Acute coronary syndrome
Conditions
Interventions
I02.233.332
An intervention developed for this study was called Music Education and Intervention to Reduce Anxiety (EMIRA). This is a CI developed to reduce state-anxiety (STAI), blood pressure (BP), heart rate (
the other is the feeling of emotional discomfort, apprehension/tension, related to the procedure. EMIRA contains two components: an educational and a musical component. A random list of randomization
E02.190.888.500
Sponsors
Escola de Enfermagem da Universidade de São Paulo
Instituto do Coração
Eligibility
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Inclusion criteria
Inclusion criteria: People with acute coronary syndrome awaiting unscheduled catheterization, diagnostic or therapeutic, were included. Unscheduled catheterization was understood in this study as a percutaneous procedure not scheduled on an outpatient basis and performed due to the diagnosis of ACS after the individual's admission to the emergency unit. Individuals aged 18 years or older; literate; hemodynamically stable with or without the use of vasoactive drugs; and who were performing cardiac catheterization for the first time or for more than a year were included. Individuals with a diagnosis of psychiatric disorder and use of mood modulators, prescribed or not, were not included.
Exclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria: Individuals with hearing loss that prevented them from listening to music within the established parameters, who presented hemodynamic instability during data collection, were excluded; those whose therapeutic plan was modified and did not undergo the procedure and those who were interrupted for any reason while offering the musical component of the intervention.
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame |
|---|---|
| Expected outcome 1: EMIRA was expected to reduce state anxiety in patients undergoing cardiac catheterization. Measures and parameters used in evaluating outcomes: The STAI state requires the participant to describe how they feel “now” in relation to 20 items presented on a 4-point Likert scale, ranging from “not at all” to “very much”. Similarly, in the trait IDATE, the participant must answer “how they usually feel” in relation to 20 items on a 4-point Likert scale, ranging from “almost never” to “almost always”. To avoid response bias, some items are presented inversely and, for the calculation of the score, the scores must be inverted. In the STAI trait they are items 1,6,7,10,13,16 and 19. In the state IDATE they are items 1,2,5,8,10,11,15,16,19 and 20.The total score varies from 20 to 80 for each scale, with higher values ??indicating greater levels of anxiety. The comparison of the STAI trait was analyzed using the Student's t-test to compare numerical variables between the intervention and control groups. precordial pain before (T1) and after the intervention with music (T2 and T3) was calculated using the mixed effects model for repeated measures. The significance level adopted for all tests was 5%.;Outcome found 1: It was observed that the mean state IDATE score decreased over time in the intervention group and in the control group. Regarding the analysis using the mixed effects model, it showed that there was a difference in the state STAI scores over time (p = 0.003), but not in the comparison between groups (p = 0.520). As the difference over time did not occur between T2-T1 or T3-T2, it is assumed that the difference occurred between T3 and T1. There was also no evidence of time:group interaction (p = 0.977). | — |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame |
|---|---|
| Expected outcome 2: It was expected to estimate the potential effectiveness of the complex nursing intervention to reduce state anxiety, blood pressure (BP), heart rate (HR), respiratory rate (RR) and chest pain intensity.Measurements and parameters used in evaluating the outcomes: Mean values ??of chest pain intensity and the two measurements of RR, HR and BP were used. precordial pain before (T1) and after the intervention with music (T2 and T3) was calculated using the mixed effects model for repeated measures. The significance level adopted for all tests was 5%.;Outcome found 2: It was observed that the mixed effects model showed no difference in pain scores over time (p=0.424), group (p=0.875) and time: group (p=0.832) and in relation to SBP ( time- p=0.1001; group- p=0.827; time: group- p=0.952). There was a difference in DBP over time (p=0.043), but not in the comparison between groups (p =0.579) and time:group (p=0.596). Regarding HR, there was also a difference over time (p < 0.001), but it was not observed in the comparison between groups (p=0.334) and time:group (p=0.420). Together, in relation to RF, there was also a difference over time (p < 0.001), but this was not observed in the comparison between groups (p=0.373) and time:group (p=0.286). | — |
Countries
Brazil
Contacts
Public ContactEscola de Enfermagem EEUSP
Escola de Enfermagem da Universidade de São Paulo
Outcome results
None listed