the three study groups over time. Data shown in means (±SD)
Fig. 6Global Severity Index and Positive Symptom Total Score of the SCL-90. Global indices of the SCL-90 questionnaire. The data show significant improvements of the Global Severity Index and the Positive Symptom Total score (PST p = 0.03, GSI p = 0.009) in the WF+ group on day 6. Data shown in percentage change from baseline (±SD)
Means of evaluated physiological data (±SD)
| PEF (L/sec) | HR (%) | SC (%) | RSP (%) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| WF+ | Day 0 | 8.7 ± 2.0 | 98.7 ± 5.5 | 88.4 ± 12.8 | 91.2 ± 17.3 |
| Day 6 | 9.0 ± 1.9 | 94.7 ± 9.2 | 81.5 ± 13.7 | 83.7 ± 16.2 | |
| WF− | Day 0 | 8.5 ± 1.5 | 97.7 ± 6.0 | 86.8 ± 12.4 | 91.1 ± 12.3 |
| Day 6 | 8.9 ± 1.7 | 92.0 ± 6.9 | 87.3 ± 14.3 | 82.7 ± 13.0 | |
| CO | Day 0 | 8.6 ± 2.1 | 100.6 ± 7.0 | 90.8 ± 8.2 | 96.1 ± 17.3 |
| Day 6 | 8.6 ± 1.8 | 101.4 ± 7.3 | 90.4 ± 13.6 | 97.4 ± 19.6 | |
Physiological data of the intervention groups (WF+ and WF−) and the control group on day 0 and day 6. Raw data of the peak expiratory flow (PEF) shown in means (±SD). Means (±SD) of the 4-min post-stress recovery phase of heart rate (HR), skin conductance (SC), and respiration rate (RSP) are shown in percentage (in relation to the 100% reference, means of the 1-min stressor phase)
Fig. 7Lung function and physiological stress test. Linear regression analysis of lung function and peripheral signals of the physiological stress test. Spirometry was performed measuring peak expiratory flow (PEF), as peripheral signals of physiological stress served heart rate (HR), skin conductance (SC), and respiration rate (RSP). Means (±SD) of the PEF value is shown in percent of the predicted PEF, scaled on age, height, weight, gender, smoker (yes, no, former), and asthma (yes, no). Means (±SD) of the 4-min post-stress recovery phase shown in percentage compared to means of the 1-min stressor phase (100% reference, indicated as red line)