| Literature DB >> 25888344 |
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Complementary therapies (CT), such as relaxation technique, massage, guided imagery, and accupuncture have shown to benefit patients undergoing surgery. The aim of this study was to determine the feasibility of using audio relaxation technique (ART), music intervention (MI), nature video application with music (NVAM), and nature video application without music (NVA) delivered via mobile technologies in a clinical setting. Secondary, the effects of ART, MI, NVAM and NVA on patients' state anxiety, pain perception, and perceived self-efficacy in healing were determined.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2015 PMID: 25888344 PMCID: PMC4383076 DOI: 10.1186/s12906-015-0613-8
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Complement Altern Med ISSN: 1472-6882 Impact factor: 3.659
Figure 1Consort chart.
Figure 2Nature video application screen shot. Permission to publish from Salumedia Tecnologías S.L.
Demographic characteristics by group
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total (N = 105) | n = 25 | n = 25 | n = 15 | n = 16 | n = 24 |
| Gender | Males = 6 | Males = 4 | Males = 4 | Males = 2 | Males = 5 |
| Females = 19 | Female = 21 | Females = 11 | Females = 14 | Females = 19 | |
| Age Mean (SD) | 45.2 (13.4) | 46.0 (15.0) | 43.9 (13.5) | 44.6 (16.5) | 51.2 (13.7) |
| Past Medical History | Anxiety = 5 | Anxiety = 7 | Anxiety = 5 | Anxiety = 4 | Anxiety = 6 |
| Depression = 4 | Depression = 5 | Depression = 6 | Depression = 3 | Depression = 4 | |
| Acute pain = 1 | Acute pain = 2 | Acute pain = 1 | Acute pain = 0 | Acute pain = 3 | |
| Chronic pain = 3 | Chronic pain = 4 | Chronic pain = 5 | Chronic pain = 3 | Chronic pain = 5 | |
| Routine Medication | Anxiety = 3 | Anxiety = 6 | Anxiety = 3 | Anxiety = 4 | Anxiety = 4 |
| Pain = 4 | Pain = 5 | Pain = 4 | Pain = 2 | Pain = 7 | |
| Used CM | Yes = 7 | Yes = 9 | Yes = 3 | Yes = 7 | Yes = 7 |
| Used ART | Yes = 13 | Yes = 11 | Yes = 4 | Yes = 7 | Yes = 10 |
| Used MI | Yes = 11 | Yes = 5 | Yes = 2 | Yes = 3 | Yes = 3 |
Note. ART = audio relaxation technique; MI = music intervention; NVAM = nature video with music; NVA = nature video with music. *Both rounds combined.
Measurements and times in study
|
|
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| X* | X** | ||
|
| X | X | X | X |
|
| X | X | X | X |
|
| X | X | X | X |
Note, X = all groups (intervention & control); X* intervention groups; X** control group; T1 = day 1 baseline; T2 = immediately prior to surgery; T3 = immediately following surgery; T4 = day 10 follow-up.
Anxiety data: group descriptives
|
|
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| SAI T1 Anxiety | ART | 3.03 | 0.51 | 25 |
| MI | 3.28 | 0.42 | 25 | |
| NVA | 3.11 | 0.64 | 15 | |
| NVAM | 3.37 | 0.35 | 16 | |
| Control | NA | NA | NA | |
| All Participants | 2.23 | 2.66 | 82 | |
| SAI T2 Anxiety | ART | 3.07 | 0.53 | 24 |
| MI | 3.37 | 0.35 | 25 | |
| NVA | 2.95 | 0.73 | 14 | |
| NVAM | 3.23 | 0.53 | 16 | |
| Control | 2.86 | 0.70 | 24 | |
| All Participants | 3.10 | 0.95 | 103 | |
| SAI T3 Anxiety | ART | 3.22 | 0.60 | 24 |
| MI | 3.36 | 0.37 | 24 | |
| NVA | 3.31 | 0.52 | 14 | |
| NVAM | 3.43 | 0.39 | 16 | |
| Control | 3.21 | 0.69 | 18 | |
| All Participants | 3.30 | 0.53 | 96 | |
| SAI T4 Anxiety | ART | 3.30 | 0.54 | 25 |
| MI | 3.54 | 0.32 | 24 | |
| NVA | 3.41 | 0.44 | 15 | |
| NVAM | 3.48 | 0.27 | 15 | |
| Control | NA | NA | NA | |
| All Participants | 3.43 | 0.42 | 80 |
Note. SAI = State Anxiety Inventory, 20-items; NA = not assessed; other abbreviations as in Table 2.
Figure 3Anxiety results for intervention groups.
Pain data: group descriptives
|
|
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| NRS T1 Pain | ART | 2.58 | 2.92 | 25 |
| MI | 1.78 | 2.24 | 23 | |
| NVA | 2.93 | 3.01 | 15 | |
| NVAM | 1.81 | 2.51 | 16 | |
| Control | NA | NA | NA | |
| All Participants | 2.23 | 2.66 | 80 | |
| NRS T2 Pain | ART | 1.08 | 1.99 | 25 |
| MI | 0.96 | 1.46 | 24 | |
| NVA | 2.29 | 2.84 | 14 | |
| NVAM | 1.31 | 2.24 | 16 | |
| Control | 2.25 | 2.63 | 24 | |
| All Participants | 1.52 | 2.25 | 103 | |
| NRS T3 Pain | ART | 2.58 | 2.70 | 25 |
| MI | 2.90 | 2.07 | 22 | |
| NVA | 2.71 | 2.95 | 14 | |
| NVAM | 3.38 | 2.06 | 16 | |
| Control | 2.74 | 2.38 | 19 | |
| All Participants | 2.84 | 2.41 | 96 | |
| NRS T4 Pain | ART | 1.56 | 1.66 | 25 |
| MI | 1.86 | 1.67 | 22 | |
| NVA | 1.80 | 2.71 | 15 | |
| NVAM | 2.31 | 1.82 | 16 | |
| Control | N/A | N/A | N/A | |
| All Participants | 1.82 | 1.92 | 79 |
Note. NRS = Numeric rating scale, 0–10; NA = not assessed; other abbreviations as in Table 2.
Figure 4Pain results for experimental groups.
Self-efficacy data: group descriptives
|
|
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| GSE T1 Self-efficacy | ART | 3.11 | 0.39 | 25 |
| MI | 3.16 | 0.40 | 25 | |
| NVA | 2.96 | 0.41 | 15 | |
| NVAM | 3.00 | 0.33 | 16 | |
| Control | NA | NA | NA | |
| All Participants | 3.08 | 0.39 | 82 | |
| GSE T2 Self-efficacy | ART | 3.18 | 0.35 | 23 |
| MI | 3.16 | 0.37 | 25 | |
| NVA | 3.05 | 0.40 | 15 | |
| NVAM | 3.00 | 0.40 | 16 | |
| Control | 3.06 | 0.40 | 24 | |
| All Participants | 3.10 | 0.38 | 103 | |
| GSE T3 Self-efficacy | ART | 3.19 | 0.38 | 23 |
| MI | 3.24 | 0.35 | 23 | |
| NVA | 3.17 | 0.41 | 13 | |
| NVAM | 3.08 | 0.37 | 16 | |
| Control | 3.15 | 0.42 | 18 | |
| All Participants | 3.17 | 0.38 | 93 | |
| GSE T4 Self-efficacy | ART | 3.26 | 0.38 | 25 |
| MI | 3.22 | 0.39 | 24 | |
| NVA | 3.13 | 0.42 | 15 | |
| NVAM | 3.16 | 0.39 | 15 | |
| Control | NA | NA | NA | |
| All Participants | 3.20 | 0.39 | 80 |
Note. GSE = General self-efficacy scale, 10 items; NA = not assessed; other abbreviations as in Table 2.
Figure 5Self-efficacy results for intervention groups.