• Medientyp: E-Artikel
  • Titel: The Effects of Mindfulness and Meditation on Vagally Mediated Heart Rate Variability: A Meta-Analysis
  • Beteiligte: Brown, Lydia; Rando, Alora A.; Eichel, Kristina; Van Dam, Nicholas T.; Celano, Christopher M.; Huffman, Jeff C.; Morris, Meg E.
  • Erschienen: Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health), 2021
  • Erschienen in: Psychosomatic Medicine
  • Sprache: Englisch
  • DOI: 10.1097/psy.0000000000000900
  • ISSN: 1534-7796; 0033-3174
  • Entstehung:
  • Anmerkungen:
  • Beschreibung: <jats:title>ABSTRACT</jats:title> <jats:sec> <jats:title>Objective</jats:title> <jats:p>Heart rate variability (HRV) is a marker of autonomic nervous system function associated with both physical and mental health. Many studies have suggested that mindfulness and meditation-based interventions (MBIs) are associated with improvements in HRV, but findings are mixed, and to date, no comprehensive meta-analysis has synthesized results.</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title>Methods</jats:title> <jats:p>Systematic literature searches were conducted using PsycINFO, Embase, Medline, CINAHL, ERIC, and Scopus to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the effects of predominantly seated MBIs on resting-state vagally mediated HRV. Risk of bias was judged using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool.</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title>Results</jats:title> <jats:p>Nineteen RCTs met the criteria for inclusion in the meta-analysis. Random-effects meta-analysis found that MBIs were not efficacious in increasing vagally mediated resting-state HRV relative to control conditions (Hedges <jats:italic toggle="yes">g</jats:italic> = 0.38, 95% confidence interval [CI] = −0.014 to 0.77). When removing an outlier (<jats:italic toggle="yes">g</jats:italic> = 3.22), the effect size was reduced, CI narrowed, and findings remained nonsignificant (<jats:italic toggle="yes">g</jats:italic> = 0.19, 95% CI = −0.02 to 0.39). High heterogeneity in results (<jats:italic toggle="yes">I</jats:italic> <jats:sup>2</jats:sup> = 89.12%) could not be explained by a priori–determined moderators including intervention duration, study setting, and control type.</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title>Conclusions</jats:title> <jats:p>There is currently insufficient evidence to indicate that MBIs lead to improvements in vagally mediated HRV over control conditions. Future large, well-designed RCTs with low risk of methodological bias could help add to the current evidence to elucidate any role MBIs might play in impacting HRV.</jats:p> </jats:sec>