Why the study?
No studies had directly compared the physiological mechanisms and benefits of slow-paced breathing, mindfulness, and their combination in a dismantling framework.
Is a fully remote RCT framework feasible for comparing the effects of slow-paced breathing, mindfulness, and yogic breathing in healthy young adults?
Is a fully remote RCT framework feasible for comparing the effects of slow-paced breathing, mindfulness, and yogic breathing in healthy young adults?
A fully remote RCT framework using wearable devices and virtual visits is highly feasible for studying breathing and mindfulness interventions.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Supports remote breathing and mindfulness trials in young adults; extends dismantling RCT designs to fully virtual wearable-monitored settings.
Despite the growing research base examining the benefits and physiological mechanisms of slow-paced breathing (SPB), mindfulness (M), and their combination (as yogic breathing, SPB + M), no studies have directly compared these in a ”dismantling” framework. To address this gap, we conducted a fully remote three-armed feasibility study with wearable devices and video-based laboratory visits. Eighteen healthy participants (age 18–30 years, 12 female) were randomized to one of three 8-week interventions: slow-paced breathing (SPB, N = 5), mindfulness (M, N = 6), or yogic breathing (SPB + M, N = 7). The participants began a 24-h heart rate recording with a chest-worn device prior to the first virtual laboratory visit, consisting of a 60-min intervention-specific training with guided practice and experimental stress induction using a Stroop test. The participants were then instructed to repeat their assigned intervention practice daily with a guided audio, while concurrently recording their heart rate data and completing a detailed practice log. The feasibility was determined using the rates of overall study completion (100%), daily practice adherence (73%), and the rate of fully analyzable data from virtual laboratory visits (92%). These results demonstrate feasibility for conducting larger trial studies with a similar fully remote framework, enhancing the ecological validity and sample size that could be possible with such research designs.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ma et al. (2023) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: