PDF(Sci-hub)
Abstract：
BACKGROUND: The neurobiology of persistent pain shares common underlying psychobiology with that of traumatic stress. Modern treatments for traumatic stress often involve bottom-up sensorimotor retraining/exposure therapies, where breath, movement, balance and mindfulness, are used to target underlying psychobiology. Vigorous exercise, in particular Bikram yoga, combines many of these sensorimotor/exposure therapeutic features. However, there is very little research investigating the feasibility and efficacy of such treatments for targeting the underlying psychobiology of persistent pain.
METHODS: This study was a randomized controlled trail (RCT) comparing the efficacy of Bikram yoga versus high intensity interval training (HIIT), for improving persistent pain in women aged 20 to 50 years. The participants were 1:1 randomized to attend their assigned intervention, 3 times per week, for 8 weeks. The primary outcome measure was the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) and further pain related biopsychosocial secondary outcomes, including SF-36 Medical Outcomes and heart rate variability (HRV), were also explored. Data was collected pre (t0) and post (t1) intervention via an online questionnaire and physiological testing.
RESULTS: A total of 34 women were recruited from the community. Analyses using ANCOVA demonstrated no significant difference in BPI (severity plus interference) scores between the Bikram yoga (n = 17) and the HIIT (n = 15). Women in the Bikram yoga group demonstrated significantly improved SF-36 subscale physical functioning: [ANCOVA: F(1, 29) = 6.17, p = .019, partial eta-squared effect size (ηp2) = .175 and mental health: F(1, 29) = 9.09, p = .005, ηp2 = .239; and increased heart rate variability (SDNN): F(1, 29) = 5.12, p = .013, ηp2 = .150, scores compared to the HIIT group. Across both groups, pain was shown to decrease, no injuries were experienced and retention rates were 94% for Bikram yoga and 75% for HIIT .
CONCLUSIONS: Bikram yoga does not appear a superior exercise compared to HIIT for persistent pain. However, imporvements in quality of life measures and indicator of better health were seen in the Bikram yoga group. The outcomes of the present study suggest vigorous exercise interventions in persistent pain cohorts are feasible.
BACKGROUND: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ( ACTRN12617001507370 , 26/10/2017).
METHODS: This study was a randomized controlled trail (RCT) comparing the efficacy of Bikram yoga versus high intensity interval training (HIIT), for improving persistent pain in women aged 20 to 50 years. The participants were 1:1 randomized to attend their assigned intervention, 3 times per week, for 8 weeks. The primary outcome measure was the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) and further pain related biopsychosocial secondary outcomes, including SF-36 Medical Outcomes and heart rate variability (HRV), were also explored. Data was collected pre (t0) and post (t1) intervention via an online questionnaire and physiological testing.
RESULTS: A total of 34 women were recruited from the community. Analyses using ANCOVA demonstrated no significant difference in BPI (severity plus interference) scores between the Bikram yoga (n = 17) and the HIIT (n = 15). Women in the Bikram yoga group demonstrated significantly improved SF-36 subscale physical functioning: [ANCOVA: F(1, 29) = 6.17, p = .019, partial eta-squared effect size (ηp2) = .175 and mental health: F(1, 29) = 9.09, p = .005, ηp2 = .239; and increased heart rate variability (SDNN): F(1, 29) = 5.12, p = .013, ηp2 = .150, scores compared to the HIIT group. Across both groups, pain was shown to decrease, no injuries were experienced and retention rates were 94% for Bikram yoga and 75% for HIIT .
CONCLUSIONS: Bikram yoga does not appear a superior exercise compared to HIIT for persistent pain. However, imporvements in quality of life measures and indicator of better health were seen in the Bikram yoga group. The outcomes of the present study suggest vigorous exercise interventions in persistent pain cohorts are feasible.
BACKGROUND: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ( ACTRN12617001507370 , 26/10/2017).
摘要：
背景：持续性疼痛的神经生物学与创伤应激的神经生物学具有共同的潜在心理生物学。创伤应激的现代治疗通常包括自下而上的感觉运动再训练/暴露疗法，在那里呼吸，运动,平衡和正念，用于针对潜在的心理生物学。大力锻炼，特别是Bikram瑜伽，结合了许多这些感觉运动/暴露治疗功能。然而,很少有研究针对持续性疼痛的潜在心理生物学进行此类治疗的可行性和有效性。
方法：本研究是一项随机对照试验（RCT），比较了Bikram瑜伽与高强度间歇训练（HIIT）的疗效，用于改善20至50岁女性的持续性疼痛。参与者以1：1的比例随机参加他们分配的干预措施，每周3次,八个星期。主要结局指标是简短疼痛清单（BPI）和进一步的疼痛相关的生物心理社会次要结局，包括SF-36医疗结果和心率变异性（HRV），也被探索过。通过在线问卷和生理测试收集干预前(t0)和干预后(t1)的数据。
结果：从社区招募了34名女性。使用ANCOVA的分析显示Bikram瑜伽（n=17）和HIIT（n=15）之间的BPI（严重程度加干扰）评分没有显着差异。Bikram瑜伽组的女性表现出显着改善的SF-36子量表的身体功能：[ANCOVA：F（1，29）=6.17，p=.019，部分eta平方效应大小（ηp2）=.175和心理健康：F（1，29）=9.09，p=.005，ηp2=.239；心率变异性（SDNN）与H150，Ip.13，2=5在这两个群体中，疼痛显示减轻，Bikram瑜伽的保留率为94%,HIIT的保留率为75%。
结论：对于持续性疼痛，Bikram瑜伽与HIIT相比没有表现出更好的运动。然而,Bikram瑜伽组的生活质量指标和健康状况指标均有改善.本研究的结果表明，在持续性疼痛队列中进行剧烈运动干预是可行的。
背景：澳大利亚新西兰临床试验注册中心（ACTRN12617001507370，26/10/2017）。
方法：本研究是一项随机对照试验（RCT），比较了Bikram瑜伽与高强度间歇训练（HIIT）的疗效，用于改善20至50岁女性的持续性疼痛。参与者以1：1的比例随机参加他们分配的干预措施，每周3次,八个星期。主要结局指标是简短疼痛清单（BPI）和进一步的疼痛相关的生物心理社会次要结局，包括SF-36医疗结果和心率变异性（HRV），也被探索过。通过在线问卷和生理测试收集干预前(t0)和干预后(t1)的数据。
结果：从社区招募了34名女性。使用ANCOVA的分析显示Bikram瑜伽（n=17）和HIIT（n=15）之间的BPI（严重程度加干扰）评分没有显着差异。Bikram瑜伽组的女性表现出显着改善的SF-36子量表的身体功能：[ANCOVA：F（1，29）=6.17，p=.019，部分eta平方效应大小（ηp2）=.175和心理健康：F（1，29）=9.09，p=.005，ηp2=.239；心率变异性（SDNN）与H150，Ip.13，2=5在这两个群体中，疼痛显示减轻，Bikram瑜伽的保留率为94%,HIIT的保留率为75%。
结论：对于持续性疼痛，Bikram瑜伽与HIIT相比没有表现出更好的运动。然而,Bikram瑜伽组的生活质量指标和健康状况指标均有改善.本研究的结果表明，在持续性疼痛队列中进行剧烈运动干预是可行的。
背景：澳大利亚新西兰临床试验注册中心（ACTRN12617001507370，26/10/2017）。
