Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35601033›Full record

ReviewHealth science reports2022

Device and nondevice-guided slow breathing to reduce blood pressure in hypertensive patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Kamila S de Freitas Gonçalves, Ana C Queiroz Godoy Daniel, José L Tatagiba Lamas, Henrique C Oliveira, Lyne Cloutier, Renata C De Campos Pereira Silveira, Eugenia V Veiga

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Health science reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 19% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Effect of breathing exercises on blood pressure and heart rate: A systematic review and meta-analysis.International journal of cardiology. Cardiovascular risk and prevention · 2024
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Kamila S de Freitas GonçalvesWHO Collaborating Centre for Nursing Research Development, College of Nursing University of São Paulo Ribeirão Preto Brazil.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0923-2919
Ana C Queiroz Godoy DanielWHO Collaborating Centre for Nursing Research Development, College of Nursing University of São Paulo Ribeirão Preto Brazil.
José L Tatagiba LamasSchool of Nursing University of Campinas Campinas Brazil.
Henrique C OliveiraSchool of Nursing University of Campinas Campinas Brazil.
Lyne CloutierDepartment of Nursing Université du Québec à Trois-Rivières Québec Canada.
Renata C De Campos Pereira SilveiraWHO Collaborating Centre for Nursing Research Development, College of Nursing University of São Paulo Ribeirão Preto Brazil.
Eugenia V VeigaWHO Collaborating Centre for Nursing Research Development, College of Nursing University of São Paulo Ribeirão Preto Brazil.
Universidade de São Paulo · BRUniversidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP) · BRUniversité du Québec à Trois-Rivières · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Backgroud and Aims: Hypertension (HTN) is a multifactorial chronic disease. Considering the high prevalence rates of this disease, treatment of HTN is necessary, not only to reduce blood pressure (BP) levels but also to prevent the development of cardiovascular, cerebrovascular, and kidney diseases. This treatment can be through medication, which will be determined according to the BP values, obtained either in medical consultations or at home; presence of cardiovascular risk factors, and the presence of target organ damage identified during anamnesis. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to summarize the effects of device-guided slow breathing (DGSB) and nondevice-guided slow breathing (NDGSB) on BP levels of patients with HTN. Methods: This study is a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials, pertaining to hypertensive patients, with or without comorbidity, over 18 years old, of both sexes, and with or without hypertensive medication. The selected studies showed comparisons between groups that performed DGSB and/or NDGSB with control conditions. The primary outcome was the value of systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) after the interventions. Results: Twenty-two studies involving 17,214 participants were included in the quantitative analysis. Considerable heterogeneity was revealed between studies. Using random effect model, it was found that DGSB did not significantly reduce SBP and DBP compared to usual care, both in terms BP values and in relation to their variations (SBP, mean difference [MD]: -2.13 mmHg, (95% confidence interval [CI]: -12.71 to 8.44), 288 individuals; Conclusion: Based on these results it appears that DGSB did not reduce BP in hypertensive patients and NDGSB is a new path for the future.

Indexed as

breathing exercisesedevice‐guided breathinghypertensionphysical therapy modalitiesresperatesystematic review

Identifiers

PMID35601033
PMCPMC9110782
OpenAlexW4280643657

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.