Background: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) related anxiety is a multidimensional phenomenon with symptoms that include claustrophobia, fear of being hurt, fear of the unknown, and fear about results, and often causes patients to move during their MRI examination resulting in motion artifacts leading to the need for repeat scans and translating into poor quality of care, increasing costs, and declining workflow efficiency. Although most facilities performing MRIs use various techniques in an attempt to reduce anxiety, new interventions are needed to improve patient support. Objective: The purpose of this feasibility study in patients undergoing MRI was to (1) determine recruitment rates; (2) determine adherence to touch and foot massage interventions; (3) determine provider and participant’s acceptability of physical presence, human touch or foot massage interventions; and (4) examine the effects of touch or foot massage interventions as compared to physical presence during MRI on anxiety. Methods: A quasi-experimental design was used for this feasibility study where the interventions were foot massage and touch. For the control group, the researcher remained in the room with the patient. Recruitment of the sample (N=60) was done from the Center for Neurosciences (CNS). In addition to measuring provider and participant acceptability, anxiety was assessed using a single item verbally administered anxiety rating (VAR) scale. Results: Recruitment of participants from the CNS generated a recruitment rate of 78.2%. There were no barriers to the application of the intervention protocol. The overall mean value of effectiveness was 8.53, SD = 2.4. There was a significant difference among the three groups in terms of effectiveness of the intervention F=15.19(2, 57), p < .001. The MRI technologist felt that these interventions were helpful to the participants in keeping them calm and they did not disrupt the workflow or increase or decrease the length of the scan. Multilevel Modeling analysis revealed that the foot massage intervention had a significant contribution in the model (?= -1.35, SE=.63, p<0.01). Effect of the touch intervention was not significant. Conclusion: The use of foot massage or touch is feasible in the MRI setting. Patients’ comments indicate acceptability of an integrative approach to interventions.