The effect of body massage lying face down on intraocular pressure in normal eyes
Jose E.E. League, MD, Jonathan A. Rivera, MD, Edgar U. Leuenberger, MD
GLAUCOMA is associated with various risk factors, foremost of which is elevated intraocular pressure (IOP). Understanding aqueous-humor dynamics, which regulate IOP, is key to understanding glaucoma, as IOP is currently the only factor that can be modified to prevent progressive optic neuropathy.
Several factors have been associated with raised IOP, including diurnal variation, postural variation, and exertion. IOP can increase when changing from sitting to supine or prone position. The reported IOP changes due to postural effects ranged from 0.3 to 6.0 mm Hg.
Others reported increase in IOP twice from baseline during posture changes. The postural influence on IOP was greater in eyes with glaucoma and persisted even after a successful filtering surgery.Straining, associated with valsalva’s maneuver, has also been linked with raised IOP. The likely mechanism for this phenomenon included elevated episcleral venous pressure. Massage is the practice of applying structured or unstructured pressure, tension, motion, or vibration— manually or with mechanical aids—to the soft tissues of the body to achieve a beneficial response. Massage is usually performed on a person while lying on a massage table, sitting upright in a massage chair, or lying on a pad on the floor. The therapy usually lasts about an hour. Two important facets associated with increase in IOP are present when a person undergoes a body massage in prone position postural effect and exertion due to valsalva’s. Depending on the type of massage performed, the subjects usually exert some form of straining and valsalva’s, both of which can cause an increase in IOP independently. Several studies related Sirsasana or head stand exercise and yoga to IOP, but none on face-down massage. With the proliferation of wellness clinics and spas, facedown body massage is becoming more popular. We, therefore, determined the IOP changes during face-down body massage in normal eyes. The information obtained from this study can help guide clinicians on how to advise patients, espcially those with glaucoma, regarding activities that can cause transient raised IOP.
Forty-six volunteers recruited to have massage in prone position for 30 minutes were included in the study. After informed consent was obtained, the participants underwent a complete eye evaluation with normal findings. Excluded were those with severe eye disorders and conditions precluding prone position, such as back disorders (scoliosis, slipped disc, osteoartritis). Ophthalmic examination included best-corrected visual acuity, slitlamp examination, gonioscopy, funduscopy, ultrasound pachymetry for central corneal thickness, and visual-field examination. A professional masseuse performed a 30- minute back massage (combination of Swedish and shiatsu) on each of the subjects lying face down. The IOPs were measured in both eyes using a pneumatonometer (Medtronic Solan Model 30, Medtronic, Jacksonville, FL, USA) after application of 1% proparacaine (Alcaine) eye drops. The IOP was taken before the massage, immediately after the volunteer resumed the sitting position, then every 5 minutes thereafter until the IOP returned to baseline. Data were analyzed using paired t-test. The study was conducted in accordance with the tenets of the Declaration of Helsinski and approved by the Institutional Review Board of the Asian Eye Institute.
A total of 46 subjects, 21 males and 25 females, with a mean age of 29.11 ± 6.28 years (range, 21 to 43), participated in the study. All had essentially normal eye findings. All had open angles (Table 1). The central corneal thickness was similar for both eyes. Visual-field examination was normal for all participants.
The mean baseline IOP prior to massage was 14.54 ± 2.18 mm Hg. The IOP uniformly increased in 43 of the 46 participants immediately after the massage. One had IOP lower than the baseline while no changes were noted in 2 subjects. The highest IOP attained was 28 mm Hg. The IOP of all participants returned to near baseline level 10 minutes after resuming the sitting position. The mean IOP immediately after the massage was 19.93 mm Hg, a difference of 5.39 mm Hg from baseline. The mean IOP 5 and 10 minutes after the massage was 15.72 mm Hg and 14.15 mm Hg respectively (Table 2). There was a significant difference between IOP at baseline and immediately after the massage and between baseline and 5 minutes after the massage (Table 2). There was, however, no significant difference between IOP at baseline and 10 minutes after the massage.
None of the participants developed any ocular or systemic adverse effects during the study period.
It is well recognized that a change in body position alters IOP. Several authors have reported an average rise of 2 to 3 mm Hg in IOP when body position is changed from sitting to supine. 4, Others reported changes as high as 6 mm Hg, with several authors reporting twofold increase when changing position from sitting to lying face down. The rise in IOP in this study is similar to those in other studies dealing with changes in body position. The IOP uniformly increased in all but 3 participants whose pressures were taken immediately after the massage. The rise in IOPs may have been higher had the pressures been measured while lying face down during the massage. Due to technical difficulties, IOPs were not obtained in the original position but in sitting position immediately after the massage. Elevated episcleral venous pressure as a result of the face-down lying position is one possible mechanism of IOP rise.
Further studies, such as anterior-segment optical coherence tomography or ultrasound biomicroscopy, are needed to document specific changes in the eye. This study also did not demonstrate a significant IOP difference (much higher IOP elevation) when the two factors (postural effect and valsalva’s) were present compared with other studies wherein there was significant IOP rise with change in body position alone. But it reinforced the view that patients with glaucoma are susceptible to pressure spikes when they assume the prone position. Glaucomatous eyes, especially those with advanced damage, may not be able to withstand the transient but significant increase in IOP that occurs after assuming a face-down position.
1. Allingham RR, Damji K, Freedman S, Moroi S, Shafranov G. Shields’ Textbook of Glaucoma. 5th ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 2005; 38-39.
2. Chiquet C, Custaud MA, Le Traun AP, et al. Changes in intraocular pressure during prolonged seven-day head-down tilt bed rest. J Glaucoma 2003; 12: 204-208.
3. Linder BJ, Trick GL. Simulation of spaceflight with whole body head-down tilt: influence on intraocular pressure and retinocortical processing. Aviat Space Environ Med 1987; 58: A139-142.
4. Krieglstein GK, Waller WK, Leydhecker W. The vascular basis of the positional influence of the intraocular pressure. Albecht Von Graefes Arch Klin Exp Ophthalmol 1978; 206: 99-106.
5. Rice R, Allen RC. Yoga in glaucoma. Am J Ophthalmol 1985; 100: 738-739.
6. Fahmy JA, Fledelius H. Yoga-induced attacks of acute glaucoma: a case report. Acta Ophthalmol 1973; 51: 80-84.
7. Baskaran M, Raman K, Ramani K, et al. Intraocular pressure changes and ocular biometry during Sirsasana in Yoga practitioners. Ophthalmology 2006; 113: 1327- 1332.
8. Anderson DR, Grant WM. The influence of position on intraocular pressure. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 1973; 12: 204-212.
9. Jain MR, Marmion VJ. Rapid pneumatic and Mackay-Marg applanation tonometry to evaluate the postural effect on intraocular pressure. Br J Ophthalmol 1976; 60: 687-693.
10. Parsley J, Powell RG, Keightley SJ, Elkington AR. Postural response of intraocular pressure in chronic open-angle glaucoma following trabeculectomy. Br J Ophthalmol 1987; 71: 494-496.
11. Rafuse PE, Mills DW, Hooper PL, et al. Effects of Valsalva’s manoeuvre on intraocular pressure. Can J Ophthalmol 1994; 29: 73-76.
12. Epstein HM, Fagman W, Bruce DL, et al. Intraocular pressure changes during anesthesia for electroshock therapy. Anesth Analg 1975; 54: 479-481.
13. Schuman JS, Masicotte EC, Connolly S, et al. Increased intraocular pressure and visual-field defects in high-resistance wind instrument players. Ophthalmology 2000; 107: 127-133.
14. Lafaut AS, Van Malderen L, Zeyen T. Is pulse synchronized pneumotonometry more reproducible than routine pneumotonometry and more in agreement with Goldmann applanation tonometry? Eur J Ophthalmol 2007; 17: 178-182.
15. Jain MR, Marmion VJ. Rapid pneumatic and Mackay-Marg applanation tonometry to evaluate the postural effect on intraocular pressure. Br J Ophthalmol 1976; 60: 687-693.
16. Galin MA, McIvor JW, Brock Magruden G. Influence of position on intraocular pressure. Am J Ophthalmol 1963; 55: 720-723.
17. Wuthrich UW. Postural change and intraocular pressure in glaucomatous eyes. Br J Ophthalmol 1976; 60: 111-114.
18. Weber AK, Price J. Pressure differential of intraocular pressure measured between supine and sitting position. Ann Ophthalmol 1981; 13: 323-326.
19. Trew DR, Smith SE. Postural studies in pulsatile ocular blood flsow: I. Ocular hypertension and normotension. Br J Ophthalmol 1991; 75: 66-70.