Key result
Menstrual cycle phase fails to influence blood pressure or heart rate reactivity to mental stress.
Why the study?
The influence of hormonal variations during menstrual cycle phases on cardiovascular stress reactivity and mood remains unclear.
Observational
Single-blind (subjects blinded to study purpose)
No menstrual phase effect on stress reactivity seen in small sample; leaves open cycle influences on CV responses in larger or clinical cohorts.
This study examined blood pressure and heart rate responses to a mental arithmetic task in a sample of 16 regularly menstruating women during the follicular (postmenstrual) and luteal (premenstrual) phases of their menstrual cycles. Self-reports of physical and psychological symptoms (mood) were obtained prior to testing. A control group of men was matched to the women with regard to age and yoked to the women's cycle phases. Both women and men were told the study involved "phases of the moon" in order to eliminate subjects' awareness of participating in a biological cycle study. Consistent with prior studies that have eliminated women's awareness of taking part in a study on menstrual phases, no phase differences in mood were evident nor did the women's mood ratings differ from those of men's. In addition, there were no phase differences in blood pressure and heart rate reactivity. These findings suggest that hormonal variations characteristic of the luteal and follicular phases do not assert an influence on common assessments of cardiovascular stress reactivity.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Weidner et al. (1990) conducted an observational in Healthy volunteers. Menstrual cycle phase (luteal vs follicular) vs. Matched male control group was evaluated on Blood pressure and heart rate responses to a mental arithmetic task, and self-reports of mood. Hormonal variations during the luteal and follicular phases did not influence blood pressure and heart rate reactivity to a mental arithmetic task, nor did mood ratings differ from male controls.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: