A randomized study of the physiologic response of cardiac rehabilitation attendees to the administration of psychological instruments (preliminary results)

2.50
Hdl Handle:
http://hdl.handle.net/10755/160030
Type:
Presentation
Title:
A randomized study of the physiologic response of cardiac rehabilitation attendees to the administration of psychological instruments (preliminary results)
Abstract:
A randomized study of the physiologic response of cardiac rehabilitation attendees to the administration of psychological instruments (preliminary results)
Conference Sponsor:Midwest Nursing Research Society
Conference Year:2006
Author:Cherrington, Candace, PhD, RN
P.I. Institution Name:Wright State University - 160 University Hall
Title:Assistant Professor
Contact Address:College of Nursing & Health, 3640 Colonel Glenn Highway, Dayton, OH, 45435-001, USA
Contact Telephone:937-775-3852
Co-Authors:Gina Maiocco, PhD, CCNS, CCRN, RN
The administration of psychological instruments is routine in research studies of persons with heart disease. Subjects are asked to complete multiple instruments that pose questions about depression, anxiety, perception of health or denial. Researchers and clinicians have expressed concern that administration of psychological instruments to patients with heart disease might cause psychological stress and may evoke a physiologic response that could, in patients with heart disease result in negative outcomes such as ventricular tachycardia or fibrillation. The purpose of this study is to test differences in physiologic response (measured by salivary cortisol) to the administration of two psychological instruments, between two groups (saliva and questionnaire or saliva only) of subjects currently enrolled in an outpatient cardiac rehabilitation program. To date 34 subjects have completed the study 19 of which are in the questionnaire group. Saliva samples were obtained at 8pm and 9pm for all subjects. After obtaining the 8pm sample the questionnaire group completed two paper and pencil instruments, the Brief Symptom Inventory 18 and the Illness Perception Questionnaire. Mean salivary cortisol levels for the questionnaire groups were, 8pm 0.104 mcg/dl (+/-.0.045), 9pm 0.087 mcg/dl (+/-0.031). Mean salivary cortisol levels for the saliva only group were, 8pm 0.162 mcg/dl (+/-0.121), 9pm 0.147 mcg/dl (+/-0.097). Repeated measure ANOVA failed to demonstrate significant difference by group (F 3.94, p .056) or time (F 2.23, p .145). For this sample, completion of two psychological instruments did not evoke a physiologic stress response in subjects with heart disease, nor was there a difference in the change in salivary cortisol by group. These data support limited research that it is safe to administer psychological instruments to persons with heart disease. Researchers and clinicians can begin to feel confident that the asking persons with heart disease to complete a psychological instrument will not induce physiologic distress. [Poster Presentation]
Repository Posting Date:
26-Oct-2011
Date of Publication:
17-Oct-2011
Sponsors:
Midwest Nursing Research Society

Full metadata record

DC FieldValue Language
dc.typePresentationen_GB
dc.titleA randomized study of the physiologic response of cardiac rehabilitation attendees to the administration of psychological instruments (preliminary results)en_GB
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10755/160030-
dc.description.abstract<table><tr><td colspan="2" class="item-title">A randomized study of the physiologic response of cardiac rehabilitation attendees to the administration of psychological instruments (preliminary results)</td></tr><tr class="item-sponsor"><td class="label">Conference Sponsor:</td><td class="value">Midwest Nursing Research Society</td></tr><tr class="item-year"><td class="label">Conference Year:</td><td class="value">2006</td></tr><tr class="item-author"><td class="label">Author:</td><td class="value">Cherrington, Candace, PhD, RN</td></tr><tr class="item-institute"><td class="label">P.I. Institution Name:</td><td class="value">Wright State University - 160 University Hall</td></tr><tr class="item-author-title"><td class="label">Title:</td><td class="value">Assistant Professor</td></tr><tr class="item-address"><td class="label">Contact Address:</td><td class="value">College of Nursing &amp; Health, 3640 Colonel Glenn Highway, Dayton, OH, 45435-001, USA</td></tr><tr class="item-phone"><td class="label">Contact Telephone:</td><td class="value">937-775-3852</td></tr><tr class="item-email"><td class="label">Email:</td><td class="value">candace.cherrington@wright.edu</td></tr><tr class="item-co-authors"><td class="label">Co-Authors:</td><td class="value">Gina Maiocco, PhD, CCNS, CCRN, RN</td></tr><tr><td colspan="2" class="item-abstract">The administration of psychological instruments is routine in research studies of persons with heart disease. Subjects are asked to complete multiple instruments that pose questions about depression, anxiety, perception of health or denial. Researchers and clinicians have expressed concern that administration of psychological instruments to patients with heart disease might cause psychological stress and may evoke a physiologic response that could, in patients with heart disease result in negative outcomes such as ventricular tachycardia or fibrillation. The purpose of this study is to test differences in physiologic response (measured by salivary cortisol) to the administration of two psychological instruments, between two groups (saliva and questionnaire or saliva only) of subjects currently enrolled in an outpatient cardiac rehabilitation program. To date 34 subjects have completed the study 19 of which are in the questionnaire group. Saliva samples were obtained at 8pm and 9pm for all subjects. After obtaining the 8pm sample the questionnaire group completed two paper and pencil instruments, the Brief Symptom Inventory 18 and the Illness Perception Questionnaire. Mean salivary cortisol levels for the questionnaire groups were, 8pm 0.104 mcg/dl (+/-.0.045), 9pm 0.087 mcg/dl (+/-0.031). Mean salivary cortisol levels for the saliva only group were, 8pm 0.162 mcg/dl (+/-0.121), 9pm 0.147 mcg/dl (+/-0.097). Repeated measure ANOVA failed to demonstrate significant difference by group (F 3.94, p .056) or time (F 2.23, p .145). For this sample, completion of two psychological instruments did not evoke a physiologic stress response in subjects with heart disease, nor was there a difference in the change in salivary cortisol by group. These data support limited research that it is safe to administer psychological instruments to persons with heart disease. Researchers and clinicians can begin to feel confident that the asking persons with heart disease to complete a psychological instrument will not induce physiologic distress. [Poster Presentation]</td></tr></table>en_GB
dc.date.available2011-10-26T22:33:37Z-
dc.date.issued2011-10-17en_GB
dc.date.accessioned2011-10-26T22:33:37Z-
dc.description.sponsorshipMidwest Nursing Research Societyen_GB
All Items in this repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.