Evidence Hub

Acute Effects of Slow-Paced Breathing on Measures of HRV in Hospitalized Patients With Bilateral COVID-19 Pneumonia: A Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Clinical Trial

E. Balint, B. Grüner, Harald Gündel, S. Haase, M. Kaw-Geppert, J. Thayer, Katja Weimer, Marc N. Jarczok

Psychosomatic Medicine, 2025

23 participants

Abstract

Objective Slow-paced breathing (SPB) with prolonged exhalation is assumed to stimulate vagal reflexes, which is represented by increased heart rate variability (HRV) values. However, most trials were conducted in healthy participants. We sought to evaluate the feasibility of SPB in hospitalized patients with confirmed bilateral COVID-19 pneumonia with major respiratory impairment and to investigate if SPB shows acute increasing effects on HRV measures in these severely ill patients with distinctly reduced vagal tone. Methods This single-center randomized controlled clinical trial enrolled 23 patients in the intervention (4-second inhalation, 6-second exhalation for 20 minutes 3× daily) and 23 patients in the control group (IG/CG). The effects of SPB on HRV were calculated using post-hoc likelihood ratio tests. Baseline HRV measures between the groups over time were compared using multilevel mixed-effect linear regression models with random slope including the covariates relevant comorbidities, COVID-19 medication, and age. Results HRV values at baseline were significantly decreased in all patients. During SPB, HRV parameters increased significantly (ln(SDNN), ln(LF), ln(TP); all p .48). Conclusion SPB is feasible and safe in patients with bilateral COVID-19 pneumonia and appears to be an effective self-performed intervention to acutely increase HRV measures. This observation was independent of comorbidities and comedication. Further trials should corroborate these findings…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a secondary / pooled analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 23 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free