Music and Dental Anxiety: What the Research Says

Meta-analyses of clinical trials report lower dental anxiety scores in patients who listened to music during or just before treatment than in patients who did not. The three reviews that grade the overall evidence rate it low to moderate, and the trials share limits: most were small, patients knew whether they were hearing music, and most played music through headphones, in many cases music the patient chose. eleMusic makes no health claims about its own music: its stations are background music for a practice's rooms, not a treatment.

This page summarizes published research for general information. It is not medical advice. eleMusic wrote it, and eleMusic sells background music to dental practices. None of the studies below used eleMusic's music, and nothing here describes an effect of eleMusic's music on anyone.

Does listening to music lower dental anxiety scores?

In each review's pooled results, on the measures the trials used, yes. Five systematic reviews with meta-analyses, published from 2022 to 2025, each pooled the trials available to them and each found a difference in favor of music. One calls the reduction small. Each also lists limits in the trials it pooled. This table gives each review in its own terms, as published.

Five meta-analyses of music and dental anxiety, oldest first, as published (read October 10, 2026)
Review	What it pooled	What it found	How its authors rate the evidence
van der Weijden, Hussain, Tang and Slot, Psychology of Music, 2022 (doi)	13 studies (12 randomized), adolescents and adults, music played during dental treatment	Anxiety scores favored music. No effect on blood pressure; heart rate and breathing results were inconsistent.	"There is a moderate certainty that this can provide a small reduction in dental anxiety." Risk of bias across the studies: "low to high".
Tan, Liu, Huang and Li, Medicina, 2023 (PMC)	18 randomized trials, 1,386 patients, children and adults; all single-center	Heart rate, blood pressure, anxiety scores and pain scores were lower in the music groups, and cooperation was higher.	Rates allocation blinding "high risk" in 5 trials, finds no other significant bias, and says "the overall quality of the article was reliable". Still calls for "more multicenter, large-sample, high-quality randomized controlled trials".
López-Valverde, López-Valverde, Macedo de Sousa and Blanco Rueda, Frontiers in Psychiatry, 2024 (PMC)	15 randomized trials reviewed, 1,402 participants (308 of them under 18); 14 of those trials pooled, after one on toothbrushing training was set aside	"an overall effect in favor of the intervention group (p = 0.005)"	On the Jadad quality scale, one trial scored as rigorous, five as medium and the rest as poor.
Shih, Hsu, Yang, Man, Chen and Lin, Journal of Clinical Medicine, 2024 (PMC)	24 controlled trials, 1,830 participants, children and adults	Lower anxiety scores with music during invasive procedures under local anesthesia (SMD -0.50).	GRADE certainty "low", "due to the risk of bias and inconsistent estimates".
Marqués-Martínez, Andrés, García-Miralles, Borell-García, Aura-Tormos and Guinot Barona, Children, 2025 (PMC)	7 randomized trials, 476 children aged 4 to 14	Lower self-reported anxiety (SMD -0.48) and heart rate. Blood pressure and oxygen saturation changes were not statistically significant.	Overall risk of bias "moderate, with most concerns related to blinding".

SMD is a standardized mean difference. It puts results from different questionnaires on one scale, and a negative number here means lower anxiety scores in the music group. The five reviews overlap: several include the same trials, so they are not five independent confirmations. For example, the trials by Mejía-Rubalcava and colleagues (Complementary Therapies in Clinical Practice, 2015, doi) and by Dixit and Jasani (Journal of Indian Society of Pedodontics and Preventive Dentistry, 2020, doi) each appear in more than one of them.

What did the studies actually measure?

Most measured anxiety with a short questionnaire the patient filled in, often before and after a single appointment. Adult trials used Corah's Dental Anxiety Scale, the Modified Dental Anxiety Scale (five questions, each scored from 1, not anxious, to 5, extremely anxious) or the state part of the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory. Children's trials used scales such as the Facial Image Scale, the Venham Picture Test and the Children's Fear Survey Schedule.

Many trials also recorded heart rate, blood pressure, oxygen saturation or breathing rate, and a few measured cortisol or alpha-amylase in saliva. These physical measures gave mixed results. Tan and colleagues found lower heart rate and blood pressure in the music groups; van der Weijden and colleagues found no effect on blood pressure; the children's review found a difference in heart rate but not in blood pressure.

The children's review says that "long-term outcomes remain poorly studied".

Does it matter who chooses the music?

The trials suggest it might. Shih and colleagues counted who chose the music in their 24 trials: the researchers in 15 and the patient in 9. In trials of invasive procedures under local anesthesia, music the patient chose showed a larger difference (SMD -1.01, 6 trials) than music the researchers chose (SMD -0.24, 10 trials). The authors conclude that "Participant preference music was more effective in reducing dental anxiety than author-selection music." The patient-chosen results also disagreed widely from trial to trial (an I² of 92%, against 37% for researcher-chosen music; I² measures how much trial results differ beyond chance).

What "patient-chosen" meant varied. In a South Korean trial by Kim, Kim and Myoung in the Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, 2011 (doi), of 219 adults having a lower wisdom tooth removed, López-Valverde and colleagues report that "The patient selected his or her favorite songs from a list that included classical music, pop songs, folk songs, hymns, and Korean-style country songs." In a 2026 trial by İşcan Yapar and colleagues in the Journal of Clinical Medicine (PMC), of 75 adults having fillings, the researchers chose the music, and the authors list that as a limit: "individual music preferences were not assessed in the present study."

Does the kind of music matter for dental anxiety?

The trials do not settle it. Shih and colleagues grouped their trials of invasive procedures under local anesthesia by the style of music played. Each group compares that style with no music, not one style with another. In adults, classical music showed a significant difference (SMD -0.69, 5 trials). The music they grouped as popular (SMD -0.43, 2 trials) or instrumental (SMD -0.17, 3 trials) did not. In children, none of the four styles they grouped did: folk, instrumental, nursery and popular music. The authors also write that "Most clinical studies lack direct comparisons between various music styles".

One trial that did compare two styles, the 2026 trial by İşcan Yapar and colleagues, found "no significant differences between classical and Turkish music". In the trials López-Valverde and colleagues describe, the classical music was specific works, such as pieces by Vivaldi, Bach and Mozart.

Were the studies done with headphones or room speakers?

Mostly headphones. Tan and colleagues write that "the primary method of music intervention in dental anxiety disorders is that patients wear headphones and listen to music". The children's review says the music was "predominantly receptive (passive listening via headphones)". Shih and colleagues list the gap among their review's limits:

"The impact of listening to music via headphones versus speakers was not analyzed, preventing a comparison of their effects."
Shih et al., Journal of Clinical Medicine, 2024, Discussion, limitation 3

The van der Weijden review is titled "The effect of playing background music during dental treatment", and its abstract does not say whether patients heard that music through headphones or room speakers.

Headphones also change what a patient hears of the room. The 2026 trial used over-ear headphones at a volume that let patients hear the clinician, and its authors write that "expectancy effects associated with wearing headphones cannot be entirely ruled out." A trial first posted on ClinicalTrials.gov in November 2025 (NCT07240233) compares three groups: music through headphones, the same headphones with no audio "to provide passive attenuation of ambient noise", and standard care with neither. On October 10, 2026 the registry listed it as enrolling by invitation, with an estimated 60 participants and no results posted.

So most of this evidence is about one patient listening through headphones. Music played over a room's speakers, heard by everyone in the room, is a different setup, and the reviews above do not report a separate result for it.

Why can't these trials be blinded?

Because a patient who hears music knows it. In a drug trial, neither the patient nor the assessor has to know who got the real pill. In a music trial, the patient always knows which group they are in, and in most of these trials the patient is also the one reporting their anxiety. Reviewers count that as a risk of bias.

"It is challenging to conduct double-blind research for the model of conscious people listening to music."
Shih et al., Journal of Clinical Medicine, 2024, Discussion, limitation 7

López-Valverde and colleagues found that only 4 of their trials met the risk-of-bias domain "blinding of participants and personnel". The 2026 trial's authors write that "participants were aware of whether they received a music intervention, as blinding was not possible due to the nature of the study design", and that their trial had no "placebo auditory control condition, such as neutral sounds or white noise."

How small were the trials?

Most had fewer than 100 patients. Shih and colleagues write: "Most studies had sample sizes under 100, leading to low statistical power and increased variability." The children's trials ranged from 12 to 128 children. The smallest, by Bayraktar and Akkoç in Clinical and Experimental Health Sciences, 2024 (doi), with 12 children, found no statistically significant differences between groups; the children's review notes its "very small sample size". The 2026 trial had 25 patients in each of its three groups.

Did any studies find little or no effect?

Yes. Two trials found little or no effect for particular patients or measures, and an earlier review called the findings inconclusive:

Highly anxious adults. A 2008 trial by Lahmann and colleagues in the Journal of the American Dental Association (doi) randomly assigned 90 adults with dental anxiety to brief relaxation, music distraction or neither. Both active groups improved on the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory, relaxation did significantly better than music, and in highly anxious patients music distraction "did not have a clinically relevant effect".
Vital signs during extractions. A 2024 trial by Ponni and colleagues in Bioinformation (PMC), of 200 adults having a tooth extracted, with music the patient chose, found "no statistical difference between the control and experimental group except the respiratory rate which increased statistically in both control and experimental group." Its authors conclude the music "has little effect on adult patients" in that setting.
An earlier review. In 2018, Bradt and Teague wrote in Oral Diseases (doi) that "findings regarding the use of music listening for dental anxiety are inconclusive, especially for children", and that "The use of music for passive distraction may not be adequate for children and highly anxious adults."

Does music help children at the dentist?

The reviews disagree. The 2025 children's review pooled 7 trials of 476 children aged 4 to 14, mostly listening through headphones, and found lower self-reported anxiety and heart rate with music. Its authors still conclude that "the evidence base remains insufficient to establish definitive clinical guidelines." For invasive procedures under local anesthesia, Shih and colleagues found a smaller difference in children (SMD -0.47) that was not statistically significant (p = 0.13), against a significant one in adults (SMD -0.51, p = 0.0007). López-Valverde and colleagues pooled only 2 trials in children, 248 children in all, and found a significant difference. Which trials a review includes changes its answer.

How should you read a new study on music and dental anxiety?

These questions, drawn from the limits the authors above name, help place any new study in this research:

How many patients were in each group?
Shih and colleagues tie sample sizes under 100 to "low statistical power and increased variability".
Who chose the music?
Patient-chosen and researcher-chosen music gave different results in the same review.
Headphones or room speakers?
Most trials used headphones. Did the trial include a headphones-only group with no music?
What was measured, and when?
A questionnaire the patient fills in, a vital sign, or both, and was it measured only around one visit?
Who knew which group a patient was in?
Patients always know. Did the person scoring the results know too?
Was the trial registered before it started?
The children's review lists "the lack of pre-registered protocols" among its risk-of-bias concerns.

Does eleMusic say its music helps anxious patients?

No. eleMusic makes no health claims about its music, and its Terms of Service say so in Section 12.3:

"The Service provides background ambience only. It is not a medical device, is not music therapy, and is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure, mitigate or prevent any disease or condition, including anxiety or pain. eleMusic makes no health, therapeutic or clinical claims about the Service."
eleMusic Terms of Service, Section 12.3, "Not a medical product", version 2026-10-11, effective October 11, 2026

Section 12.4 says the practice decides how music plays in its rooms:

"You decide where, when and how loudly the Content plays. You are responsible for keeping the volume appropriate, for making sure the music does not interfere with communication, alarms, equipment sounds, patient monitoring or care, and for accommodating patients, visitors and staff who prefer no music."
eleMusic Terms of Service, Section 12.4, "Your environment", version 2026-10-11, effective October 11, 2026

eleMusic's stations are background music for the rooms of a dental practice, played from a tablet or laptop, or cast to a TV. They are not a treatment, and no study on this page tested them. Original instrumental music, generated and mastered by eleMusic. How the music is made. No vocals, no ads, no commercial recordings. Read Section 12 of the Terms, or see how eleMusic works. For practical, non-clinical questions about music in each room or type of practice, see our guides to music for dental treatment rooms, music for a dental waiting room and music for pediatric, orthodontic and oral surgery offices.

Music and dental anxiety: what the research says

Does listening to music lower dental anxiety scores?

What did the studies actually measure?

Does it matter who chooses the music?

Does the kind of music matter for dental anxiety?

Were the studies done with headphones or room speakers?

Why can't these trials be blinded?

How small were the trials?

Did any studies find little or no effect?

Does music help children at the dentist?

How should you read a new study on music and dental anxiety?

How many patients were in each group?

Who chose the music?

Headphones or room speakers?

What was measured, and when?

Who knew which group a patient was in?

Was the trial registered before it started?

Does eleMusic say its music helps anxious patients?

Sources