Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40808975›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of clinical and health psychology : IJCHP

The effectiveness and user preferences of two tactile breathing devices in reducing stress in stressed individuals: A mixed methods study.

E Honinx, M Meys, S Broes, L Van Langenhoven, R Janssens, I Huys, V Oswald, J Annen, S Laureys, C Martial and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of clinical and health psychology : IJCHP. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

11 authors.

E HoninxMoonbird, Antwerp, Belgium.
M MeysComa Science Group, GIGA-Consciousness, University of Liège, Belgium.
S BroesMoonbird, Antwerp, Belgium.
L Van LangenhovenKU Leuven - University of Leuven, I-BioStat, Leuven B-3000, Belgium.
R JanssensKU Leuven - University of Leuven, Clinical Pharmacology and Pharmacotherapy, Leuven B-3000, Belgium.
I HuysKU Leuven - University of Leuven, Clinical Pharmacology and Pharmacotherapy, Leuven B-3000, Belgium.
V OswaldCognitive and Computational Neuroscience Lab, Psychology Département, University of Montréal, Montreal, Canada.
J AnnenComa Science Group, GIGA-Consciousness, University of Liège, Belgium.
S LaureysComa Science Group, GIGA-Consciousness, University of Liège, Belgium.
C MartialComa Science Group, GIGA-Consciousness, University of Liège, Belgium.
O GosseriesComa Science Group, GIGA-Consciousness, University of Liège, Belgium.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Rising stress levels have led to increased interest in stress management tools, particularly tactile breathing devices. Despite their popularity, there is limited evidence on their physiological and psychological effectiveness and user perceptions. This study evaluates the effectiveness of and preferences toward two tactile breathing devices among highly stressed individuals. Methods: The study involved 36 participants using two breathing devices, moonbird and Core. Physiological data were collected using EEG, ECG, and a breathing belt. User preferences and self-reported experiences were assessed via questionnaires. Results: Moonbird usage was associated with increased delta power and decreased alpha power, while Core did not significantly modify EEG power. ECG analysis indicated no significant differences in mean heart rate between devices. Both devices reduced heart rate variability during use, but no lasting effects were observed post-intervention. Respiratory rates decreased during both devices' use, with moonbird showing more sustained effects post-intervention. There were no significant differences in self-reported relaxation and energy levels between the devices, though moonbird was preferred overall for its handling and breathing guidance. Conclusion: Both devices demonstrated the ability to lower physiological stress, as indicated by improvements in certain neurophysiological measures during use, with moonbird preferred for its ergonomic design and tactile feedback. These findings underscore the importance of user experience in device effectiveness, highlighting the need for a user-centric approach in device design. Future research should explore long-term effectiveness, real-world user feedback, and the physiological and psychological mechanisms associated with these devices.

Indexed as

Breathing devicesECGEEGPhysiological measuresRespirationStress managementUser preferences

Identifiers

PMID40808975
PMCPMC12343360

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.