Psychophysiological responses to various slow, deep breathing techniques

Abstract

Deep breathing exercises are commonly used for several health conditions including pain and hypertension. Various techniques are available to practice deep breathing, whereas possible differential psychophysiological effects have not been investigated. We compared four deep breathing techniques and examined outcomes in blood pressure variability, respiratory sinus arrhythmia, baroreflex function, and emotional state. Healthy adult volunteers performed pursed‐lips breathing, left and right unilateral nostril breathing, and deep breathing with an inspiratory threshold load (loaded breathing), all at a frequency of 0.1 Hz (i.e., controlled breathing) and for three minutes each. Results showed that blood pressure variability was higher during loaded breathing versus other conditions and higher during pursed‐lips breathing versus left and right unilateral nostril breathing. Respiratory sinus arrhythmia was higher during loaded breathing versus other conditions and higher during pursed‐lips breathing versus left unilateral nostril breathing. The effect of breathing condition on respiratory sinus arrhythmia was mediated by alterations in blood pressure variability. There was no difference between the breathing conditions in baroreflex sensitivity or effectiveness. Participants rated pursed‐lips breathing as more calming and pleasant and with more sense of control (vs. other conditions). Overall, among the four tested deep breathing techniques, loaded breathing was associated with enhanced cardiovascular effects and pursed‐lips breathing with better emotional responses, while also enhancing cardiovascular effects (albeit less than loaded breathing). These findings can be informative in applying deep breathing techniques as self‐management interventions for health conditions, in which baroreceptors stimulation and autonomic and emotional modulations can be beneficial, such as pain and hypertension.

Psychophysiological effects of slow‐paced breathing at six cycles per minute with or without heart rate variability biofeedback

“…In comparison with PRE and POST, we saw similar significant patterns of results in both conditions (SPB‐HRVB and SPB‐NoHRVB), with a decrease in emotional arousal, a more negative emotional valence, and an increase in emotional control. These findings are generally in line with previous research (Gholamrezaei et al., 2021; Van Diest et al., 2014; Wells et al., 2012) illustrating the overall subjective ratings of relaxing effects of SPB and increased emotional control, suggesting that this technique might be an effective coping strategy. The decrease in emotional valence also reflects previous findings applying short‐term SPB (Gholamrezaei et al., 2021; Szulczewski & Rynkiewicz, 2018; Van Diest et al., 2014; You, Laborde, Zammit, et al., 2021), although mixed evidence was found by Steffen et al.…”

“…These findings are generally in line with previous research (Gholamrezaei et al., 2021; Van Diest et al., 2014; Wells et al., 2012) illustrating the overall subjective ratings of relaxing effects of SPB and increased emotional control, suggesting that this technique might be an effective coping strategy. The decrease in emotional valence also reflects previous findings applying short‐term SPB (Gholamrezaei et al., 2021; Szulczewski & Rynkiewicz, 2018; Van Diest et al., 2014; You, Laborde, Zammit, et al., 2021), although mixed evidence was found by Steffen et al. (2017) using the individual resonance frequency.…”

“…These findings are generally in line with previous research (Gholamrezaei et al, 2021;Van Diest et al, 2014;Wells et al, 2012) illustrating the overall subjective ratings of relaxing effects of SPB and increased emotional control, suggesting that this technique might be an effective coping strategy. The decrease in emotional valence also reflects previous findings applying short-term SPB (Gholamrezaei et al, 2021;Szulczewski & Rynkiewicz, 2018;Van Diest et al, 2014;, although mixed evidence was found by Steffen et al (2017) using the individual resonance frequency. The more negative emotional valence experienced while performing SPB (both for SPB-HRVB and SPB-NoHRVB) in comparison with PRE and POST resting measurements might reflect some breathing discomfort and a tendency to hyperventilate (Szulczewski & Rynkiewicz, 2018;Van Diest et al, 2014).…”

“…In trained musicians, a similar decrease in self‐reported anxiety was found in both conditions. Furthermore, only a few studies examined the effects of a single SPB session without biofeedback on self‐report affective variables (Gholamrezaei et al., 2021; Steffen et al., 2017; Szulczewski & Rynkiewicz, 2018; Van Diest et al., 2014; Wells et al., 2012; You, Laborde, Zammit, et al., 2021). Overall, the studies suggest a modulation of self‐report affective variables by SPB.…”

Squeeze the beat: Enhancing cardiac vagal activity during resonance breathing via coherent pelvic floor recruitment.

“…Noteworthy, applying inspiratory threshold loading has been found to result in stronger cardiac resonance compared to unloaded RB, which seems to be strengthened with increasing loads (Gholamrezaei et al, 2019(Gholamrezaei et al, , 2021a. On the contrary, inducing natural inspiratory resistance via unilateral nostril breathing or contracting the glottis muscles during inspiration, seems offer no incremental value regarding cardiac-hemodynamic stimulation (Gholamrezaei et al, 2021a;Mason et al, 2013).…”