| Literature DB >> 32282842 |
Julia Frank1,2, Georg Seifert2, Rico Schroeder3, Bernd Gruhn1, Wiebke Stritter2, Michael Jeitler4,5, Nico Steckhan4,5, Christian S Kessler4,5, Andreas Michalsen4,5, Andreas Voss3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Yoga in school is a beneficial tool to promote the good health and well-being of students by changing the way they react to stress. The positive effects of yoga-taught in schools-on children, youth and young adults have been demonstrated in former studies using mostly subjective psychometric data. AIM: The present trial aims to evaluate the potential effects of yoga on autonomic regulation in young adults by analyzing heart rate variability (HRV).Entities:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32282842 PMCID: PMC7153865 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0231299
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Fig 1Flow diagram.
It displays the progress of all participants through the trial.
Fig 2Study design.
Timelines: T0.1—start of the study and first collection of psychometric data, T1—first ECG recording before intervention, T2—second ECG recording and collection of psychometric data following immediately the intervention.
Study population characteristics.
| 57.1% | 45.5% | |
| 19.7 ± 1.9 | 20.1 ± 2.1 | |
| 23.66 ± 4.03 | 22.47 ± 1.91 |
n—number of participants
*—mean ± standard deviation
BMI—body mass index
List of applied HRV analysis methods and related calculated indices used in this study.
| Method type | Analysis method | Index [unit] | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| Linear | Time domain (TD) | meanNN [ms] | Mean value of NN interval time series |
| sdNN [ms] | Standard deviation of NN interval time series | ||
| RMSSD [ms] | Square root of the mean squared differences of successive NN intervals | ||
| SHANNON [bit] | Shannon entropy of the NN interval density distribution (class width of 8ms) | ||
| Frequency domain (FD) | LF/HF | Ratio of LF and HF, with LF and HF being the power in the “low” frequency range (0.04–0.15 Hz) and high frequency range (0.15–0.4 Hz) | |
| Nonlinear | Symbolic dynamics (SD) | phvar20 | Probability of occurrence of the word type “111111” reflecting high-variability patterns in the NN interval time series with NN interval differences>20ms over six heart cycles |
| Poincaré plot analysis (PPA) | SD2 | Standard deviation of the long-term NN interval variability | |
| Segmented Poincaré analysis (SPPA) | SPPA_6r [%] | Sixth row of a 12x12 probability distribution matrix determined on the basis of a 45 degree rotated and segmented Poincaré plot point cloud | |
| Asymmetry analysis | Guzik’s index [%] | Percent value of the sum of distances of points above the identity line in the Poincaré plot and the sum of distances of all points from the identity line | |
| Permutation entropy (PE) | normPE_embedd_3_lag_1 [bit] | Permutations entropy index encoding 3 successive NN intervals (embedding dimension = 3 und delay time (lag) = 1) |
Results of ANOVA and paired t-test quantified by descriptive statistics, significance values and effect sizes measures.
To evaluate differences of nocturnal short-term HRV indices between a yoga group and a control group before and after a 10-week intervention.
| T1 | T2 | T1 | T2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| M±SD | M±SD | M±SD | M±SD | p-value | |||
| g*-value | g*-value | ωp2-value | |||||
| 946.0±171.6 | 996.0±150.8 | 925.1±104.7 | 991.5±167.4 | 0.822 | 0.751 | ||
| 0.301 | 0.458 | -0.039 | 0.142 | -0.037 | |||
| 40.5±14.0 | 54.1±27.4 | 41.2±11.0 | 47.5±24.3 | 0.823 | 0.308 | ||
| 0.544 | 0.234 | -0.039 | 0.135 | 0.003 | |||
| 46.1±21.6 | 62.1±39.2 | 41.1±19.0 | 52.6±35.3 | 0.528 | 0.923 | ||
| 0.489 | 0.388 | -0.024 | 0.161 | -0.041 | |||
| 4.3 ±0.6 | 4.6±0.7 | 4.3±0.4 | 4.4±0.6 | 0.775 | 0.369 | ||
| 0.539 | 0.266 | -0.038 | 0.136 | -0.007 | |||
| 0.86±0.49 | 0.80±0.46 | 1.60±0.93 | 1.05±0.78 | 0.158 | 0.094 | ||
| -0.263 | -0.669 | 0.043 | 0.228 | 0.076 | |||
| 0.11±0.11 | 0.19±0.17 | 0.12±0.14 | 0.15±0.19 | 0.760 | 0.713 | ||
| 0.402 | 0.267 | -0.038 | 0.123 | -0.036 | |||
| 46.6±14.1 | 62.0±28.4 | 50.0±10.8 | 55.5±24.9 | 0.909 | 0.234 | ||
| 0.644 | 0.213 | -0.041 | 0.133 | 0.019 | |||
| 36.3±5.0 | 33.4±3.2 | 37.7±2.6 | 35.5±5.4 | 0.225 | 0.680 | ||
| -0.687 | -0.493 | 0.022 | 0.217 | -0.034 | |||
| 48.0±4.4 | 51.2±4.2 | 47.8±1.6 | 48.8±4.7 | 0.324 | 0.237 | ||
| 0.716 | 0.274 | 0.001 | 0.149 | 0.019 | |||
| 0.96±0.02 | 0.98±0.02 | 0.97±0.02 | 0.97±0.03 | 0.868 | 0.067 | 0.097 | |
| 0.579 | 0.028 | -0.040 | 0.098 | 0.074 | |||
Values are expressed as mean value ± standard deviation (M±SD) at time point T1 (baseline before intervention) and T2 (post-intervention).
Abbreviations: 1all parameters and their units are explained in the methods section; n—number of participants; GME—group main effect; TME—time main effect; IE—interaction effect; normPE—normPE_embedd_3_ lag_1.
Effect size results quantified by: partial Omega squared ωp2-values in ANOVA with S—small effect with 0.01< = ωp2<0.06; M—medium effect with 0.06< = ωp2<0.14; L—Large effect with ωp2> = 0.14 and unbiased Hedges’ g*-values in t-tests with S—small effect with 0.2< = |g*|<0.5; M—medium effect with 0.5< = |g*|<0.8; L—Large effect with |g*|> = 0.8.
Significant results: p-values in bold indicating indices that had a significance level of p<0.05 for the tests GME, TME and IE and bold marked symbols # indicate also a significance level of p<0.05 for the paired t-tests (separately for yoga and control) of the time-dependent changes (T1→T2) in indices.