Abstract
Dysfunctional breathing (DB) is common among people with and without primary respiratory pathology. While anxiety contributes to DB, the underpinning mechanism is unclear. One explanation is that anxiety induces excessive conscious monitoring of breathing, disrupting ‘automatic’ breathing mechanics. We validated a new tool that quantifies such breathing-related ‘hypervigilance’: the Breathing Vigilance Questionnaire (Breathe-VQ).
Three-hundred-and-forty healthy adults (Mage=27.3 years, range: 18-71; 161 men) were recruited online. We developed an initial Breathe-VQ (11 items, 1-5 Likert scale) based on the Pain Vigilance and Awareness Scale, using feedback from the target population and clinicians. At baseline, participants completed the Breathe-VQ, Nijmegen Questionnaire (NQ), State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (form 2), and Movement-Specific Reinvestment Scale (assessing general conscious processing). Eighty-three people repeated the Breathe-VQ two weeks later.
We removed five items based on item-level analysis. The resulting six-item Breathe-VQ questionnaire (score range: 6-30) has excellent internal (alpha=.892) and test-retest reliability (ICC=.810), a minimal detectable change of 6.5, and no floor/ceiling effects. Concurrent validity was evidenced by significant positive correlations with trait anxiety and conscious processing scores (r’s=.35-.46). Participants at high-risk of having DB (NQ>23; N=76) had significantly higher Breathe-VQ score (M=19.1±5.0) than low-risk peers (N=225; M=13.8±5.4; p<.001). In this ‘high-risk’ group, Breathe-VQ and NQ-scores were significantly associated (p=.005), even when controlling for risk factors (e.g., trait anxiety).
The Breathe-VQ is a valid and reliable tool to measure breathing vigilance. Breathing vigilance may contribute to DB, and could represent a therapeutic target. Further research is warranted to further test the Breathe-VQ’s prognostic value, and assess intervention effects.
Key Findings
– Dysfunctional breathing (DB) is highly prevalent in the general population as well as in people with respiratory conditions.
– Anxiety is identified as a key factor contributing to DB, potentially because it induces conscious, anxious monitoring of breathing.
– We developed a short self-reported outcome measure of such breathing-specific vigilance, the Breathe-VQ.
– The Breathe-VQ was found to be a valid and reliable tool for use in the general population.
– Breathe-VQ scores were positively associated with self-reported breathing problems, after correcting for known risk factors such as trait-anxiety.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This study did not receive any funding.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Institutional ethical approval was obtained from the College of Health, Medicine and Life Sciences Research Ethics Committee of Brunel University London. All participants provided online written informed consent prior to participation.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
↵* JS and AL are shared first author
Author Note: The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
Minor typo errors, particularly in the methods section.
Data Availability
All data produced in this study are available in the manuscript, supplementary data and via an Open Science Framework page (https://osf.io/shqtf/)
