Effect of Personalized Music Intervention in Mechanically Ventilated Children in the PICU: A Pilot Study
Liu MH, Zhu LH, Peng JX, Zhang XP, Xiao ZH, Liu QJ, Qiu J, Latour JM
Pediatric critical care medicine : a journal of the Society of Critical Care Medicine and the World Federation of Pediatric Intensive and Critical Care Societies · 23 citations
Review labels
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
- Controlled clinical trial (classified by our AI screen)
- Studied in
- People
- Main outcome
- Health markers and function
Who paid for it
- Funding
- Funding not disclosed
Publication
- Published
- 2019-10-25 · Pediatr Crit Care Med · vol. 21 · issue 1 · pp. e8–e14
- Publisher
- Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
- Cited
- 33 citations · more than 91% of similar papers · 3.0× the field average
- Impact
- Top 10% most cited in its field
- References
- 37 works
- Access
- Paywalled
- Research areas
- Music Therapy and Health · Infant Development and Preterm Care · Intensive Care Unit Cognitive Disorders
- Keywords
- Medicine, Intervention (counseling), Emergency medicine, Intensive care medicine, Nursing
- MeSH
- humans, critical illness, midazolam, hypnotics and sedatives, music therapy, respiration, artificial, length of stay, pilot projects, blood pressure, heart rate, time factors, music, child, child, preschool, infant, intensive care units, pediatric, china, female, male, respiratory rate, behavior rating scale, patient comfort
8 authors
From CN, GB
- Meihua LiuHunan Children's Hospital
- Li-hui ZhuHunan Children's Hospital
- Jianxiong PengHunan Children's Hospital
- Xinping ZhangHunan Children's Hospital
- Zhenghui XiaoHunan Children's Hospital
- Qiong‐Jie LiuHunan Children's Hospital
Abstract
Objectives
To determine the feasibility of a personalized music intervention with mechanically ventilated patients in the PICU.
Design
Pilot study with a quasi-experimental design.
Setting
Tertiary children's hospital in China with a 40-bed PICU.
Patients
Children, 1 month to 7 years, with mechanical ventilation were recruited and assigned to music group (n = 25) and control group (n = 25).
Interventions
Children in the music group received their own favorite music and listened for 60 minutes three times a day. The control group receive routine care without music.
Measurements and main results
Primary outcome measure was comfort measured with the COMFORT Behavior scale 5 minutes before and after the music. Secondary outcome measures were physiologic variables; heart rate, respiration, blood pressure, oxygen saturation. Mechanical ventilation time, length of stay, and sedation medication were also collected. Qualitative analysis revealed that nurses had a positive attitude in delivering the interventions and identified improvements for the main trial. Children in the music group had lower COMFORT Behavior scores (15.7 vs 17.6; p = 0.011). Children in the music group had better physiologic outcomes; heart rate (140 vs 144; p = 0.039), respiration rate (40 vs 43; p = 0.036), systolic blood pressure (93 vs 95 mm Hg; p = 0.031), oxygen saturation (96% vs 95%; p < 0.001), diastolic blood pressure was not significantly (52 vs 53 mm Hg; p = 0.11). Children in the music group had a shorter ventilation time (148.7 vs 187.6; p = 0.044) and a shorter length of stay, but not significant (11.2 vs 13.8; p = 0.071). Children in the control group had higher total amount of on-demand midazolam (29 vs 33 mg; p = 0.040).
Conclusions
Our pilot study indicates that personalized music intervention is feasible and might improve the comfort of children with mechanical ventilation. Further studies are needed to provide conclusive evidence in confirming the effectiveness of music interventions comforting critically ill children in PICUs.
Abstract via Europe PMC. Copyright remains with the authors or publisher.
Community trust
Loading…
How much do you trust this study's findings?
Comments
Sign in to rate, comment on or flag this study.Sign inSomething 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 inEducational information about published research. Not medical advice, and not a recommendation to start or stop anything.