二次检索
版本
人群分类
研究领域
证据类型
时间限定

作者:Cochrane Gynaecological, Neuro-oncology and Orphan Cancer Group

关键词:

发表时间:2021

发表期刊:Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

证据类型:系统评价/Meta分析

Background This is an update of the review published on the Cochrane Library in 2016, Issue 8. Having cancer may result in extensive emotional, physical and social suffering. Music interventions have been used to alleviate symptoms and treatment side effects in people with cancer. This review includes music interventions defined as music therapy offered by trained music therapists, as well as music medicine, which was defined as listening to pre-recorded music offered by medical staff. Objectives To assess and compare the effects of music therapy and music medicine interventions for psychological and physical outcomes in people with cancer. Search methods We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2020, Issue 3) in the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE via Ovid, Embase via Ovid, CINAHL, PsycINFO, LILACS, Science Citation Index, CancerLit, CAIRSS, Proquest Digital Dissertations, ClinicalTrials.gov, Current Controlled Trials, the RILM Abstracts of Music Literature, http://www.wfmt.info/Musictherapyworld/and the National Research Register. We searched all databases, except for the last two, from their inception to April 2020; the other two are no longer functional, so we searched them until their termination date. We handsearched music therapy journals, reviewed reference lists and contacted experts. There was no language restriction. Selection criteria We included all randomized and quasi-randomized controlled trials of music interventions for improving psychological and physical outcomes in adults and pediatric patients with cancer. We excluded patients undergoing biopsy and aspiration for diagnostic purposes. Data collection and analysis Two review authors independently extracted the data and assessed the risk of bias. Where possible, we presented results in meta-analyses using mean differences and standardized mean differences. We used post-test scores. In cases of significant baseline difference, we used change scores. We conducted separate meta-analyses for studies with adult participants and those with pediatric participants. Primary outcomes of interest included psychological outcomes and physical symptoms and secondary outcomes included physiological responses, physical functioning, anesthetic and analgesic intake, length of hospitalization, social and spiritual support, communication, and quality of life (QoL) . We used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence.