Why the study?
Evaluating physiological responses to dance as an alternative modality in cardiac rehabilitation is necessary to ensure safe and effective practice.
Does a dance-based cardiac rehabilitation session alter cardiac autonomic modulation compared to a conventional cardiac rehabilitation session in women with cardiovascular risk factors?
Does a dance-based cardiac rehabilitation session alter cardiac autonomic modulation compared to a conventional cardiac rehabilitation session in women with cardiovascular risk factors?
Dance-based cardiac rehabilitation induces greater alterations in nonlinear heart rate variability dynamics during exercise compared to conventional rehabilitation, but with similar recovery patterns, suggesting it is a physiologically comparable alternative.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Dance-based CRP yields comparable CAM to conventional sessions in women with CRF; extends rehab options while warranting confirmatory RCTs.
Introduction: Dance has been suggested as an alternative therapeutic modality in cardiac rehabilitation programs (CRP). Therefore, evaluating the physiological responses of the body during dance is necessary to provide information that will allows it to be practiced a safe and effective way. In this context, the objective of the current study was to evaluate and compare the cardiac autonomic modulation (CAM) of women with cardiovascular risk factors (CRF) during and after a dance-based cardiac rehabilitation session and a conventional cardiac rehabilitation session. Methods: In total, 19 women, with at least 1 CRF, participated in this non-randomized crossover clinical trial, consisting of 4 steps: I. Familiarization with the dance protocol (DP); II. DP session; III. Familiarization with the conventional protocol (CP); IV. CP session. The CAM was evaluated using heart rate variability, considering nonlinear methods: recurrence plot, debugged trend fluctuations, and symbolic analysis. For data evaluation, 2-way analysis of variance for repeated measures was used, P < .05. Results: During exercise, an effect of protocol was observed for most of indices. In the DP, higher values were recorded for DET, Alpha-1, and 0 V% indices, and lower values for 1 V% and 2 ULV% indices and for entropy measurements. During recovery, no differences were observed between protocols. Effects of the exercises were observed in the comparisons between moments for all indices, however, a similar pattern of recovery was found between DP and CP. Conclusions: Comparisons of the dance and conventional protocols revealed that CAM was similar in both approaches, while greater alterations in nonlinear dynamics were observed during the DP exercise. However, these alterations were not able to modify the recovery of the volunteers. Clinical Trial Registration: The study was previously registered on the clinicaltrials.gov platform under registration number: NCT04967235. https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT04967235?
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Silva et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: