Effects of a commercially available acoustic vibration device on nasal symptoms, pulmonary function, and exercise performance

Authors

Catherine M. Cavallaro, James Madison UniversityFollow

Preferred Name

Catherine Cavallaro

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-No Derivative Works 4.0 International License.

Date of Graduation

5-11-2023

Semester of Graduation

Spring

Degree Name

Master of Science (MS)

Department

Department of Kinesiology

Second Advisor

Stephanie Kurti-Luden

Third Advisor

Nicholas Luden

Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to investigate whether the SinuSonic acoustic vibration device influenced nasal symptoms and function, expired nitric oxide (eNO), pulmonary function, and exercise responses and performance in active individuals. Methods: Sixteen recreational exercisers (age 34.5 ± 16.0 y: VO_2max 41.1 ± 6.5 mL/kg/min) completed two exercise trials, each consisting of a 10 min warm up followed by a graded exercise test on a cycle ergometer. In a randomized, counterbalanced design, participants used a SinuSonic device (or sham device) for 5 min, followed by 5 min of rest, before undergoing the graded exercise test. Nasal symptoms (NOSE questionnaire), eNO, peak nasal inspiratory flow (PNIF) and pulmonary function were assessed at four time points: baseline, 5 min following device use, following exercise, and 10 min post exercise. Exercise measurements were examined at the highest workload achieved during the graded exercise test, and included oxygen saturation (SaO₂), VO_2max, and maximal power output (W_max). Treatment effects were assessed using repeated-measures ANOVAs with two within-subject factors (treatment device and time) and one between-subject factor (nasal symptom group: high vs low). Results: SinuSonic use did not influence eNO, PNIF, or pulmonary function measures. NOSE scores were significantly different (p < 0.05) between nasal symptom groups (high > low) and changed significantly over time. There was a trend (p = 0.06) suggesting potentially reduced NOSE scores after SinuSonic use (versus sham), and also a trend indicating the magnitude of treatment effects were larger in the high nasal symptom group (p = 0.06). SinuSonic use had no effect on exercise performance or SaO₂. Conclusions: In healthy individuals with generally low nasal symptoms, SinuSonic use did not affect eNO, PNIF, pulmonary function, SaO₂ or exercise performance. However, due to potential trends for treatment effects on NOSE scores, which tended to be greater in those with higher nasal symptoms, it is recommended that future investigators perform a similar investigation in those with chronically high congestion and/or other nasal symptoms.