| Literature DB >> 32025489 |
Maheshkumar Kuppusamy1, Dilara Kamaldeen2, Ravishankar Pitani3, Julius Amaldas4, Padmavathi Ramasamy2, Poonguzhali Shanmugam1, Venugopal Vijayakumar1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: This study was conducted among healthy adolescents to assess the effects of a yoga breathing practice (Bhramari pranayama, Bhr.P) towards cardiac autonomic function using heart rate variability (HRV) parameters.Entities:
Keywords: Adolescents; Autonomic function; Bhramari pranayama; Heart rate variability; Yoga
Year: 2020 PMID: 32025489 PMCID: PMC6997567 DOI: 10.1016/j.imr.2020.01.006
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Integr Med Res ISSN: 2213-4220
Fig. 1Subjects’ recruitment flow diagram.
Baseline characteristics of the yoga breathing group and no-treatment control group.
| Variables | Yoga breathing (n = 236) | No treatment group (n = 242) | p-Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sex (M/F) | 135/101 | 138/109 | 0.480# |
| Age (yrs) | 13.4 ± 0.5 | 14.4 ± 0.6 | 0.430$ |
| Height (cm) | 157.9 ± 11.9 | 161.0 ± 8.4 | 0.010$ |
| Weight (kg) | 51.8 ± 11.5 | 53.5 ± 10.9 | 0.870$ |
| BMI (kg/m2) | 21.1 ± 6.1 | 20.7 ± 4.1 | 0.318$ |
BMI, Body mass index. Data are represented in the mean ± SD (standard deviation). P-values were calculated using unpaired t-test$ and chi-squared test#.
Comparison of time domain and frequency domain parameters between yoga breathing group and no-treatment control group.
| Yoga breathing group (n = 236) | No treatment group (n = 242) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Before | 6 Months after | Δ Value | Before | 6 Months after | Δ Value | |
| Time domain variable | ||||||
| HR (bpm) | 74.28 ± 4.26 | 69.73 ± 5.29*** | −4.55 ± 1.40 | 73.22 ± 6.05 | 75.18 ± 5.65 | 1.96 ± 1.48† |
| R-R (msec) | 739.05 ± 53.19 | 778.98 ± 61.55*** | 39.93 ± 8.34 | 753.79 ± 48.98 | 750.57 ± 57.53 | −3.21 ± 0.90††† |
| SDNN (sec) | 80.03 ± 10.14 | 88.06 ± 14.83** | 8.03 ± 1.90 | 79.05 ± 12.71 | 77.82 ± 12.32 | −1.22 ± 0.52†† |
| RMSDD (sec) | 59.91 ± 13.50 | 62.05 ± 16.93*** | 2.13 ± 0.34 | 58.78 ± 14.27 | 58.06 ± 13.03 | −0.72 ± 1.20† |
| NN 50 (count) | 26.29 ± 10.16 | 29.68 ± 11.02*** | 3.38 ± 0.45 | 27.33 ± 10.58 | 26.70 ± 11.06 | −0.62 ± 0.92† |
| pNN 50 (%) | 11.20 ± 4.17 | 13.59 ± 7.08*** | 2.39 ± 0.93 | 11.77 ± 4.21 | 10.68 ± 4.08** | −1.08 ± 0.24†† |
| Frequency domain variable | ||||||
| LF (n.u) | 65.06 ± 11.67 | 57.02 ± 12.29*** | −4.87 ± 0.91 | 63.95 ± 11.66 | 65.86 ± 11.37*** | 1.11 ± 0.32†† |
| HF (n.u) | 40.08 ± 9.01 | 46.87 ± 11.22*** | 6.14 ± 1.20 | 40.05 ± 8.88 | 40.72 ± 8.95 | −0.02 ± 0.07†† |
| LF/HF Ratio | 1.60 ± 0.42 | 1.37 ± 0.40*** | −0.21 ± 0.02 | 1.71 ± 0.44 | 2.06 ± 0.55*** | 0.32 ± 0.11††† |
Data are represented in the mean ± SD (standard deviation). Δ (Delta), changes between before and 6-months after treatment.
HF, high-frequency power; HR, heart rate; LF, low-frequency power; LF/HF, ratio of low frequency to high-frequency power; NN50, number of pairs of adjacent NN intervals differing by more than 50 ms in the entire recording; n.u, normalized unit; pNN50, percentage of absolute differences between successive normal RR intervals that exceed 50 ms; RR, normal-to-normal interval; RMSSD, root-mean-square of the successive normal sinus RR interval difference; SDNN, the standard deviation of the normal-normal interval.
*p < 0.05, **P < 0.01, ***p < 0.001 compared with before and 6 months after.
†p < 0.05, ††P < 0.01, †††p < 0.001 compared with yoga and control group.