Skip to main content
NCBI home page
PLOS One logoLink to PLOS One
. 2023 Nov 28;18(11):e0294945. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0294945

Blood pressure and heart rate variability responses following an acute bout of vinyasa yoga and a prolonged seated control: A randomized crossover trial

Alexis Thrower 1,*, Bethany Barone Gibbs 2, Abdullah Alansare 3, Sally Sherman 4, Kelliann Davis 4
Editor: Hidetaka Hamasaki5
PMCID: PMC10684087  PMID: 38015939

Abstract

Vinyasa yoga is moderate-intensity physical activity, yet physiological responses are poorly characterized. The purpose of this study was to examine the effect of a vinyasa yoga session on autonomic/cardiovascular functioning in healthy adults. A randomized crossover design took place at the Physical Activity and Weight Management laboratory (Pittsburgh, PA; n = 18), and included two experimental conditions: 60 minutes of vinyasa yoga or a seated control, and measurements were taken at baseline, 5-minutes, and 65-minute post-conditions. The primary cardiovascular-related outcomes of this study included blood pressure (BP), heart rate (HR), and HR variability (HRV) measures [natural log transformed (ln) standard deviation of normal-to-normal R-R intervals (SDNN), root mean square of successive differences (RMSSD), high frequency (HF), and low frequency to high frequency ratio (LF/HF ratio)]. Linear mixed effects models were used for data analyses. Systolic BP was 8.14 mmHg lower at 5 minutes post yoga (p<0.001) but was not different 65 minutes post, compared to the control. HR was higher at 5- and 65-minutes post yoga compared to the control (10.49/4.70 bpm, respectively, both p<0.01). HRV was lower (worse) at 5 and 65 minutes post for lnSDNN, lnRMSSD, and lnHF (all p<0.01). LF/HF ratio was higher (worse) at 5 minutes post yoga compared to the control (difference = +0.38, p = 0.025), but not different at 65 minutes post between conditions. Compared to prolonged sitting, vinyasa yoga had variable effects on post-session autonomic function including favorable BP responses and unfavorable HR and HRV responses, further investigation is warranted.

Background

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is an umbrella term including diseases of the heart and vasculature within the body [1]. The American Heart Association 2022 report found CVD to be the leading cause of death worldwide, [2] with previous evidence suggesting that there is a strong inverse relationship between cardiovascular health and all-cause and CVD mortality [3]. CVD is influenced by many health factors and behaviors including smoking, diabetes, overweight/obesity, poor diet, high cholesterol levels, high blood pressure (BP) and physical inactivity [1, 2] Physical inactivity is prevalent, with 76% of Americans not meeting the 2018 physical activity guidelines; however, meeting these specific activity guidelines can improve one’s cardiovascular health [4] Therefore, more Americans should aim to meet the physical activity guidelines to improve cardiovascular health and decrease both all-cause and CVD mortality risk.

Different modes of exercise can be performed to meet current physical activity guidelines like walking, running, or cycling. Millions of Americans are currently practicing yoga, [5] and our group has demonstrated that the vinyasa style of yoga, specifically, is a mode of moderate-intensity physical activity [6]. Yet, unlike more traditional modes of moderate exercise, vinyasa yoga consists of three components including physical postures (asanas) linked together into different series, breathing practices (pranayama), and mindfulness/meditation (dyna). These additional components may result in vinyasa yoga generating similar or more physiological benefits compared to other modes of physical activity [7].

Physical activity bouts of at least a moderate-intensity are known to improve (i.e., lower) post exercise HR [8] and BP [9, 10]. HR and BP changes from different activities are in part due to cardiac autonomic regulation in the body [11]. Heart rate variability (HRV), similar to HR and BP, is another measurement of cardiac autonomic regulation [12] and observing its function may be a powerful tool in understanding CVD risk [13]. HRV is defined as the time variation/fluctuation between consecutive heartbeats occurring due to the influence of the ANS’s two branches, the sympathetic and parasympathetic nervous systems [12]. HRV has been found to improve following exercise, but the time point at which HRV increased following exercise varied [11, 14, 15]. Moreover, almost no studies have evaluated HRV responses following a vinyasa yoga bout, despite its moderate intensity level and unique additional components.

To address research gaps about the relationship between vinyasa yoga and ANS function, the purpose of this study was to measure the effect of vinyasa yoga on autonomic regulation of the cardiovascular system (i.e., changes in BP, HR, and HRV) compared to a prolonged seated control condition.

Methods

Participants

A convenience sample of 18 unpaid volunteers were recruited for this study between April 1, 2022 through April 25, 2022. Participants were required to be between 18–55 years old and have had any experience with vinyasa yoga to ensure that they could appropriately perform the yoga sequence. Individuals were excluded from this study if they had physical limitations (i.e., musculoskeletal injuries), a medical condition that required medical clearance (i.e., cancer, heart disease, or type 1 or 2 diabetes), presence of a cardiovascular condition (CVD), previous myocardial infarction, or peripheral artery disease), were taking medications that affect HR or BP (i.e., anti-depressants, beta-blockers, etc.), or were pregnant.

Individuals were recruited through flyers distributed to students/staff in the Department of Health and Human Development at the University of Pittsburgh. All interested individuals gave verbal consent to complete a screening session, after which, if found to be eligible, they attended a virtual or in-person consent session to understand study requirements, obtain written consent, and determine vinyasa yoga familiarity. All study procedures were approved by the University of Pittsburgh Human Research Protection Office (IRB Approval Number: STUDY 22020050).

Assessment of participant characteristics

Baseline characteristics (height, weight, age, gender, physical activity levels, and yoga experience) were measured or self-reported at the beginning of the participants’ first in-person visit.

Height, weight, and body mass index (BMI)

Height was measured twice using a wall-mounted stadiometer and measured to the nearest 0.1 cm. Weight was also measured twice with a digital scale to the nearest 0.1 kg. BMI in kg/m2 was calculated from the height and weight measurements as weight (in kg) divided by height (in m2).

Age, gender, physical activity, and yoga experience

Age and gender were self-reported by the participants. Participants were also asked to self-report how many minutes a week they were physically active, the other physical activities they participated in weekly, and the number of times a week they were currently practicing yoga.

Experimental sessions

This study was a randomized crossover design (Fig 1) where the participants acted as their own control. Participant randomization to each order of conditions was determined through the sealed envelope technique. Under both conditions, the subjects completed the consent signing/orientation and then were randomized to an experimental condition when they attended their first in-person laboratory visit. Both conditions, the vinyasa yoga and prolonged seated control, lasted for 60 minutes.

Fig 1. Study design.

Fig 1

Open in a new tab

This figure displays the enrollment and study completion process for participants.

To maximize internal validity, the in-person laboratory visits were scheduled for the same time and day of the week, one week apart. BP, HR, and HRV measurements were taken following a 5-minute seated rest prior to each condition, and at 5- and 65-minutes post conditions. Room temperature was monitored and maintained at a temperature between 68–72°F (20–22.2°C) during all sessions. Participants were asked to wear comfortable clothes to both sessions to allow for ease of movement. They were also asked to refrain from nicotine and caffeine for six hours, eating for three hours, and intense exercise and alcohol consumption for 24 hours prior to scheduled visits.

Participants completed self-selected desk work for approximately 50 minutes as a washout period between the 5- and 65-minute post condition rest and measurements. They were instructed to choose desk work that they did not perceive as stressful (e.g., reading, work on a personal laptop) and complete similar tasks during both sessions to standardize the washout period between conditions.

Vinyasa yoga session

The same yoga mat and block were provided for the participants to use during each yoga session. A Polar heart rate monitor and BP cuff were applied to the subjects while instructions about the yoga session were explained to them. Then, subjects were instructed to sit quietly for 5 minutes, upright, in a chair, with their feet planted directly on the floor. Following this initial rest, resting BP, HR, and a 6-minute HRV measurement were measured and recorded. Only the BP cuff was removed following these resting measurements prior to the yoga condition. The Polar heart rate monitor was continuously worn by subjects during the session to ensure participant safety with HR being recorded in the last 10 seconds of every minute. Following these baseline measurements but prior to beginning the yoga condition, the subjects had the opportunity to review a list of the yoga poses that they would be performing that day. After they reviewed this list, they were allowed to ask for any pose demonstrations or clarifications before beginning the yoga protocol.

For the yoga condition, the assessor asked participants to follow a standardized yoga video that was used in the study conducted previously by our team [6]. This video was played on a large, 80-inch TV screen and included instructor cues of pose names and a person demonstrating the poses. For the current protocol (see S1 Fig), more instructor cues were added to this video providing additional breathing, and mindfulness cues. The yoga sequence was performed for 60-minutes and was a version of the Journey into Power sequence by Baron Baptiste [16]. The subjects were allowed to take any pose modifications that they would typically use in their own yoga practice, and this information was recorded as a measure of fidelity. When the subjects were participating in the yoga condition, the investigator (a 200-hour certified yoga instructor) observed the subject’s form and verbally corrected the subjects if it was necessary for safety concerns.

The BP cuff was re-placed on the subject when they moved to the resting measurement chair immediately following the yoga condition, and they rested again for 5 minutes. Following the 5-minute rest period, BP, HR, and HRV measurements were taken. The subjects relocated to a different chair in the same room where they performed seated desk work. At 60 minutes post yoga, subjects actively moved back to the resting measurement chair where they rested for a final 5 minutes and had their final measurements taken at 65 minutes post yoga.

Prolonged seated control condition

Before the prolonged seated control condition, the Polar heart rate monitor and BP cuff were applied to the subjects while the session instructions were explained to them. Then, subjects were instructed to sit quietly for 5 minutes, in a chair, in an upright position, with their feet planted directly on the floor. Following this 5-minute rest, subjects had their resting BP, HR, and a 6-minute HRV measurement taken. Similar to the yoga condition, the BP cuff was removed following these measurements and prior to the seated documentary viewing period. The Polar heart rate monitor remained on the subjects to record HR during the documentary viewing, in the last 10 seconds of every minute, to keep consistency between the conditions.

During the control condition, subjects moved from the measurement chair to be seated in a supportive chair within the same room. This chair is where they watched episodes of a nature documentary, 72 Cutest Animals, [17] for 60 minutes. After the 60-minutes of documentary viewing, the subject moved back to the resting measurement chair and the BP cuff was re-placed. Following the same protocol as the yoga session, subjects rested for 5 minutes and had their BP, HR, and HRV measured. They moved from the measurement chair to perform seated desk work, returned to the measurement chair at 60 minutes post condition, completed the 5-minute rest, and had their other measurements taken beginning at 65 minutes post documentary viewing.

Experimental session measurements

Blood pressure

BP was measured on the left arm with a Dinamap digital BP monitor with BP cuff size determined to ensure accurate measurements by finding the midpoint of the humerus and measuring the circumference at this midpoint. Both systolic BP (SBP) and diastolic BP (DBP) were recorded during BP measurements. BP was always taken following a 5-minute seated rest with the actual measurement occurring before, 5 minutes after, and 65 minutes after the vinyasa yoga and prolonged seated control conditions. The average from the two BP measurements was used for data analysis.

Heart rate/heart rate variability

HR and HRV were the final measurements taken at each measurement time point during the experimental sessions. They were measured for 6 minutes with a Polar H10 heart rate monitor. During resting conditions, the Polar H10 heart rate monitor is a highly validated for HR and HRV measures when compared to the electrocardiogram [18]. Kubios HRV software was utilized to analyze HRV data using R-R intervals including the time domain measures of mean HR, standard deviation of normal-to normal R-R intervals (SDNN), and root mean square of successive differences (RMSSD) [19]. Frequency domain variables included high frequency (HF) HRV and low frequency to high frequency ratio (LF/HF ratio). HR/HRV were measured before, 5-, and 65-minutes post conditions. Following the 5-minute rest and BP measurements, the HR/HRV recording lasted 6 minutes to record at least 5 minutes of usable data. Kubios also calculated breathing cycles per minute, so subjects were instructed to breathe normally during the 6-minute measurements.

Sample size determination and statistical analyses

A power analysis was performed to determine sample size for this study. Though we did not find acute within-subject data that were appropriate to estimate an expected effect size, we did find evidence that other mind-body practices resulted in moderate effects on HRV [20]. Thus, we assumed a moderate effect size of 0.5, a within-subject correlation of 0.75, power of 0.80, and a type 1 error rate set at α = 0.05, which resulted in a required sample size of 18 participants.

Statistical Analyses were performed with Stata SE version 17.0 with a statistical significance level of p< 0.05 [21]. Data was checked to ensure normal distributions before analyses were conducted, and log transformations were performed when appropriate. Linear mixed effects models evaluated within-subject changes for each variable (SBP, DBP, mean HR, SDNN, RMSSD, and HF) at each time point (5 minutes and 65 minutes post conditions). Further linear mixed effects models compared each variable between conditions overall and at each time point, with adjustment for baseline values.

Results

Of 22 individuals interested in volunteering for this study, 19 were found to be eligible, and 18 consented and participated in the study (Fig 2). One subject’s HR/HRV data was excluded from analysis due to technical issues. Participant characteristics are reported in Table 1.

Fig 2. Participant recruitment flow chart.

Fig 2

Open in a new tab

This flowchart displays participant recruitment and completion sample sizes.

Table 1. Participant characteristics.

Characteristics (N = 18) Mean (SD) or n (%)
Age (years) 28.7 (9.4)
BMI (kg/m2) 27.4 (5.6)
Gender
 Male 9 (50)
 Female 9 (50)
Weekly Exercise Minutes
 0–149 (min/week) 3 (17)
 >150 (min/week) 15 (83)
Number of Times Currently Practicing Yoga Weekly
 0 (days/week) 11 (61)
 >1 (days/week) 7 (39)
Open in a new tab

Data is presented as mean and standard deviation (SD) or sample size (n) and percentage (%)

Blood pressure

Effects of the experimental conditions on BP are reported in Fig 3. Within the vinyasa yoga condition, SBP and DBP were lower 5 minutes post yoga compared to baseline values (SBP: difference = -3.5 mmHg, p = 0.044; DBP: difference = -3.67 mmHg, p = 0.001). SBP was higher 5 minutes post seated control compared to baseline (difference = +4.8 mmHg, p = 0.040). Between conditions, SBP and DBP were lower 5 minutes post yoga compared to the seated control condition (SBP: difference = -8.14, p = 0.001; DBP: difference = -5.62, p = 0.001). There were no differences in BP either within or between conditions at 65-minutes post condition. Overall, BP was lower 5 minutes post yoga and was elevated following the seated control.

Fig 3. Blood presure responses across conditions (N = 18).

Fig 3

Open in a new tab

This figure displays systolic and diastolic blood pressure responses in millimeters of mercury (mmHg) across the yoga and seated control condition; *indicates a statistically significant difference in the change from baseline between conditions; Abbreviations: SBP = Systolic Blood Pressure, DBP = Diastolic Blood Pressure.

Heart rate/heart rate variability

HR/HRV results are reported in Fig 4. Within the vinyasa yoga condition, HR was higher 5 minutes post yoga compared to baseline values (difference = +6.60 bpm, p = 0.010). Within the control condition, HR was lower at both post seated control time points compared to baseline values (5-minutes: difference = -4.58 bpm, p = 0.001); (65-minutes: difference = -2.20 bpm, p = 0.001). Between conditions, the change in HR from baseline was higher 5 minutes post (difference = +10.49, p = 0.001) and 65 minutes (difference = +4.70 bpm, p = 0.002) post yoga compared to the seated control. HR was not different at 65 minutes post yoga compared to baseline values.

Fig 4. Heart rate variability responses across the vinyasa yoga and prolonged seated control conditions (n = 17).

Fig 4

Open in a new tab

This figure displays heart rate variability responses across conditions; *indicates a statistically significant difference in the change from baseline between conditions; Abbreviations: SBP = Systolic Blood Pressure, DBP = Diastolic Blood Pressure, HR = Heart Rate, SDNN = Standard Deviation of Normal-to-Normal R-R Intervals, RMSSD = Root Mean Square of Successive Differences, HF = High Frequency, and LF/HF = Low Frequency to High Frequency Ratio.

For HRV outcomes, only RMSSD was lower 5 minutes post yoga compared to baseline values (difference = -0.28, p = 0.014), with no other significant differences. Significant increases were found within the seated control condition at both time points for SDNN, RMSSD, and HF (all p<0.01) but not LF/HF ratio. Between conditions, SDNN, RMSSD, and HF were lower post yoga compared to the seated control at both time points (all p<0.01). LF/HF ratio was higher in the yoga condition at 5 minutes post compared to the seated condition (difference = +0.38, p = 0.025) but not at 65 minutes post. Overall, HRV was mostly unchanged within subjects following yoga, though responses were significantly worse after yoga compared to the favorable responses observed following the seated control.

Discussion

This study examined physiological (SBP, HR, and HRV) responses to a vinyasa yoga session compared to a prolonged seated control session. Compared to the seated control condition, vinyasa yoga elicited the hypothesized and favorable BP response by decreasing both SBP and DBP. Contrary to the hypotheses, HR and HRV responses were unexpected compared to the control, with HR increasing, most HRV variables decreasing, and LF/HF ratio slightly increasing at both time points following the yoga condition compared to the control. It is worth noting that even though HR remained above baseline values by 65 minutes post yoga, HR returned clinically near baseline values by the final, 65-minute post measurement (+0.72 bpm). HRV was lower following the yoga condition compared to the control, but this is largely reflected by a significant increase in HRV during the seated control condition.

Post yoga BP responses have not been thoroughly studied with a rigorous study design, but our BP results are similar to a recent study; Pina et al., that found non-significant BP decreases following a 60-minute bout of vinyasa yoga compared to baseline values [22]. Our findings are also consistent with previously observed SBP responses to a single bout of exercise. Both aerobic [10, 23] and resistance [23] exercise bouts established acute post-exercise hypotensive BP responses. Finally, BP responses to this study’s vinyasa yoga bout are consistent with a meta-analysis that found long term (4–52 week) yoga interventions generated moderate decreases in SBP and DBP, with greater reductions in BP from yoga interventions that included breathing awareness [24]. Proposed mechanisms for acute and chronic BP reductions post yoga are ANS influences, baroreceptor adjustments, and increased availability of vasodilators [9, 23]. These conclusions and our study’s findings are encouraging for utilizing vinyasa yoga as a method to improve BP, an aspect of cardiovascular health.

The BP responses to the seated control were also similar to previous studies. A study by our group found significant BP increases following a sedentary workday [25]. Lee et al., performed a systematic review and meta-analysis concluding that long-term sedentary behaviors are found to be associated with increases in both SBP and DBP [26]. These conclusions along with the findings of our study indicate that BP seems to increase in response to prolonged sitting, though importantly mechanisms explaining this effect are only partially understood. The proposed mechanisms for sitting-induced increases in BP include changes in ANS activity, [27] reduced nitric oxide availability, [28] reduced muscular demand, impaired vascular function, and reduced venous return in the lower limbs [29]. These events can lead to vasoconstriction [29] and fluid accumulation of the lower limbs [30], generating increases in BP. Future research is needed to clarify these mechanisms and identify strategies to reduce this effect.

Similar to post yoga BP responses, acute post yoga HR and HRV responses have not been thoroughly studied in large, diverse samples or utilizing standardized yoga protocols (i.e., reporting yoga style, yoga poses, pose duration, and breathing rate). Our HR and HRV responses post yoga were non-significant within subject and mostly unfavorable compared to the seated control. These HRV findings are consistent with a comprehensive review of some acute and long-term yoga interventions where mixed results were observed. As many studies in this review were poor quality with varying yoga intensities [31], our randomized crossover trial adds specific data about vinyasa yoga and acute effects. Furthermore, other studies investigating acute HRV responses to other types of exercise, such as aerobic and resistance training, have discovered that greater exercise intensity, duration, and volume more negatively influence autonomic responses, suggesting a dose-response relationship [11, 32, 33]. Further research is warranted with standardized and well-characterized yoga protocols to better understand autonomic responses to yoga.

The improved HR/HRV responses to the seated control from this study were not consistent with previous findings. Our group previously performed a meta-analysis of HR/HRV responses to bouts of prolonged sitting and found no significant changes in response to prolonged sitting bouts [34]. Although the reasons why our study’s HR/HRV responses were different from those of the meta-analysis are unclear, the BP responses to our study’s prolonged seated condition were typical. Taken together, the opposing cardiovascular responses to prolonged sitting, where BP increases, HR decreases, and HRV increases, may suggest that these changes may be strongly influenced by the different branches of the ANS acting independently of each other.

There are strengths and limitations to this study. The strengths include consistent visit times, the standardized yoga protocol, the randomized crossover design, an equal number of male and female subjects, measurement of respiration rate during HRV recordings, and a controlled room temperature. Despite these strengths, the limitations of our study should also be addressed. Weaknesses include utilizing a heart rate monitor rather than the gold standard electrocardiogram to measure HRV, studying a single style of yoga (vinyasa), including mostly participants that were meeting physical activity guidelines, a convenient (healthy) sample, and the laboratory setting which, though important for internal validity, may have reduced ecological validity. Further, though we intended our control condition to be a neutral comparison, prolonged sitting resulted in significant changes in our cardiovascular parameters which influence between-condition comparisons. The self-selected deskwork activity chosen for the washout period between post condition measures may also have influenced some of the changes observed in this study. Future studies should seek to recruit a more generalizable sample and investigate the effects of yoga over time in a parallel arm randomized controlled trial study design. Additionally, studies should consider including other yoga styles, other conditions that measure responses to the individual components of vinyasa yoga, comparison to a more neutral control condition or another type of moderate-intensity aerobic exercise, other ANS responses directly quantifying sympathetic activity, and follow-up measurements past 65 minutes following the cessation of exercise.

Conclusion

The results of this study signify that vinyasa yoga alters some autonomic and cardiovascular functioning by decreasing SBP and DBP, increasing HR, and having minimal impacts on HRV. There were also opposing physiological effects in response to the prolonged seated control, and yoga resulted in improved BP but less favorable HR and HRV in comparison. The opposing cardiovascular responses in this study indicate that acute BP, as compared to HR and HRV responses to vinyasa yoga and prolonged sitting may be predominantly influenced by different mechanisms. Overall, our findings potentially support vinyasa yoga as a strategy for acutely lowering BP though not for acute benefits in autonomic function.

Supporting information

S1 Fig. This figure displays the vinyasa yoga protocol followed for this study.

Poses are listed in order of how they were performed, and the number of breaths in each pose is listed after the pose name.

(TIFF)

Click here for additional data file. (5.2MB, tiff)
S1 Data. This is the minimal anonymized data set that was used for analyses in this manuscript.

The codebook is included as a second tab within the excel document.

(XLSX)

Click here for additional data file. (18.1KB, xlsx)

Data Availability

Anonymized data is available as S1 Data in this paper.

Funding Statement

The author(s) received no specific funding for this work.

References

  • 1.Cleveland Clini. Cardiovascular disease: Heart disease causes and symptoms. Cleveland Clinic 2021. https://my.clevelandclinic.org/health/diseases/21493-cardiovascular-disease (accessed April 30, 2022). [Google Scholar]
  • 2.American Heart Association. 2022. Heart Disease and Stroke Statistics Update Fact Sheet At-a-Glance n.d. [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Benjamin EJ, Muntner P, Alonso A, Bittencourt MS, Callaway CW, Carson AP, et al. Heart Disease and Stroke Statistics-2019 Update: A Report From the American Heart Association. Circulation 2019;139:e56–528. doi: 10.1161/CIR.0000000000000659 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Physical Activity Guidelines for Americans 2 nd edition. 2018. [Google Scholar]
  • 5.The 2016 Yoga in America Study Conducted by Yoga Journal and Yoga Alliance. 2016. [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Sherman SA, Rogers RJ, Davis KK, Minster RL, Creasy SA, Mullarkey NC, et al. Energy expenditure in vinyasa yoga versus walking. J Phys Act Health 2017;14:597–605. doi: 10.1123/jpah.2016-0548 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Yoga: What you need to know. 2021. n.d. https://www.nccih.nih.gov/health/yoga-what-you-need-to-know (accessed May 2, 2022). [Google Scholar]
  • 8.American College of Sports Medicine. ACSM’s Guidelines for Exercise Testing and Prescription Eighth Edition n.d. [DOI] [PubMed]
  • 9.Macdonald JR. Potential causes, mechanisms, and implications of post exercise hypotension. J Hum Hypertens 2002;16:225–36. doi: 10.1038/sj.jhh.1001377 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Cardoso CG, Gomides RS, Queiroz ACC, Pinto LG, Lobo F da S, Tinucci T, et al. Acute and chronic effects of aerobic and resistance exercise on ambulatory blood pressure. Clinics 2010;65:317–25. doi: 10.1590/S1807-59322010000300013 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Michael S, Graham KS, Oam GMD. Cardiac autonomic responses during exercise and post-exercise recovery using heart rate variability and systolic time intervals-a review. Front Physiol 2017;8. doi: 10.3389/fphys.2017.00301 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Staff HHP. Heart rate variability: How it might indicate well-being 2021. https://www.health.harvard.edu/blog/heart-rate-variability-new-way-track-well-2017112212789 (accessed May 2, 2022). [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Freeman J v., Dewey FE, Hadley DM, Myers J, Froelicher VF. Autonomic Nervous System Interaction With the Cardiovascular System During Exercise. Prog Cardiovasc Dis 2006;48:342–62. doi: 10.1016/j.pcad.2005.11.003 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Seiler S, Haugen O, Kuffel E. Autonomic recovery after exercise in trained athletes: Intensity and duration effects. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2007;39:1366–73. doi: 10.1249/mss.0b013e318060f17d [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Gambassi BB, Almeida F de JF, Almeida AEAF, Ribeiro DAF, Gomes RSA, Chaves LFC, et al. Acute response to aerobic exercise on autonomic cardiac control of patients in phase iii of a cardiovascular rehabilitation program following coronary artery bypass grafting. Braz J Cardiovasc Surg 2019;34:305–10. doi: 10.21470/1678-9741-2019-0030 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Baptiste B. Journey into Power. Atria Books; 2003. [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Mitchell G. 72 Cutest Animals. [Netflix streaming]; 2016. [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Schaffarczyk M, Rogers B, Reer R, Gronwald T. Validity of the Polar H10 Sensor for Heart Rate Variability Analysis during Resting State and Incremental Exercise in Recreational Men and Women. Sensors 2022;22:6536. doi: 10.3390/s22176536 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Kubios. Kubios HRV Scientific 4.0 n.d.
  • 20.Cavina APS, Silva NM, Biral TM, Lemos LK, Junior EP, Pastre CM, et al. Effects of 12-week Pilates training program on cardiac autonomic modulation: A randomized controlled clinical trial. J Comp Eff Res 2021;10:1363–72. doi: 10.2217/cer-2021-0195 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.StataCorp. Stata Statistical Software: Release 17 Standard Edition 2021. [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Pina AA, Shadiow J, Fadeyi AT, Chavez A, Hunter SD. The acute effects of vinyasa flow yoga on vascular function, lipid and glucose concentrations, and mood _ Elsevier Enhanced Reader. Complement Ther Med 2021. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Romero S, Minson C, Halliwill J. The cardiovascular system after exercise _ Enhanced Reader. The American Physiological Society 2017. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Wu Y, Johnson BT, Acabchuk RL, Chen S, Lewis HK, Livingston J, et al. Yoga as Antihypertensive Lifestyle Therapy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Mayo Clin Proc 2019;94:432–46. doi: 10.1016/j.mayocp.2018.09.023 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Alansare AB, Kowalsky RJ, Jones MA, Perdomo SJ, Stoner L, Gibbs BB. The Effects of a Simulated Workday of Prolonged Sitting on Seated versus Supine Blood Pressure and Pulse Wave Velocity in Adults with Overweight/Obesity and Elevated Blood Pressure. J Vasc Res 2020;57:355–66. doi: 10.1159/000510294 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Lee PH, Wong FKY. The Association Between Time Spent in Sedentary Behaviors and Blood Pressure: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Sports Medicine 2015;45:867–80. doi: 10.1007/s40279-015-0322-y [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Waxenbaum JA, Reddy V, Matthew;, Affiliations V. Anatomy, Autonomic Nervous System. n.d. [PubMed]
  • 28.Herrin N, Paterson D. Nitric oxide‐cGMP pathway facilitates acetylcholine release and bradycardia during vagal nerve stimulation in the guinea‐pig in vitro _ Enhanced Reader. Journal of Physiology 2001:507–8. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Restaino R, Holwerda S, Credeur D, Fadel P, Padilla J. Impact of prolonged sitting on lower and upper limb micro‐ and macrovascular dilator function _ Enhanced Reader. Experimental Physiologoy 2015:829–38. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Mittermayr M, Fries D, Gruber H, Peer S, Klingler A, Fischbach U, et al. Leg edema formation and venous blood flow velocity during a simulated long-haul flight. Thromb Res 2007;120:497–504. doi: 10.1016/j.thromres.2006.12.012 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Tyagi A, Cohen M. Yoga and heart rate variability: A comprehensive review of the literature. Int J Yoga 2016;9:97. doi: 10.4103/0973-6131.183712 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Marasingha-Arachchige SU, Rubio-Arias JÁ, Alcaraz PE, Chung LH. Factors that affect heart rate variability following acute resistance exercise: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Sport Health Sci 2022;11:376–92. doi: 10.1016/j.jshs.2020.11.008 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Gladwell VF, Sandercock GRH, Birch SL. Cardiac vagal activity following three intensities of exercise in humans. Clin Physiol Funct Imaging 2010;30:17–22. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-097X.2009.00899.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Bates LC, Alansare A, Gibbs BB, Hanson ED, Stoner L. Effects of Acute Prolonged Sitting and Interrupting Prolonged Sitting on Heart Rate Variability and Heart Rate in Adults: A Meta-Analysis. Front Physiol 2021;12. doi: 10.3389/fphys.2021.664628 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Decision Letter 0

Hidetaka Hamasaki

29 Aug 2023

PONE-D-23-23684Blood Pressure and Heart Rate Variability Responses to an Acute Bout of Vinyasa YogaPLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Thrower,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

==============================

ACADEMIC EDITOR:The study by Thrower et al. is a randomized crossover study that examines the effect of vinyasa yoga on autonomic nervous function, as measured by the changes in blood pressure, heart rate, and heart rate variability. The editor believes that the findings of your study will contribute to the current literature regarding the effect of mindfuleness-based interventions on autonomic nervous function. The manuscript is well-written and ready for revision.

==============================

Please submit your revised manuscript by Oct 13 2023 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Hidetaka Hamasaki

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at 

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and 

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

2. We note that you have indicated that data from this study are available upon request. PLOS only allows data to be available upon request if there are legal or ethical restrictions on sharing data publicly. For more information on unacceptable data access restrictions, please see http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-unacceptable-data-access-restrictions. 

In your revised cover letter, please address the following prompts:

a) If there are ethical or legal restrictions on sharing a de-identified data set, please explain them in detail (e.g., data contain potentially sensitive information, data are owned by a third-party organization, etc.) and who has imposed them (e.g., an ethics committee). Please also provide contact information for a data access committee, ethics committee, or other institutional body to which data requests may be sent.

b) If there are no restrictions, please upload the minimal anonymized data set necessary to replicate your study findings as either Supporting Information files or to a stable, public repository and provide us with the relevant URLs, DOIs, or accession numbers. For a list of acceptable repositories, please see http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-recommended-repositories.

We will update your Data Availability statement on your behalf to reflect the information you provide.

3. Please include your full ethics statement in the ‘Methods’ section of your manuscript file. In your statement, please include the full name of the IRB or ethics committee who approved or waived your study, as well as whether or not you obtained informed written or verbal consent. If consent was waived for your study, please include this information in your statement as well. 

4. We notice that your supplementary [Figure S1] are included in the manuscript file. Please remove them and upload them with the file type 'Supporting Information'. Please ensure that each Supporting Information file has a legend listed in the manuscript after the references list.

5. Please include captions for your Supporting Information files at the end of your manuscript, and update any in-text citations to match accordingly. Please see our Supporting Information guidelines for more information: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/supporting-information. 

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Partly

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: No

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: The manuscript is technically sound and presented lucidly . The data analysis and results are clear and understandably explained. The study protocol is clear. The discussion supports the study findings. However, the convenience sampling method along with the pre and post intervention pattern used for the study is a weaker option whereas a randomized control would have strengthened the study.

Reviewer #2: I reviewed with interest the article by Alexis Thrower and al. "Blood Pressure and Heart Rate Variability Responses to an Acute Bout of Vinyasa Yoga". In this article, the authors studied blood pressure and  heart rate variability response to an acute 60 minutes long bout of vinyasa Yoga compared to 60 minutes of prolonged seated condition when watching a relaxing television programme. They used a randomized crossover design. They were able to show that systolic and diastolic blood pressure significantly decreased immediately after vinyasa yoga when compared to prolonged seated condition. No such difference between the groups could be detected after 60 minutes of desk work. Heart rate was significantly higher, both immediately after vinyasa yoga and after 60 minutes of desk work, compared to prolonged seated condition. Heart rate variables lnSDNN and lnRMSSD were slightly, but statistically higher both immediately after Vinyasa yoga and after 60 minutes of desk work compared to prolonged seated condition. LnHF was slightly, but statistically higher immediately after vinyasa yoga compared to prolonged seated condition. However, when reviewing the manuscript, I had comments that I would like to receive answers from the authors. Some changes should be made by the authors as well in order to improve the article.

Firstly, the article's title does not reflect the study design concept. In the study design both interventions (vinyasa yoga and prolonged seated condition) are followed by 60 minutes of desk work. Type of desk work has not been specified and described in the article at all. Since the type of work and work itself has an effect on HRV variables this should be described in detail and mentioned/explained in the discussion. Example: Office workers with high effort-reward imbalance and overcommitment have greater decreases in heart rate variability over a 2-h working period. Jennifer L Garza et al. PMID: 25249418 DOI: 10.1007/s00420-014-0983-0. Heart rate variability and occupational stress—systematic review. Susanna JÄRVELIN-PASANEN et al. PMID: 29910218, doi: 10.2486/indhealth.2017-0190.

A title should be changed to reflect the true study design. Firstly there is vinyasa yoga intervention vs. prolonged seated intervention. First measurements were made right after that intervention, but after that a 60 minut desk work exposure follows. This could be seen as another important intervention by itself that affects later measurements and is not merely a time gap period for further evaluation of the yoga vs. prolonged seating. This should be further addressed in the Discussion as well.

Secondly, heart rate and heart rate variability measurements were made with the Polar heart rate monitor. No specific data on the model was provided and no possible validation studies regarding using that model were provided.Example: Validity of the Polar H10 Sensor for Heart Rate Variability Analysis during Resting State and Incremental Exercise in Recreational Men and Women. Marcelle Schaffarczyk. PMID: 36081005, doi: 10.3390/s22176536.This should be addressed and corrected by the authors.

Thirdly, references do not include previous studies involving yoga and HRV. Example: Yoga and heart rate variability: A comprehensive review of the literature. Anupama Tyagi. PMID: 27512317, doi: 10.4103/0973-6131.183712. This should be corrected and used in the Discussion section.

Fourthly, lnLF/HF ratio could also be used in HRV measurements. These results have not been shown in the paper. Authors should comment on that and/or include this data in the paper.

Authors should use corrections and additions to the paper related to all of the above mentioned points to further clarify the statement that different mechanisms are predominantly responsible for apparent discrepancy in the outcome variables (line 332). This should be addressed in somewhat greater detail in the discussion section, especially as proposed speculation/explanation for the observed discrepancy in (line 298 to 301) does not seem to make sense and no references were attached to this statement. Better speculations could be made if relying on the data already published. Examples: Cheema BS, Houridis A, Busch L, Raschke-Cheema V, Melville GW, Marshall PW, et al. Effect of an office worksite-based yoga program on heart rate variability: Outcomes of a randomized controlled trial. BMC Complement Altern Med. 2013;13:82. PMID: 23574691, 10. doi: 10.1186/1472-6882-13-82.Effective and Viable Mind-Body Stress Reduction in the Workplace:

A Randomized Controlled Trial. Ruth Q Wolever. PMID: 22352291 DOI: 10.1037/a0027278

Fourthly, Celsius degrees should be added to Fahrenheit degrees in order to further internationalize the paper. This should be corrected by the authors.

Lastly, conclusions should be based only on the data provided by the study. Data does not support the statement that vinyasa yoga improves cardiovascular health as HRV results are somewhat worse after yoga compared to prolonged sitting and significant reduction in blood pressure is only present immediately after yoga intervention. Authors should address this issue very carefully.

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: Yes: R.ARCHANA

Reviewer #2: Yes: Ivan Žebeljan

**********

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

PLoS One. 2023 Nov 28;18(11):e0294945. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0294945.r002

Author response to Decision Letter 0

27 Sep 2023

Dear Dr. Hamasaki,

Thank you for the opportunity to submit a revised draft of our manuscript now titled, ‘Blood pressure and heart rate variability responses following an acute bout of vinyasa yoga and a prolonged seated control: a randomized crossover trial’ to PLOS ONE. We appreciate you and the reviewers taking the time and effort to provide valuable feedback on this manuscript. For each comment, we have responded in a point-by-point fashion and incorporated changes to reflect the suggestions provided by the reviewers. All changes are detailed following the reviewers’ comments below and tracked within the manuscript Word document. We feel these edits have much improved the manuscript, and we hope you will too. We look forward to further review at PLOS ONE.

Sincerely,

Alexis Thrower, MS

Graduate Student Researcher

Doctoral Student in Exercise Physiology

Department of Exercise Physiology

Comments from Reviewer 1

Comment 1: The manuscript is technically sound and presented lucidly. The data analysis and results are clear and understandably explained. The study protocol is clear. The discussion supports the study findings. However, the convenience sampling method along with the pre and post intervention pattern used for the study is a weaker option whereas a randomized control would have strengthened the study.

Thank you for this suggestion regarding the sample and study design. We agree that more representative sampling and randomized clinical trial study designs with exposure to yoga and the observation of outcomes over time would have strengthened our study. We note that we did use a randomized crossover, within-subjects design with a comparison condition (not just pre- and post-) which is a strong design for acute effects. We have added the reviewer’s points as future directions to the last paragraph of the discussion section as follows (edits presented below with bold, blue font):

“The activity chosen for the washout period between post condition measures may also have influenced some of the changes observed in this study. Future studies should seek to recruit a more generalizable sample and investigate the effects of yoga over time in a parallel arm randomized controlled trial study design. Additionally, studies should consider including other yoga styles, other conditions that measure responses to the individual…”

Comments from Reviewer 2

Comment 1: Firstly, the article's title does not reflect the study design concept. In the study design both interventions (vinyasa yoga and prolonged seated condition) are followed by 60 minutes of desk work. Type of desk work has not been specified and described in the article at all. Since the type of work and work itself has an effect on HRV variables this should be described in detail and mentioned/explained in the discussion. Example: Office workers with high effort-reward imbalance and overcommitment have greater decreases in heart rate variability over a 2-h working period. Jennifer L Garza et al. PMID: 25249418 DOI: 10.1007/s00420-014-0983-0. Heart rate variability and occupational stress—systematic review. Susanna JÄRVELIN-PASANEN et al. PMID: 29910218, doi: 10.2486/indhealth.2017-0190. A title should be changed to reflect the true study design. Firstly there is vinyasa yoga intervention vs. prolonged seated intervention. First measurements were made right after that intervention, but after that a 60 minut desk work exposure follows. This could be seen as another important intervention by itself that affects later measurements and is not merely a time gap period for further evaluation of the yoga vs. prolonged seating. This should be further addressed in the Discussion as well.

We agree that the title could be more relevant to this manuscript and that we should include more information related to the desk work portion of the study. These changes can be found in the title on the title page of the document, in the short title of the header of each page, and are presented below in bold, blue font. In the methods section, changes were made to elaborate on what desk work included for these participants. A third paragraph was added to the Experimental sessions section and is included below for your reference. The limitation of the desk work activity was also addressed in the last paragraph of the discussion section and included below.

Title: Blood pressure and heart rate variability responses following an acute bout of vinyasa yoga and a prolonged seated control: a randomized crossover trial

Short title: Autonomic and cardiovascular responses to a yoga session and seated control

Methods: “Participants completed self-selected desk work for approximately 50 minutes as a washout period between the 5- and 65-minute post condition rest and measurements. They were instructed to choose desk work that they did not perceive as stressful (e.g., reading, work on a personal laptop) and complete similar tasks during both sessions to standardize the washout period between conditions.”

Discussion: “Further, though we intended our control condition to be a neutral comparison, prolonged sitting resulted in significant changes in our cardiovascular parameters which influence between-condition comparisons. The self-selected deskwork activity chosen for the washout period between post condition measures may also have influenced some of the changes observed in this study. Future studies should consider including other yoga styles, other conditions that measure responses to the individual components of vinyasa yoga, comparison to a more neutral control condition or another type of moderate-intensity aerobic exercise, other ANS responses directly quantifying sympathetic activity, and follow-up measurements past 65 minutes following the cessation of exercise.”

Comment 2: Secondly, heart rate and heart rate variability measurements were made with the Polar heart rate monitor. No specific data on the model was provided and no possible validation studies regarding using that model were provided.Example: Validity of the Polar H10 Sensor for Heart Rate Variability Analysis during Resting State and Incremental Exercise in Recreational Men and Women. Marcelle Schaffarczyk. PMID: 36081005, doi: 10.3390/s22176536.This should be addressed and corrected by the authors.

Thank you for bringing this to our attention. The model and a statement regarding the validity of the heart rate monitor was added under the Methods section within the first paragraph of the Heart rate/heart rate variability subheading.

“HR and HRV were the final measurements taken at each measurement time point during the experimental sessions and using a Polar H10 heart rate monitor. During resting conditions, the Polar H10 heart rate monitor is highly validated for HR and HRV measures when compared to the electrocardiogram.(1) Kubios HRV software was utilized to analyze HRV data using R-R intervals including the time domain measures of mean HR, standard deviation of normal-to normal R-R intervals (SDNN), and root mean square of successive differences (RMSSD).(2)”

Comment 3: Thirdly, references do not include previous studies involving yoga and HRV. Example: Yoga and heart rate variability: A comprehensive review of the literature. Anupama Tyagi. PMID: 27512317, doi: 10.4103/0973-6131.183712. This should be corrected and used in the Discussion section.

Thank you for this suggestion. A statement and citation were added to the fourth paragraph of the discussion section to mention the comprehensive review of previous heart rate variability responses to yoga.

“Similar to post yoga BP responses, acute post yoga HR and HRV responses have not been thoroughly studied in large, diverse samples or utilizing standardized yoga protocols (i.e., reporting yoga style, yoga poses, pose duration, and breathing rate). Our HR and HRV responses post yoga were non-significant within subject and mostly unfavorable compared to the seated control. These HRV findings are consistent with a comprehensive review of some acute and long-term yoga interventions where mixed results were observed. As many studies in this review were poor quality with varying yoga intensities,(3) our randomized crossover trial adds specific data about vinyasa yoga and acute effects. Furthermore, other studies investigating acute HRV responses to other types of exercise, such as aerobic and resistance training, have discovered that greater exercise intensity, duration, and volume more negatively influence autonomic responses, suggesting a dose-response relationship.(4–6) Further research is warranted with standardized and well-characterized yoga protocols to better understand autonomic responses to yoga.”

Comment 4: Fourthly, lnLF/HF ratio could also be used in HRV measurements. These results have not been shown in the paper. Authors should comment on that and/or include this data in the paper.

Thank you for suggesting this additional HRV variable. LF/HF ratio was added to this manuscript in the abstract, the methods section in the first paragraph of the Heart rate/heart rate variability subheading, and to the results section in the second paragraph under the Heart rate/heart rate variability section. Additionally, LF/HF ratio was added to Figure 4.

Abstract: “The primary cardiovascular-related outcomes of this study included blood pressure (BP), heart rate (HR), and HR variability (HRV) measures [natural log transformed (ln) standard deviation of normal-to-normal R-R intervals (SDNN), root mean square of successive differences (RMSSD), high frequency (HF), and low frequency to high frequency ratio (LF/HF ratio)]. Linear mixed effects models were used for data analyses. Systolic BP was 8.14 mmHg lower at 5 minutes post yoga (p<0.001) but was not different 65 minutes post, compared to the control. HR was higher at 5- and 65-minutes post yoga compared to the control (10.49/4.70 bpm, respectively, both p<0.01). HRV was lower (worse) at 5 and 65 minutes post for lnSDNN, lnRMSSD, and lnHF (all p<0.01). LF/HF ratio was higher (worse) at 5 minutes post yoga compared to the control (difference= +0.38, p=0.025), but not different at 65 minutes post between conditions. Compared to prolonged sitting, vinyasa…”

Methods: “Kubios HRV software was utilized to analyze HRV data using R-R intervals including the time domain measures of mean HR, standard deviation of normal-to normal R-R intervals (SDNN), and root mean square of successive differences (RMSSD).(2) Frequency domain variables included high frequency (HF) HRV and low frequency to high frequency ratio (LF/HF ratio). HR/HRV were measured before, 5-, and 65-minutes post conditions. Following the 5-minute rest and BP measurements, the HR/HRV recording lasted 6 minutes to record at least 5 minutes of usable data.”

Results: “Significant increases were found within the seated control condition at both time points for SDNN, RMSSD, and HF (all p<0.01) but not LF/HF ratio. Between conditions, SDNN, RMSSD, and HF were lower post yoga compared to the seated control at both time points (all p<0.01). LF/HF ratio was higher in the yoga condition at 5 minutes post compared to the seated condition (difference= +0.38, p=0.025) but not at 65 minutes post. Overall, HRV was mostly unchanged within subjects following yoga, though responses were significantly worse after yoga compared to the favorable responses observed following the seated control.”

Discussion: “Compared to the seated control condition, vinyasa yoga elicited the hypothesized and favorable BP response by decreasing both SBP and DBP. Contrary to the hypotheses, HR and HRV responses were unexpected compared to the control, with HR increasing and most HRV variables worsening at both time points following the yoga condition compared to the control.”

Figure 4 addition: (included in revise and resubmit letter)

Comment 5: Authors should use corrections and additions to the paper related to all of the above mentioned points to further clarify the statement that different mechanisms are predominantly responsible for apparent discrepancy in the outcome variables (line 332). This should be addressed in somewhat greater detail in the discussion section, especially as proposed speculation/explanation for the observed discrepancy in (line 298 to 301) does not seem to make sense and no references were attached to this statement. Better speculations could be made if relying on the data already published. Examples: Cheema BS, Houridis A, Busch L, Raschke-Cheema V, Melville GW, Marshall PW, et al. Effect of an office worksite-based yoga program on heart rate variability: Outcomes of a randomized controlled trial. BMC Complement Altern Med. 2013;13:82. PMID: 23574691, 10. doi: 10.1186/1472-6882-13-82.Effective and Viable Mind-Body Stress Reduction in the Workplace:A Randomized Controlled Trial. Ruth Q Wolever. PMID: 22352291 DOI: 10.1037/a0027278

Thank you for the suggestions thus far and for requesting clarification regarding different mechanisms influencing the outcome variables. Adjustments were made in the second and fourth paragraph of the discussion section to clarify and simplify these paragraphs and this idea. We also made a small change to the conclusion paragraph. Your citation suggestions are included in the review that was added based on your third comment (above); therefore, we did not to add them individually in the discussion section.

Second paragraph: “Finally, BP responses to this study’s vinyasa yoga bout are consistent with a meta-analysis that found longer term (4-52 week) yoga interventions generated moderate decreases in SBP and DBP, with greater reductions in BP from yoga interventions that included breathing awareness.(8) Proposed mechanisms for acute and chronic BP reductions from yoga are ANS influences, baroreceptor adjustments, and increased availability of vasodilators.(9,10) These conclusions and our study’s findings are encouraging for utilizing vinyasa yoga as a method to improve BP, an aspect of cardiovascular health.”

Fourth paragraph: “Similar to post yoga BP responses, acute post yoga HR and HRV responses have not been thoroughly studied in large, diverse samples or utilizing standardized yoga protocols (i.e., reporting yoga style, yoga poses, pose duration, and breathing rate). Our HR and HRV responses post yoga were non-significant within subject and mostly unfavorable compared to the seated control. These HRV findings are consistent with a comprehensive review of some acute and long-term yoga interventions where mixed results were observed. As many studies in this review were poor quality with varying yoga intensities,(3) our randomized crossover trial adds specific data about vinyasa yoga and acute effects. Furthermore, other studies investigating acute HRV responses to other types of exercise, such as aerobic and resistance training, have discovered that greater exercise intensity, duration, and volume more negatively influence autonomic responses, suggesting a dose-response relationship.(4–6) Further research is warranted with standardized and well-characterized yoga protocols to better understand autonomic responses to yoga.”

Conclusion: “There were also opposing physiological effects in response to the prolonged seated control, and yoga resulted in improved BP but less favorable HR and HRV in comparison. The opposing cardiovascular responses in this study indicate that acute BP as compared to HR and HRV responses to vinyasa yoga and prolonged sitting may be predominantly influenced by different mechanisms. Overall, our findings further support vinyasa yoga as a promising strategy for acutely lowering BP, but further investigation may be necessary to determine if vinyasa yoga improves other aspects of cardiovascular health.”

Comment 6: Fourthly, Celsius degrees should be added to Fahrenheit degrees in order to further internationalize the paper. This should be corrected by the authors.

Thank you for this suggestion. Celsius degrees were added to the methods section under the Experimental sessions subheading’s second paragraph and is displayed below with bolded and blue font.

“Room temperature was monitored and maintained at a temperature between 68-72 °F (20-22.2 °C) during all sessions. Participants were asked to wear comfortable clothes to both sessions to allow for ease of movement. They were also asked to refrain from nicotine and caffeine for six hours, eating for three hours, and intense exercise and alcohol consumption for 24 hours prior to scheduled visits.”

Comment 7: Lastly, conclusions should be based only on the data provided by the study. Data does not support the statement that vinyasa yoga improves cardiovascular health as HRV results are somewhat worse after yoga compared to prolonged sitting and significant reduction in blood pressure is only present immediately after yoga intervention. Authors should address this issue very carefully.

Thank you for bringing this to our attention. We agree that our final conclusions could be tempered to more accurately reflect on our study findings. Adjustments were made to the last paragraph of the results section, the second paragraph of the discussion section, and the first paragraph of the conclusion section based off of this suggestion.

Abstract: “Compared to prolonged sitting, vinyasa yoga had variable effects on post-session autonomic function including favorable BP responses and unfavorable HR and HRV responses, further investigation is warranted.”

Results: “Between conditions, SDNN, RMSSD, and HF were lower post yoga compared to the seated control at both time points (all p<0.01). LF/HF ratio was higher 5 minutes post between conditions (difference= +0.38, p=0.025) but not at 65 minutes post. Overall, HRV was mostly unchanged within subjects following yoga, though responses were significantly worse after yoga compared to the favorable responses observed following the seated control.”

Discussion: “Finally, BP responses to this study’s vinyasa yoga bout are consistent with a meta-analysis that found long term (4-52 week) yoga interventions generated moderate decreases in SBP and DBP, with greater reductions in BP from yoga interventions that included breathing awareness.(8) Previously suggested mechanisms for hypotensive BP responses to exercise are ANS influences, baroreceptor adjustments, and increased availability of vasodilators.(9,10) These conclusions and our study’s findings are encouraging for utilizing vinyasa yoga as a method to improve BP, an aspect of cardiovascular health.”

Conclusion: “The results of this study signify that vinyasa yoga alters some autonomic and cardiovascular functioning by decreasing SBP and DBP, increasing HR, and having minimal impacts on HRV. There were also opposing physiological effects in response to the prolonged seated control, and yoga resulted in improved BP but less favorable HR and HRV in comparison. The results of this study indicate that acute BP, HR, and HRV responses to vinyasa yoga and prolonged sitting may be predominantly influenced by different mechanisms. Overall, our findings potentially support vinyasa yoga as a strategy for acutely lowering BP though not for acute benefits in autonomic function.”

In addition to the above comments, additional edits were made to the formatting of the manuscript to better reflect the PLOS ONE guidelines and more information was added regarding the ethics of this study. Finally, all figures were uploaded to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic and reuploaded to this submission. We look forward to hearing from you regarding this manuscript resubmission and to continue the peer review process.

Attachment

Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers Letter.docx

Click here for additional data file. (784KB, docx)

Decision Letter 1

Hidetaka Hamasaki

13 Nov 2023

Blood pressure and heart Rate variability responses following an acute bout of vinyasa yoga and a prolonged seated control: a randomized crossover trial

PONE-D-23-23684R1

Dear Dr. Thrower,

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice for payment will follow shortly after the formal acceptance. To ensure an efficient process, please log into Editorial Manager at http://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the 'Update My Information' link at the top of the page, and double check that your user information is up-to-date. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

Hidetaka Hamasaki

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. If the authors have adequately addressed your comments raised in a previous round of review and you feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication, you may indicate that here to bypass the “Comments to the Author” section, enter your conflict of interest statement in the “Confidential to Editor” section, and submit your "Accept" recommendation.

Reviewer #2: All comments have been addressed

**********

2. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

6. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #2: I reviewed with interest the updated article by Alexis Thrower and al. "Blood pressure and heart Rate variability responses following an acute bout of vinyasa yoga and a prolonged seated control: a randomized crossover trial". I feel that the authors have made changes that enable the article to be published.

**********

7. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #2: Yes: Ivan Žebeljan

**********

Acceptance letter

Hidetaka Hamasaki

16 Nov 2023

PONE-D-23-23684R1

Blood pressure and heart Rate variability responses following an acute bout of vinyasa yoga and a prolonged seated control: a randomized crossover trial

Dear Dr. Thrower:

I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now with our production department.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information please contact onepress@plos.org.

If we can help with anything else, please email us at customercare@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access.

Kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Dr. Hidetaka Hamasaki

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Associated Data

    This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

    Supplementary Materials

    S1 Fig. This figure displays the vinyasa yoga protocol followed for this study.

    Poses are listed in order of how they were performed, and the number of breaths in each pose is listed after the pose name.

    (TIFF)

    Click here for additional data file. (5.2MB, tiff)
    S1 Data. This is the minimal anonymized data set that was used for analyses in this manuscript.

    The codebook is included as a second tab within the excel document.

    (XLSX)

    Click here for additional data file. (18.1KB, xlsx)
    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers Letter.docx

    Click here for additional data file. (784KB, docx)

    Data Availability Statement

    Anonymized data is available as S1 Data in this paper.

    Articles from PLOS ONE are provided here courtesy of PLOS

    RESOURCES