| Literature DB >> 32246229 |
Marcos Economides1, Paul Lehrer2, Kristian Ranta1, Albert Nazander1, Outi Hilgert1, Anu Raevuori1,3,4, Richard Gevirtz5, Inna Khazan6, Valerie L Forman-Hoffman7.
Abstract
A rise in the prevalence of depression underscores the need for accessible and effective interventions. The objectives of this study were to determine if the addition of a treatment component showing promise in treating depression, heart rate variability-biofeedback (HRV-B), to our original smartphone-based, 8-week digital intervention was feasible and whether patients in the HRV-B ("enhanced") intervention were more likely to experience clinically significant improvements in depressive symptoms than patients in our original ("standard") intervention. We used a quasi-experimental, non-equivalent (matched) groups design to compare changes in symptoms of depression in the enhanced group (n = 48) to historical outcome data from the standard group (n = 48). Patients in the enhanced group completed a total average of 3.86 h of HRV-B practice across 25.8 sessions, and were more likely to report a clinically significant improvement in depressive symptom score post-intervention than participants in the standard group, even after adjusting for differences in demographics and engagement between groups (adjusted OR 3.44, 95% CI [1.28-9.26], P = .015). Our findings suggest that adding HRV-B to an app-based, smartphone-delivered, remote intervention for depression is feasible and may enhance treatment outcomes.Entities:
Keywords: Biofeedback; Depression; Digital health; Heart rate variability; Meditation; Mindfulness; Online intervention; Smartphone app; mHealth
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32246229 PMCID: PMC7250954 DOI: 10.1007/s10484-020-09458-z
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Appl Psychophysiol Biofeedback ISSN: 1090-0586
Fig. 1Screenshots of the Meru Health application. The screenshots depict HRV-B practice in the enhanced group (a), daily practices common to both groups (b), and messaging between patient and therapist (c). The colored heart rate tracer in the HRV-B practice (bottom of panel a) displays amber during period of low resonance and green during periods of high resonance
Participant demographics
| All participants (n = 96) | Enhanced (n = 48) | Standard (n = 48) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Baseline PHQ-9 (mean, SD) | 15.3 (3.69) | 15.5 (3.68) | 15.1 (3.73) |
| Age (mean, SD) | 34.3 (6.51) | 35.8 (6.34) | 32.9 (6.41) |
| Gender | |||
| Female (n, %) | 78 (81.3) | 43 (89.6) | 35 (72.9) |
| Male (n, %) | 18 (18.7) | 5 (10.4) | 13 (27.1) |
| Antidepressants | |||
| Yes (n, %) | 33 (34.4) | 14 (29.2) | 19 (39.6) |
| No (n, %) | 63 (65.6) | 34 (70.8) | 29 (60.4) |
| Country | |||
| Finland (n, %) | 87 (90.6) | 43 (89.6) | 44 (91.7) |
| US (n, %) | 9 (9.4) | 5 (10.2) | 4 (8.3) |
PHQ Patient Health Questionnaire, SD standard deviation, US United States
Participant engagement
| All participant (n = 96) | Enhanced (n = 48) | Standard (n = 48) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| No. of complete meditations | |||
| Mean (SEM) | 34.5 (2.71) | 34.3 (3.66) | 34.7 (4.02) |
| Min–max | 0–143 | 1–133 | 0–143 |
| Total meditation hours | |||
| Mean (SEM) | 7.82 (0.62) | 6.84 (0.74) | 8.81 (0.97) |
| Min–max | 0–29.2 | 0–26.3 | 0.28–29.2 |
| No. of complete CBT/BAT exercises | |||
| Mean (SEM) | 29.6 (1.77) | 34.0 (2.43) | 25.1 (2.44) |
| Min–max | 0–78 | 0–78 | 0–56 |
| No. of complete psychoeducation videos | |||
| Mean | 17.7 (0.61) | 19.4 (0.72) | 16.1 (0.93) |
| Min–max | 3–27 | 4–27 | 3–25 |
| No. of messages sent | |||
| to therapist | |||
| Mean (SEM) | 19.9 (1.87) | 21.7 (2.71) | 18.1 (2.57) |
| Min–max | 0–99 | 0–99 | 0–71 |
| No. of messages received from therapist | |||
| Mean (SEM) | 46.8 (2.47) | 47.7 (3.69) | 46.0 (3.32) |
| Min–max | 0–132 | 0–132 | 5–101 |
| Total HRV-B hours | |||
| Mean (SEM) | n/a | 3.86 (0.47) | n/a |
| Min–max | n/a | 0–13 | n/a |
SEM standard error of the mean
HRV-B engagement
| Week | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | |
| Minutes of practice, mean (SEM) | 34.6 (2.85) | 30.2 (3.39) | 39.2 (4.13) | 31.6 (4.86) | 31.9 (4.33) | 20.2 (3.64) | 20.6 (3.93) | 23.6 (5.56) |
| No. of complete sessions, mean (SEM) | 5.67 (0.40) | 4.27 (0.40) | 3.98 (0.39) | 3.10 (0.45) | 2.79 (0.35) | 1.81 (0.33) | 2.02 (0.35) | 2.10 (0.48) |
| Duration per session in minutes, mean (SEM) | 5.92 (0.17) | 6.78 (0.33) | 9.64 (0.40) | 9.93 (0.57) | 11.1 (0.40) | 11.4 (0.60) | 10.1 (0.56) | 11.2 (0.60) |
SEM standard error of the mean
Secondary patient-reported outcome means (SEM)
| Time-point | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Baseline | w1 | w3 | w5 | w7 | Post | |
| Standard group | ||||||
| ITT mean | 15.41 (0.63) | 15.04 (0.64) | 12.31 (0.70) | 11.66 (0.71) | 10.41 (0.71) | 8.81 (0.70) |
| ITT median | 15 | 14 | 11 | 12 | 10.5 | 10 |
| PP mean | 15.08 (0.68) | 14.47 (0.81) | 12.00 (0.77) | 11.00 (0.78) | 10.00 (0.96) | 8.37 (0.99) |
| PP median | 15 | 14 | 11 | 10 | 8.5 | 8 |
| Enhanced group | ||||||
| ITT mean | 16.57 (0.71) | 15.09 (0.71)15.09 (0.71) | 12.24 (0.72) | 10.61* (0.72) | 10.09 (0.74) | 9.16 (0.74) |
| ITT median | 15 | 13 | 11 | 9 | 9 | 7 |
| PP mean | 15.50 (0.62) | 13.98 (0.63) | 11.22 (0.79) | 9.23 (0.67) | 8.80 (0.68)(0.68) | 7.85 (0.76) |
| PP median | 15 | 13 | 11 | 8 | 9 | 6 |
PP per protocol, ITT intent to treat, SEM standard error of the mean, w week