Effects of brief remote high ventilation breathwork with retention on mental health and wellbeing: A randomised placebo-controlled trial
Guy W. Fincham, Elissa S Epel, Alessandro Colasanti, Clara Strauss, Kate Cavanagh
Research Square April 22, 2024 preprint DOI: 10.21203/rs.3.rs-4219750/v1 (opens in new tab)
Study at a glance
AI-extracted from the abstract| Characteristics | Randomized controlled trial Placebo-controlled |
|---|---|
| Sample size | 200 |
| Population | Young, healthy adults balanced for gender |
| Interventions | High ventilation breathwork with retention (HVBR) placebo HVBR comparator (15 breaths/min with short breath holds) |
| Duration | 3 weeks of 20 min daily practice; post-intervention primary timepoint and follow-up |
| Topics | Breathwork |
| Registration | NCT06064474 |
| Key findings | Brief remotely delivered HVBR did not outperform a placebo breathwork comparator on the primary outcome of stress or on secondary outcomes including anxiety, depression, mental wellbeing, sleep-related impairment, and affect. Both groups showed significant pre-post improvement in stress, but the authors report no significant group difference in that improvement. |
Abstract
Abstract High ventilation breathwork with retention (HVBR) might be beneficial for mental/physical health and has been growing in popularity over the past decade. However, little research has investigated the potential therapeutic effects of brief, remotely delivered HVBR and the tolerability profile of this technique. This study (NCT06064474) was the largest blinded randomised-controlled trial on HVBR to date in which 200 young, healthy adults balanced for gender were randomly allocated in blocks of 2 by remote software to 3 weeks of 20 min daily HVBR (fast breathing with long breath holds) or a placebo HVBR comparator (15 breaths/min with short breath holds). The trial was concealed as a ‘fast breathwork’ study wherein both intervention and comparator were masked, and only ~ 40% guessed their group assignment with no difference in accuracy between groups. Both groups reported analogous credibility and expectancy of benefit, subjective adherence, positive sentiment, along with short- and long-term tolerability. At post-intervention (primary timepoint) for stress level (primary outcome), we found no significant group x time interaction, F(1,180) = 1.98, p = 0.16, ηp2 = 0.01, d = 0.21), nor main effect of group, (F = 0.35, p = 0.55, ηp2 < 0.01) but we did find a significant main effect of time, (F = 13.0, p < 0.01, ηp2 = 0.07). There was a significant improvement in stress pre-post-intervention in both groups, however there was no significant difference in such improvement across groups. In addition to stress at follow-up, we found no significant group x time interactions for secondary trait outcomes of anxiety, depression, mental wellbeing, and sleep-related impairment. This was also the case for state positive and negative affect after the first session of breathwork and at post-intervention. Brief remote HVBR therefore may not be more efficacious at improving mental health than a well-designed active comparator in otherwise healthy, young adults. Funders: The Ryoichi Sasakawa Young Leaders Fellowship Fund, and PsyDAO.
Comparable studies
Other randomized controlled trials on breathwork, most cited first.
Citations in the library
Cites 15
- Brief structured respiration practices enhance mood and reduce physiological arousal Cell Reports Medicine 2023
- Case analysis of long-term negative psychological responses to psychedelics Scientific Reports September 25, 2023
- High ventilation breathwork practices: An overview of their effects, mechanisms, and considerations for clinical applications. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews December 1, 2023
- Effects of conscious connected breathing on cortical brain activity, mood and state of consciousness in healthy adults Current Psychology September 8, 2023
- Does the Wim Hof Method have a beneficial impact on physiological and psychological outcomes in healthy and non-healthy participants? A systematic review. PLoS One 2024
and 10 more in the library