Pilot Study of Subject Education and Oximetry as It Affects Comfort During Slow-Paced Breathing

  • Samuel KohlenbergEmail author


This study examined the effects of subject education and oximetry on discomfort sometimes associated with slow-paced breathing (dyspnea). This study was performed because some people report anxiety about getting sufficient oxygen while breathing slowly. Clinical experience suggested that reassuring subjects unaccustomed to slow-paced breathing that they are receiving enough oxygen may lead to greater comfort. The study had a sample size of 20 sequentially randomized healthy adults constituting two groups of ten subjects. Both groups underwent 5 min of video-guided paced breathing at a rate of six breaths per minute. One group was able to view oximetry and hear an educational script, and the other received neither the educational script nor the viewable oximetry. Subjects answered a questionnaire about ease and adequacy of respiration as well as comfort. Analysis of the questionnaire showed that the group who received education about oximetry and viewed an oximeter during training felt significantly greater comfort during slow breathing than the conventional paced breathing group (p < 0.01). While further study is warranted, these preliminary findings suggest the potential need for this dyspneic effect to be taken into account in clinical practice as well as in research.


Bradypnea Dyspnea HRV-BF Oximetry (spO2) Paced breathing 


Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

The author declares no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

This human subject study was approved by the Saybrook University Institutional Review Board and was performed in accordance with all required best practices for human subject studies in the United States.

Informed Consent

All subjects gave informed consent prior to their participation in the study. All identifying details for all subjects have been omitted.


  1. American Thoracic Society. (1999). Dyspnea. Mechanisms, assessment, and management: A consensus statement. American Journal of Respirator and Critical Care Medicine, 159, 321–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ganong, W. F., & Ganong, W. (1995). Review of medical physiology. Norwalk, CT: Appleton & Lange.Google Scholar
  3. Giardino, N. D., Chan, L., & Borson, S. (2004). Combined heart rate variability and pulse oximetry biofeedback for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: Preliminary findings. Applied Psychophysiology and Biofeedback, 29(2), 121–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Gilbert, C. (2012). Pulse oximetry and breathing training. Biofeedback, 40(4), 137–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Moss, D., & Shaffer, F. (Eds.). (2016). Foundations of heart rate variability biofeedback: A book of readings. Wheat Ridge, CO: Association for Applied Psychophysiology and Biofeedback.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Saybrook UniversityPasadenaUSA

Personalised recommendations