This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Cherrington, C. C. Articles by Lennie, T. A. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Cherrington, C. C. Articles by Lennie, T. A. Pubmed/NCBI databases Compound via MeSH Substance via MeSH Medline Plus Health Information Heart Attack Stress Hazardous Substances DB HYDROCORTISONE Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

The Physiological Response in Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction to the Administration of Psychological Instruments

College of Nursing, Wright State University–Miami Valley.

Debra K. Moser, DNSc, RN

Cardiovascular Nursing at the University of Kentucky.

Terry A. Lennie, PhD, RN

College of Nursing at The Ohio State University, Candace C. Cherrington, PhD, RN, 3640 Colonel Glenn, Hwy., Dayton, OH 45435-0001; telephone: (937) 775-3852; fax: (937) 775-4571candace.cherrington{at}

The administration of psychologically provocative research instruments could serve as a transient source of stress and spuriously affect results. To determine whether the administration of selected psychosocial instruments activates the stress response, we examined the physiological stress response of stable patients post–myocardial infarction (MI) to completing the Beck Depression Inventory, the Illness Perception Questionnaire, and the Spielberger State Anxiety Inventory 24 to 48 hours post–acute event. Salivary cortisol, heart rate variability (HRV), heart rate, and mean arterial pressure (MAP) were measured prior to instrument administration and 30 minutes after as indicators of the stress response. Twenty-four subjects (16 men) completed the study. Mean baseline measures of salivary cortisol (0.558 mcg/dL), heart rate (86 bpm), and MAP (86 mm Hg) were within normal ranges. A repeated-measures analysis of variance demonstrated no significant difference in salivary cortisol,F(1, 23) = 2.59, NS; HRV,F(1, 18) = 0.27, NS; heart rate,F(1, 23)= 4.29, NS; orMAP,F(1, 22)= 0.859, NS, from preinterview to postinterview. These results suggest that completing these selected psychological instruments in the first 24 to 48 hours following MI was not a stressful event, at least for those who were stable post–percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty.

Key Words: myocardial infarction • cortisol • stress response • Beck Depression Inventory • Spielberger State Anxiety Inventory

Biological Research For Nursing, Vol. 4, No. 2, 85-91 (2002)
DOI: 10.1177/1099800402238329


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?