Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-g8jcs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T01:14:54.224Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effect of feedback signal and psychological characteristics on blood pressure self-manipulation capability

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 July 1998

SAROJ K.L. LAL ,
ROBYN J. HENDERSON ,
NORMAN CARTER ,
ANDREW BATH ,
MICHAEL G. HART ,
PAULINE LANGELUDDECKE  and
STEPHEN N. HUNYOR
SAROJ K.L. LAL
Affiliation:
Cooperative Research Center (CRC) for Cardiac Technology & Cardiovascular Research Unit, Department of Cardiology, Sydney, Australia
ROBYN J. HENDERSON
Affiliation:
Cooperative Research Center (CRC) for Cardiac Technology & Cardiovascular Research Unit, Department of Cardiology, Sydney, Australia
NORMAN CARTER
Affiliation:
National Acoustic Laboratories, Sydney, Australia
ANDREW BATH
Affiliation:
Cooperative Research Center (CRC) for Cardiac Technology & Cardiovascular Research Unit, Department of Cardiology, Sydney, Australia
MICHAEL G. HART
Affiliation:
Cooperative Research Center (CRC) for Cardiac Technology & Cardiovascular Research Unit, Department of Cardiology, Sydney, Australia
PAULINE LANGELUDDECKE
Affiliation:
Department of Psychiatry, Royal North Shore Hospital, Sydney, Australia
STEPHEN N. HUNYOR
Affiliation:
Cooperative Research Center (CRC) for Cardiac Technology & Cardiovascular Research Unit, Department of Cardiology, Sydney, Australia
Get access

Abstract

Blood pressure presentation mode and personality are likely to influence biofeedback outcome. Thirty-six normotensive subjects were randomly assigned to visual or auditory continuous systolic feedback. “Distracting speech” and “broad band noise” were also superimposed and the effect on the biofeedback response was investigated. Psychological influence was also investigated. Systolic pressure reductions of 4 ± 4.3 mmHg (visual, p = .04) and 5 ± 5.5 mmHg (visual + auditory, p = .03) were achieved compared with auditory feedback (2 ± 4.7 mmHg), which was less effective. The addition of noise or speech had no effect on the systolic response, but speech adversely affected diastolic reduction (p = .04). Mood (p = .003) was associated with systolic lowering, whereas increased trait anxiety (p = .06) and expectation (p = .03) had trends for opposite effects. Increased anger-hostility, state-anxiety, and expectation (p = .06) had links with systolic raising capability. We conclude that feedback modality and psychological characteristics have implications for studies investigating blood pressure manipulation capability.

Keywords

Blood pressureVisual and auditory signalNoiseBiofeedbackAttentionPsychological factors
Type
Research Article
Information
Psychophysiology , Volume 35 , Issue 4 , July 1998 , pp. 405 - 412
Copyright
© 1998 Society for Psychophysiological Research

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)