Meta-analysis2018Industry funded

Funded in part by Roche www.roche.dk

Kind of blue: A systematic review and meta-analysis of music interventions in cancer treatment

Bro ML, Jespersen KV, Hansen JB, Vuust P, Abildgaard N, Gram J, Johansen C

Psycho-oncology · 34 citations

Review labels

Industry funded

Neutral facts our review recorded about how this study was done. They describe method, never whether we like the result.

How it was studied

Design
Meta-analysis (indexed by PubMed)
Studied in
People
Main outcome
Health markers and function

Who paid for it

Funding
Industry funded
University or hospital
Hospital of Southwest Denmark www.sydvestjysksygehus.dk
Nonprofit
Danish Cancer Society Research Center www.cancer.dk
Government
Region of Southern Denmark www.regionsyddanmark.dk
Nonprofit
Familien Hede Nielsens Fond www.hedenielsensfond.dk
Company
Roche www.roche.dk
University or hospital
Karola Jørgensens Forskningsfond, Hospital of Southwest Denmark www.sydvestjysksygehus.dk

Based on 6 listed funder(s).

Publication

Published
2017-06-18 · Psychooncology · vol. 27 · issue 2 · pp. 386–400
Publisher
Wiley
Cited
59 citations · more than 67% of similar papers · 0.9× the field average
References
48 works
Access
Paywalled
Research areas
Music Therapy and Health · Empathy and Medical Education · Art Therapy and Mental Health
Keywords
Meta-analysis, Psychological intervention, Cancer, Music therapy, Psychology, Medicine, Psychotherapist, Internal medicine, Psychiatry
MeSH
humans, neoplasms, music therapy, adult

7 authors

From DK

  • Margrethe Langer Bro · correspondingUniversity of Southern Denmark; Danish National Academy of Music; Hospital South West Jutland; Danish Diabetes Academy
  • Kira Vibe JespersenAarhus University; Royal Academy of Music
  • Julie Bolvig HansenUniversity of Southern Denmark; Frederiksberg Hospital
  • Peter VuustAarhus University; Royal Academy of Music
  • Niels AbildgaardOdense University Hospital
  • Jeppe GramHospital South West Jutland

Abstract

Objectives

Music may be a valuable and low-cost coping strategy for cancer patients. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to identify the psychological and physical effects of music interventions in cancer treatment.

Methods

We included randomized, controlled trials with adult patients in active cancer treatment exposed to different music interventions versus control conditions. Qualitative studies and systematic reviews were excluded. We identified a total of 2624 records through 2 systematic searches (June 2015 and September 2016) in PubMed, Scopus, EMBASE, Cinahl, Web of Science, Cochrane, and PsycINFO and used Risk of Bias Assessment, GRADE and Checklist for Reporting Music-Based Interventions to evaluate the music applied and quality of the studies. We conducted meta-analyses using Review Manager (version 5.3). PROSPERO reg. no. CRD42015026024.

Results

We included 25 RCT's (N = 1784) of which 20 were eligible for the meta-analysis (N = 1565). Music reduced anxiety (SMD -0·80 [95% CI, -1.35 to -0.25]), pain (SMD -0.88 [95% CI -1.45 to -0.32]), and improved mood (SMD -0.55 [95% CI, -0.98 to -0.13]). However, studies were hampered by heterogeneity with I2 varying between 54% and 96%. Quality of the studies ranged from very low to low. The most effective mode of music intervention appeared to be passive listening to self-selected, recorded music in a single session design.

Conclusions

Music may be a tool in reducing anxiety, pain, and improving mood among patients with cancer in active treatment. However, methodological limitations in the studies conducted so far prevent firm conclusions.

Abstract via Europe PMC. Copyright remains with the authors or publisher.

Community trust

Loading…

How much do you trust this study's findings?

0 · not at all10 · completely

Comments

Sign in to rate, comment on or flag this study.Sign in

Something wrong here?

Flag this study if its information, labels or funding look wrong. An editor reviews every flag.

Sign in to rate, comment on or flag this study.Sign in

Educational information about published research. Not medical advice, and not a recommendation to start or stop anything.