Chair Massage for Treating Anxiety in Patients Withdrawing from Psychoactive Drugs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
CONTEXT: Therapeutic massage has been proven to be an effective, nonpharmacologic, alternative for managing state and trait anxiety in a variety of clinical situations. However, no controlled study has investigated this effect in an addiction treatment setting. AIM: The aim of this study was to investigate the effectiveness of chair massage for reducing anxiety in persons participating in an inpatient withdrawal management program for psychoactive drugs. DESIGN: The design was a randomized, controlled clinical trial conducted from June 2008 to January 2009. SUBJECTS: Eighty-two (82) adult patients received inpatient treatment for psychoactive drug withdrawal (alcohol, cocaine, and opiates). SETTING: This study was conducted at the Withdrawal Management Services at the Capital District Health Authority, Halifax, Nova Scotia. INTERVENTIONS: Subjects were randomly assigned to receive chair massage (n = 40) or a relaxation control condition (n = 42). Treatments were offered for 3 consecutive days. Standard counseling and pharmacologic management were also offered concurrently to patients in all conditions. MEASUREMENTS: The primary outcome measure was anxiety assessed using the Spielberger State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI). State and trait anxiety scores were determined immediately prior to and following each treatment intervention. RESULTS: Analysis of STAI scores showed a significant reduction in state and trait anxiety for both interventions (p < 0.001). The magnitude in the reduction in state (p = 0.001) and trait (p = 0.045) anxiety was significantly greater in the chair massage group where the effect on state anxiety was sustained, at least in part, for 24 hours. CONCLUSIONS: Within the clinical context of this study, chair massage was more effective that relaxation control in reducing anxiety. Further investigation of chair massage as a potential nonpharmacologic adjunct in the management of withdrawal related anxiety is warranted.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".