Effect of Deep Slow Breathing on Pain-Related Variables in Osteoarthritis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study evaluated the effect of a six-week deep slow breathing (DSB) program on pain, physical function, and heart rate variability (HRV) in subjects with lower extremity joint pain. Twenty subjects were assigned into training ( n = 10) and control ( n = 10) groups. The training group participated in a six-week DSB program consisting of weekly training sessions and at-home breathing exercises. DSB exercises focused on prolonging the exhalation and the pause following exhalation. The Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) was used to assess pain and physical function, and HRV data were obtained before and after intervention. Results revealed no significant interactions between group and time for any of the variables. There was no significant main effect for group, but there was a significant main effect (<mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M1"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo><</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.025</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math>) and a large effect size for time on both pain (<mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M2"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mrow><mml:mi>η</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math> = 0.454) and physical function (<mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M3"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mrow><mml:mi>η</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math> = 0.506). There were no significant main effects (<mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M4"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>></mml:mo><mml:mn>0.017</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math>) for group and time on LF power (group <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M5"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mrow><mml:mi>η</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math> = 0.039, time <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M6"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mrow><mml:mi>η</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math> = 0.061), HF power (group <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M7"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mrow><mml:mi>η</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math> = 0.039, time <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M8"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mrow><mml:mi>η</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math> = 0.039), and LF/HF ratio (group <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M9"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mrow><mml:mi>η</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math> = 0.036, time <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M10"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mrow><mml:mi>η</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math> = 0.169). Results indicated that the six-week DSB program was not sufficient to alleviate pain or improve physical function in subjects with lower extremity joint pain. Although the pain was not alleviated, other beneficial effects such as better coping with the pain were reported in the majority of training subjects. As this is the first study to examine the use of DSB for lower extremity joint pain and dysfunction, further research is needed to investigate the efficacy and applicability of DSB.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.021 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".