| Title |
The effect of natural sounds on the anxiety of patients undergoing coronary artery bypass graft surgery
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Perioperative Medicine, November 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13741-017-0074-3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Mohammad Javad Amiri, Tabandeh Sadeghi, Tayebeh Negahban Bonabi |
| Abstract |
This study aims to investigate the effect of natural sounds on the anxiety of patients undergoing coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG). In this clinical trial, 90 patients, who were candidates for CABG in an urban area of Iran, were selected and randomly assigned to intervention and control groups by the minimization method. In the intervention group, natural sounds were broadcast through headphones for 30 min. In the control group, headphones connected to a silent device were used. The research instruments were a demographic questionnaire and the Spielberger State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI). These were used before the intervention, 30 min after the music, and before the surgery in the waiting room for both groups. Data was analyzed using SPSS software. The mean anxiety level of the intervention group has been found to be significantly lower than that of the control group half an hour after the intervention as well as in the waiting room in the preoperative period (p = 0.001). Moreover, the mean anxiety of the intervention group decreases, while it increases for the control group over time (p < 0.001). Natural sounds can be used as a non-pharmacological way to reduce the anxiety of patients undergoing CABG. IRCT2017011723190N3, Registered 1 March 2017. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 80 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 80 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 12 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 8% |
| Other | 5 | 6% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 5 | 6% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 6% |
| Other | 10 | 13% |
| Unknown | 37 | 46% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 21 | 26% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 11 | 14% |
| Psychology | 4 | 5% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 3% |
| Arts and Humanities | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 4 | 5% |
| Unknown | 36 | 45% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 34. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 18 October 2023.
All research outputs
#1,119,438
of 24,630,122 outputs
Outputs from Perioperative Medicine
#11
of 264 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#22,932
of 330,478 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Perioperative Medicine
#1
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,630,122 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 264 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 330,478 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.