A hypotensive protocol of inspiratory muscle strength training: Systematic review and meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis

1Citations
Citations of this article
20Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

The aim of this study was to evaluate the hypotensive effect and optimal protocol of inspiratory muscle resistance training (IMST). Randomized controlled trials using IMST to lower blood pressure (BP) were retrieved from 12 databases as of July 2022. A meta-analysis of BP and heart rate variability (HRV) was performed and a trial sequence analysis was performed using trial sequential analysis (TSA) software. Twelve articles (n = 386 participants) from five countries were included, with a mean quality score of 5.83. IMST achieved significant results in reducing systolic, diastolic, and mean arterial pressure (−7.93 [−12.08, −3.78]; −3.80 [−6.08, −1.53]; −4.90 [−13.76, 3.96]). Furthermore, TSA has shown that the findings for systolic and diastolic BP are conclusive. Finally, considerable variation remained between studies when analyzing HRV. The overall hypotensive effect of IMST was demonstrated by the TSA and was well tolerated in different populations. Of these, two interventions, high resistance or low resistance combined with slow breathing, showed the best efficacy under an 8-week exercise intervention. In addition, the process of lowering BP by modulating sympathetic vagal activity has not been further confirmed in this study. Future long-term interventions, especially those over 3 months, are needed to observe the prolonged antihypertensive effects and modulatory mechanisms; controlling for variables such as respiratory rate and executing more rigorous studies to further explore antihypertensive options.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Li, W., Zhu, X., Wang, X., Liu, H., Liu, J., Xiao, H., … Wu, Y. (2023). A hypotensive protocol of inspiratory muscle strength training: Systematic review and meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis. Journal of Clinical Hypertension, 25(11), 971–982. https://doi.org/10.1111/jch.14655

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free