Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Clinical Trial
. 1994 Jan-Feb;23(1):27-35.

The effects of music and muscle relaxation on patient anxiety in a coronary care unit

Affiliations
  • PMID: 8150641
Clinical Trial

The effects of music and muscle relaxation on patient anxiety in a coronary care unit

D Elliott. Heart Lung. 1994 Jan-Feb.

Abstract

Objective: To test the efficacy of music and muscle relaxation techniques in reducing the anxiety of patients admitted to a coronary care unit with ischemic heart disease.

Design: Randomized, controlled trial.

Setting: Seven-bed coronary care unit of an Australian tertiary care hospital.

Patients: Fifty-six patients admitted to a coronary care unit with unstable angina pectoris or acute myocardial infarction.

Outcome measures: Psychologic (State Trait Anxiety Inventory, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, Linear Analogue Anxiety Scale) and physiologic (systolic and diastolic blood pressure and heart rate) variables were measured as indicators of anxiety.

Intervention: Two or three 30-minute sessions of audiotape interventions were conducted with portable tape players with headphones. The two intervention tapes consisted of light classical music and verbal instructions for muscle relaxation.

Results: With analysis of variance procedures, the null hypotheses were supported. No significant differences (p < 0.05) between groups were demonstrated for the psychologic or physiologic variables; that is, no significant reductions in anxiety were achieved for patients using music or muscle relaxation interventions when compared with the control group. The effect size of the interventions on the outcome measures was 0.19 to 0.22, indicating a small effect. Resultant power was at a low level.

Conclusions: These results differ from those of similar studies but may be related to the high probability of a type II error. Further investigation with longer intervention sessions and larger sample sizes is indicated. Similar studies should incorporate power analysis when reporting their results.

PubMed Disclaimer

Publication types