Singing for children and adults with bronchiectasis

Implementing a singing-based intervention for postpartum depression in Denmark and Romania: a brief research report

Background

There is a burgeoning evidence-base that demonstrates the positive impact of the arts on our health, wellbeing, and health behaviors. However, very few studies have focused on how to optimize the implementation of these activities for different sociocultural contexts. Due to the increasing interest in scaling effective arts interventions as part of public health strategies, and in line with global goals of achieving health equity, this is an essential focus.

Aim

Using the case study of a singing for post-partum depression (PPD) intervention with empirically-demonstrated clinical effects, this brief research report explores implementation of an arts and health intervention that has been successful in the United Kingdom ("Music and Motherhood") for the new contexts of Silkeborg (Denmark) and Cluj-Napoca (Romania).

Methods

Data was collected from participants at all levels of the implementation structure including at local and management levels. The study draws on qualitative implementation data to explore participant experiences, including one-to-one interviews, written testimonies, meeting minutes, ethnographic researcher reflections and focus groups, including data from 46 participants in total.

Results and conclusion

We explore implementation and adaptation across five key themes: (1) acceptability and feasibility; (2) practical and structural barriers and enablers; (3) adoption and sustainability; (4) broader contextual factors affecting implementation and sustainability; and (5) project structure and processes. Taken together, the themes demonstrate that arts interventions need to be adapted in culturally sensitive ways by stakeholders who have local knowledge of their environments. This research serves as an informative foundation for use by other researchers that aim to expand the reach and impact of arts-based interventions.

Speech and language therapy for management of chronic cough

BACKGROUND

Cough both protects and clears the airway. Cough has three phases: breathing in (inspiration), closure of the glottis, and a forced expiratory effort. Chronic cough has a negative, far-reaching impact on quality of life. Few effective medical treatments for individuals with unexplained (idiopathic/refractory) chronic cough (UCC) are known. For this group, current guidelines advocate the use of gabapentin. Speech and language therapy (SLT) has been considered as a non-pharmacological option for managing UCC without the risks and side effects associated with pharmacological agents, and this review considers the evidence from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the effectiveness of SLT in this context.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness of speech and language therapy for treatment of people with unexplained (idiopathic/refractory) chronic cough.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Airways Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, trials registries, and reference lists of included studies. Our most recent search was 8 February 2019.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included RCTs in which participants had a diagnosis of UCC having undergone a full diagnostic workup to exclude an underlying cause, as per published guidelines or local protocols, and where the intervention included speech and language therapy techniques for UCC.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened the titles and abstracts of 94 records. Two clinical trials, represented in 10 study reports, met our predefined inclusion criteria. Two review authors independently assessed risk of bias for each study and extracted outcome data. We analysed dichotomous data as odds ratios (ORs), and continuous data as mean differences (MDs) or geometric mean differences. We used standard methods recommended by Cochrane. Our primary outcomes were health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and serious adverse events (SAEs).

MAIN RESULTS

We found two studies involving 162 adults that met our inclusion criteria. Neither of the two studies included children. The duration of treatment and length of sessions varied between studies from four sessions delivered weekly, to four sessions over two months. Similarly, length of sessions varied slightly from one 60-minute session and three 45-minute sessions to four 30-minute sessions. The control interventions were healthy lifestyle advice in both studies.One study contributed HRQoL data, using the Leicester Cough Questionnaire (LCQ), and we judged the quality of the evidence to be low using the GRADE approach. Data were reported as between-group difference from baseline to four weeks (MD 1.53, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.21 to 2.85; participants = 71), revealing a statistically significant benefit for people receiving a physiotherapy and speech and language therapy intervention (PSALTI) versus control. However, the difference between PSALTI and control was not observed between week four and three months. The same study provided information on SAEs, and there were no SAEs in either the PSALTI or control arms. Using the GRADE approach we judged the quality of evidence for this outcome to be low.Data were also available for our prespecified secondary outcomes. In each case data were provided by only one study, therefore there were no opportunities for aggregation; we judged the quality of this evidence to be low for each outcome. A significant difference favouring therapy was demonstrated for: objective cough counts (ratio for mean coughs per hour on treatment was 59% (95% CI 37% to 95%) relative to control; participants = 71); symptom score (MD 9.80, 95% CI 4.50 to 15.10; participants = 87); and clinical improvement as defined by trialists (OR 48.13, 95% CI 13.53 to 171.25; participants = 87). There was no significant difference between therapy and control regarding subjective measures of cough (MD on visual analogue scale of cough severity: -9.72, 95% CI -20.80 to 1.36; participants = 71) and cough reflex sensitivity (capsaicin concentration to induce five coughs: 1.11 (95% CI 0.80 to 1.54; participants = 49) times higher on treatment than on control). One study reported data on adverse events, and there were no adverse events reported in either the therapy or control arms of the study.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The paucity of data in this review highlights the need for more controlled trial data examining the efficacy of SLT interventions in the management of UCC. Although a large number of studies were found in the initial search as per protocol, we could include only two studies in the review. In addition, this review highlights that endpoints vary between published studies.The improvements in HRQoL (LCQ) and reduction in 24-hour cough frequency seen with the PSALTI intervention were statistically significant but short-lived, with the between-group difference lasting up to four weeks only. Further studies are required to replicate these findings and to investigate the effects of SLT interventions over time. It is clear that SLT interventions vary between studies. Further research is needed to understand which aspects of SLT interventions are most effective in reducing cough (both objective cough frequency and subjective measures of cough) and improving HRQoL. We consider these endpoints to be clinically important. It is also important for future studies to report information on adverse events.Because of the paucity of data, we can draw no robust conclusions regarding the efficacy of SLT interventions for improving outcomes in unexplained chronic cough. Our review identifies the need for further high-quality research, with comparable endpoints to inform robust conclusions.

Evaluation of a Choir as a Non-Medical Intervention for Children with Asthma: BreathStars

A shift in the current health policy has seen heightened focus on non-medical interventions which can be delivered out with formal health-care settings, to complement and enhance the clinical care of people with long-term conditions. Asthma is a common long-term condition managed by pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions. Recent research activity has focused on the use of singing for respiratory health due to its similarity with the more well-known intervention of breathing exercises. The aim of this study was to determine if singing improved breathing in children with asthma. A realist evaluation study design with a mixed methods approach was adopted to evaluate a singing group for children aged 7-12. Results obtained through framework analysis of the data indicated notable improvement in asthma control with the added impact on self-esteem. Enjoyment of the singing group within a family centered approach was seen as a positive alongside the community benefit of wider asthma education. Lessons can be learnt from this evaluation which could inform future initiatives relevant to the current agenda of asset-based approaches such as social prescribing within the context of the current devolution of the health and social care budget in the North West of England.

Singing for adults with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD)

BACKGROUND

Singing is a complex physical activity dependent on the use of the lungs for air supply to regulate airflow and create large lung volumes. In singing, exhalation is active and requires active diaphragm contraction and good posture. Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a progressive, chronic lung disease characterised by airflow obstruction. Singing is an activity with potential to improve health outcomes in people with COPD.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effect of singing on health-related quality of life and dyspnoea in people with COPD.

SEARCH METHODS

We identified trials from the Cochrane Airways Specialised Register, ClinicalTrials.gov, the World Health Organization trials portal and PEDro, from their inception to August 2017. We also reviewed reference lists of all primary studies and review articles for additional references.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials in people with stable COPD, in which structured supervised singing training of at least four sessions over four weeks' total duration was performed. The singing could be performed individually or as part of a group (choir) facilitated by a singing leader. Studies were included if they compared: 1) singing versus no intervention (usual care) or another control intervention; or 2) singing plus pulmonary rehabilitation versus pulmonary rehabilitation alone.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened and selected trials for inclusion, extracted outcome data and assessed risk of bias. We contacted authors of trials for missing data. We calculated mean differences (MDs) using a random-effects model. We were only able to analyse data for the comparison of singing versus no intervention or a control group.

MAIN RESULTS

Three studies (a total of 112 participants) were included. All studies randomised participants to a singing group or a control group. The comparison groups included a film workshop, handcraft work, and no intervention. The frequency of the singing intervention in the studies ranged from 1 to 2 times a week over a 6 to 24 week period. The duration of each singing session was 60 minutes.All studies included participants diagnosed with COPD with a mean age ranging from 67 to 72 years and a mean forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV₁) ranging from 37% to 64% of predicted values. The sample size of included studies was small (33 to 43 participants) and overall study quality was low to very low. Blinding of personnel and participants was not possible due to the physical nature of the intervention, and selection and reporting bias was present in two studies.For the primary outcome of health-related quality of life, there was no statistically significant improvement in the St George's Respiratory Questionnaire total score (mean difference (MD) -0.82, 95% confidence interval (CI) -4.67 to 3.02, 2 studies, n = 58, low-quality evidence). However, there was a statistically significant improvement in the SF-36 Physical Component Summary (PCS) score favouring the singing group (MD 12.64, 95% CI 5.50 to 19.77, 2 studies, n = 52, low-quality evidence). Only one study reported results for the other primary outcome of dyspnoea, in which the mean improvement in Baseline Dyspnoea Index (BDI) score favouring the singing group was not statistically significant (MD 0.40, 95% CI -0.65 to 1.45, 1 study, n = 30, very low-quality evidence).No studies examined any long-term outcomes and no adverse events or side effects were reported.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is low to very low-quality evidence that singing is safe for people with COPD and improves physical health (as measured by the SF-36 physical component score), but not dyspnoea or respiratory-specific quality of life. The evidence is limited due to the low number of studies and the small sample size of each study. No evidence exists examining the long-term effect of singing for people with COPD. The absence of studies examining singing performed in conjunction with pulmonary rehabilitation precludes the formulation of conclusions about the effects of singing in this context. More randomised controlled trials with larger sample sizes and long-term follow-up, and trials examining the effect of singing in addition to pulmonary rehabilitation, are required to determine the effect of singing on health-related quality of life and dyspnoea in people with COPD.

Interventions for bronchiectasis: an overview of Cochrane systematic reviews

BACKGROUND

Bronchiectasis is a chronic respiratory disease characterised by abnormal dilatation of the bronchi, and presents typically with a chronic productive cough (or chronic wet cough in children) and recurrent infective exacerbations. It significantly impacts daily activities and quality of life, and can lead to recurrent hospitalisations, severe lung function impairment, respiratory failure and even death.

OBJECTIVES

To provide an overview of the efficacy and safety of interventions for adults and children with bronchiectasis from Cochrane reviews.To identify gaps in the evidence base that will inform recommendations for new research and reviews, and to summarise information on reported outcomes and make recommendations for the reporting of standard outcomes in future trials and reviews.

METHODS

We included Cochrane reviews of non-cystic fibrosis (CF) bronchiectasis. We searched the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. The search is current to 11 February 2015. We also identified trials that were potentially eligible for, but not currently included in, published reviews to make recommendations for new Cochrane reviews. We assessed the quality of included reviews using the AMSTAR criteria. We presented an evidence synthesis of data from reviews alongside an evidence map of clinical trials and guideline data. The primary outcomes were exacerbations, lung function and quality of life.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 21 reviews but extracted data from, and rated the quality of, only nine reviews that reported results for people with bronchiectasis alone. Of the reviews with no usable data, two reviews included studies with mixed clinical populations where data were not reported separately for people with bronchiectasis and 10 reviews did not contain any trials. Of the 40 studies included across the nine reviews, three (number of participants nine to 34) included children. The studies ranged from single session to year-long studies. Each review included from one to 11 trials and 28 (70%) trials in the overview included 40 or fewer participants. The total number of participants included in reviews ranged from 40 to 1040. The age range of adult participants was from 36 to 73 years and children ranged from six to 16 years. The proportion of male participants ranged from 21% to 72%. Where reported, mean baseline forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) ranged from 1.17 L to 1.66 L and from 47% to 88% predicted. Most of the reviews had search dates older than two years.We have summarised the published evidence as outlined in Cochrane reviews, but it was not possible to draw definitive conclusions. There was inconclusive evidence on the use of long-term antibiotics and nebulised hypertonic saline for reducing exacerbation frequency and evidence that human deoxyribonuclease (RhDNase) increases exacerbation frequency. Improvements in lung function were reported for inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) though this was small and not clinically relevant. Evidence of benefit for hyperosmolar agents and mucolytics was inconclusive. There was limited evidence of improvements in quality of life with airway clearance techniques and physical therapy but evidence of benefit for hyperosmolar agents was inconclusive. Secondary outcomes were not clearly reported in all trials in the included reviews. Improvements in dyspnoea, wheeze and cough-free days were reported for small trials of ICS and LABA (long-acting beta2-agonsts)/ICS and cough reduction was also reported for a small bromhexine trial. Reduction in sputum production was reported for long-term antibiotics and airway clearance techniques but evidence of benefit for hyperosmolar agents was inconclusive.Adverse events were included as outcomes in seven reviews. The review of long-term (four weeks to one year) prophylactic courses of antibiotics reported significantly more cases of wheeze (Peto odd ratio (OR) 8.56, 95% confidence intervals (CI) 1.63 to 44.93), dyspnoea (12 versus three, P value = 0.01) and chest pain (seven versus zero, P value = 0.01) from the same trial (74 participants) but no differences in occurrence of diarrhoea, rash or number of withdrawals. In the review of mucolytics versus placebo, relevant outcomes were not reported for erdosteine comparisons and no significant adverse effects were reported for bromhexine, though adverse events were associated with RhDNase (OR 28.19, 95% CI 3.77 to 210.85, 1 study). Of the remaining five reviews, adverse events were not reported in the single trials included in the ICS review or the physical therapy review and the impact of adverse events in the single trial included in the inhaled LABA/ICS combination versus ICS review were unclear. The reviews of short-term courses of antibiotics and inhaled hyperosmolar agents reported no significant differences in occurrence of adverse events. Fewer admissions to hospital were reported for long-term antibiotics, but this outcome was not reported in all reviews. No reviews reported differences in mortality, but again this outcome was not included in all reviews.We did not explicitly include antibiotic resistance as an outcome in the review, but this was unclear in the Cochrane reviews and evidence from other trials should be considered.We rated all reviews as high quality (AMSTAR), though opportunities for improved reporting (e.g. summary of findings and GRADE evaluation of the evidence) were identified for inclusion in future updates of the reviews. However, the majority of trials were not high quality and confidence in the effects of treatments, therefore, requires additional evidence from larger and more methodologically robust trials. We evaluated the overall coverage of important topics in bronchiectasis by mapping the quality of the current evidence base against published guidelines and identifying high priority areas for new research on; use of short-course and long-term antibiotics, ICS and oral corticosteroids, inhaled hyperosmolars, mucolytics, and use of airway clearance techniques.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This overview clearly points to significant opportunities for further research aimed at improving outcomes for people with bronchiectasis. We have highlighted important endpoints for studies (particularly exacerbations, quality of life and lung function), and areas of clinical practice that are in most urgent need of evidence-based support (including long-term antibiotics, ICSs and mucolytics).As the evidence is confined to small trials of short duration, it is not currently possible to assess the balance between the benefits and potential harms of treatments for bronchiectasis.

Effectiveness of music therapy: a summary of systematic reviews based on randomized controlled trials of music interventions

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this review was to summarize evidence for the effectiveness of music therapy (MT) and to assess the quality of systematic reviews (SRs) based on randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

STUDY DESIGN

An SR of SRs based on RCTs.

METHODS

Studies were eligible if they were RCTs. Studies included were those with at least one treatment group in which MT was applied. We searched the following databases from 1995 to October 1, 2012: MEDLINE via PubMed, CINAHL (Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature), Web of Science, Global Health Library, and Ichushi-Web. We also searched all Cochrane Database and Campbell Systematic Reviews up to October 1, 2012. Based on the International Classification of Diseases, 10th revision, we identified a disease targeted for each article.

RESULTS

Twenty-one studies met all inclusion criteria. This study included 16 Cochrane reviews. As a whole, the quality of the articles was very good. Eight studies were about "Mental and behavioural disorders (F00-99)"; there were two studies on "Diseases of the nervous system (G00-99)" and "Diseases of the respiratory system (J00-99)"; and there was one study each for "Endocrine, nutritional and metabolic diseases (E00-90)", "Diseases of the circulatory system (I00-99)", and "Pregnancy, childbirth and the puerperium (O60)". MT treatment improved the following: global and social functioning in schizophrenia and/or serious mental disorders, gait and related activities in Parkinson's disease, depressive symptoms, and sleep quality.

CONCLUSION

THIS COMPREHENSIVE SUMMARY OF SRS DEMONSTRATED THAT MT TREATMENT IMPROVED THE FOLLOWING: global and social functioning in schizophrenia and/or serious mental disorders, gait and related activities in Parkinson's disease, depressive symptoms, and sleep quality. MT may have the potential for improving other diseases, but there is not enough evidence at present. Most importantly, no specific adverse effect or harmful phenomenon occurred in any of the studies, and MT was well tolerated by almost all patients.

Creative arts as a public health resource: moving from practice-based research to evidence-based practice

There is growing international acceptance of the notion that participation in the creative arts can be beneficial for well-being and health. For over 30 years practical arts for health projects have been developed to support health care and promote health and well-being in communities. An increasing body of evaluation and research evidence lends weight to the value of such initiatives. However, the field of arts and health is complex and multi-faceted and there are challenges in moving beyond ‘practice-based’ research, towards building a progressive body of knowledge that can provide a basis for future ‘evidence-based’ practice in health care and public health. This paper reviews some of the population-level evidence from epidemiological studies on cultural participation and health, before considering research on active initiatives that draw on the creative arts in health care settings and communities to support health and well-being. The notion of a hierarchy of evidence is discussed in relation to arts for health initiatives and a plea is made for recognising the value of concrete case studies, qualitative research and the testimonies of participants and professionals alike in assessing both the value of creative arts activities and for understanding their impacts. Nevertheless, the need for robust controlled studies with precise measurable health outcomes is clear if we are to move towards the scaling up of arts interventions to achieve public health-level impacts from creative arts participation. A brief account of the current programme of research on singing and health that is underway at the Sidney De Haan Research Centre for Arts and Health is presented as a possible model for future research on arts and health.