Key result
Standardized mindfulness interventions show no effect on IL-6, inflammatory markers, or HRV versus controls.
Why the study?
The physiological effects of standardized Mindfulness Based Interventions on heart rate variability and inflammatory markers have shown variable and inconclusive associations in prior studies.
Do standardized Mindfulness Based Interventions (MBIs) improve heart rate variability and inflammatory markers?
Meta-Analysis (n=607)
Do standardized Mindfulness Based Interventions (MBIs) improve heart rate variability and inflammatory markers?
Standardized Mean Difference: 0.02 (95% CI -0.29–0.34)
p-value: p=0.88
Current evidence regarding the impact of mindfulness-based interventions on heart rate variability and inflammatory markers is mixed and inconclusive, highlighting the need for larger, rigorous randomized controlled trials.
MBIs should not be expected to reduce IL-6 or improve HRV in practice; challenges prior mechanistic assumptions and leaves open effects on clinical outcomes.
Mindfulness Based Interventions (MBIs) have recently been increasingly used in clinical settings, and research regarding their effects on health has grown rapidly. However, with regard to the physiological effects of mindfulness practices, studies have reported associations that vary in strength and direction. Therefore, in this systematic review and meta-analysis, we aimed to systematically identify, appraise, and summarize the existing data from randomized and non-randomized controlled trials that examine physiological effects of the standardized MBIs by focusing on pro-inflammatory cytokines and C-reactive protein, and commonly used heart rate variability parameters. The following electronic databases were searched: MEDLINE (via Ovid), PsychINFO (via Ovid), PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, CINAHL, ProQuest (Dissertations and Theses), and ClinicalTrails.gov. The systematic review identified 10 studies to be included in the meta-analysis, comprising in total 607 participants. The meta-analysis ended up with mixed and inconclusive results. This was assumedly due to the small number of the original studies and, in particular, to the lack of large, rigorously conducted RCTs. Therefore, the current meta-analysis highlights the necessity of larger, more rigorously conducted RCTs on physiological outcomes with standardized MBIs being compared to various forms of active controls, and with more long-term follow-ups.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Rådmark et al. (2019) conducted a meta-analysis in Various somatic and psychiatric conditions (and healthy individuals) (n=607). Mindfulness Based Interventions (MBIs) vs. Active or inactive controls (wait-list, treatment as usual, CBT, etc.) was evaluated on Interleukin-6 (IL-6) levels (Hedges' g 0.02, 95% CI -0.29 to 0.34, p=0.88). Standardized mindfulness-based interventions did not significantly affect interleukin-6 levels (Hedges' g 0.02) or other inflammatory and heart rate variability markers compared to controls.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: