Why the study?
Although heart rate variability is proposed as a biomarker for vagal activation during transcutaneous vagus nerve stimulation, data regarding its effects remain equivocal.
Does short-term transcutaneous electrical stimulation of the auricular vagus nerve affect parameters of heart rate variability?
Does short-term transcutaneous electrical stimulation of the auricular vagus nerve affect parameters of heart rate variability?
This article outlines the methodology for a randomized study assessing the impact of transcutaneous vagus nerve stimulation on heart rate variability, providing open-access datasets for future research.
RCT protocol and open datasets for tVNS effects on HRV now public; extends infrastructure for autonomic modulation trials.
Many previous studies have demonstrated that transcutaneous vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) has the potential to exhibit therapeutic effects similar to its invasive counterpart. An objective assessment of VNS requires a reliable biomarker of successful vagal activation. Although many potential biomarkers have been proposed, most studies have focused on heart rate variability (HRV). Despite the physiological rationale for HRV as a biomarker for assessing vagal stimulation, data on its effects on HRV are equivocal. To further advance this field, future studies investigating VNS should contain adequate methodological specifics that make it possible to compare the results between studies, to replicate studies, and to enhance the safety of study participants. This article describes the design and methodology of a randomized study evaluating the effect of short-term noninvasive stimulation of the auricular branch of the vagus nerve on parameters of HRV. Primary records of rhythmograms of all the subjects, as well as a dataset with clinical, instrumental, and laboratory data of all the current study subjects are in the public domain for possible secondary analysis to all interested researchers. The physiological interpretation of the obtained data is not considered in the article.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Shvartz et al. (2023) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: