Department of Creative Arts Therapies, College of Nursing and Health Professions, Drexel University, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Department of Music Therapy and The Arts and Quality of Life Research Center, Boyer College of Music and Dance, Temple University, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021 Oct 12;10(10):CD006911. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD006911.pub4.
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. MAIN RESULTS: We identified 29 new trials for inclusion in this update. In total, the evidence of this review rests on 81 trials with a total of 5576 participants. Of the 81 trials, 74 trials included adult (N = 5306) and seven trials included pediatric (N = 270) oncology patients. We categorized 38 trials as music therapy trials and 43 as music medicine trials. The interventions were compared to standard care. Psychological outcomes The results suggest that music interventions may have a large anxiety-reducing effect in adults with cancer, with a reported average anxiety reduction of 7.73 units (17 studies, 1381 participants; 95% confidence interval (CI) -10.02 to -5.44; very low-certainty evidence) on the Spielberger State Anxiety Inventory scale (range 20 to 80; lower values reflect lower anxiety). Results also suggested a moderately strong, positive impact of music interventions on depression in adults (12 studies, 1021 participants; standardized mean difference (SMD): -0.41, 95% CI -0.67 to -0.15; very low-certainty evidence). We found no support for an effect of music interventions on mood (SMD 0.47, 95% CI -0.02 to 0.97; 5 studies, 236 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Music interventions may increase hope in adults with cancer, with a reported average increase of 3.19 units (95% CI 0.12 to 6.25) on the Herth Hope Index (range 12 to 48; higher scores reflect greater hope), but this finding was based on only two studies (N = 53 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Physical outcomes We found a moderate pain-reducing effect of music interventions (SMD -0.67, 95% CI -1.07 to -0.26; 12 studies, 632 adult participants; very low-certainty evidence). In addition, music interventions had a small treatment effect on fatigue (SMD -0.28, 95% CI -0.46 to -0.10; 10 studies, 498 adult participants; low-certainty evidence). The results suggest a large effect of music interventions on adult participants' QoL, but the results were highly inconsistent across studies, and the pooled effect size was accompanied by a large confidence interval (SMD 0.88, 95% CI -0.31 to 2.08; 7 studies, 573 participants; evidence is very uncertain). Removal of studies that used improper randomization methods resulted in a moderate effect size that was less heterogeneous (SMD 0.47, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.88, P = 0.02, I = 56%). A small number of trials included pediatric oncology participants. The findings suggest that music interventions may reduce anxiety but this finding was based on only two studies (SMD -0.94, 95% CI -1.9 to 0.03; very low-certainty evidence). Due to the small number of studies, we could not draw conclusions regarding the effects of music interventions on mood, depression, QoL, fatigue or pain in pediatric participants with cancer. The majority of studies included in this review update presented a high risk of bias, and therefore the overall certainty of the evidence is low. For several outcomes (i.e. anxiety, depression, pain, fatigue, and QoL) the beneficial treatment effects were consistent across studies for music therapy interventions delivered by music therapists. In contrast, music medicine interventions resulted in inconsistent treatment effects across studies for these outcomes. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review indicates that music interventions compared to standard care may have beneficial effects on anxiety, depression, hope, pain, and fatigue in adults with cancer. The results of two trials suggest that music interventions may have a beneficial effect on anxiety in children with cancer. Too few trials with pediatric participants were included to draw conclusions about the treatment benefits of music for other outcomes. For several outcomes, music therapy interventions delivered by a trained music therapist led to consistent results across studies and this was not the case for music medicine interventions. Moreover, evidence of effect was found for music therapy interventions for QoL and fatigue but not for music medicine interventions. Most trials were at high risk of bias and low or very low certainty of evidence; therefore, these results need to be interpreted with caution.
背景:这是 2016 年在 Cochrane 图书馆发表的一篇关于综述的更新。患有癌症可能会导致广泛的情绪、身体和社会痛苦。音乐干预措施已被用于减轻癌症患者的症状和治疗副作用。本综述包括被定义为接受受过训练的音乐治疗师提供的音乐治疗的音乐干预,以及被定义为接受医务人员提供的预录音乐的音乐医学。
目的:评估和比较音乐治疗和音乐医学干预对癌症患者心理和身体结果的影响。
检索方法:我们在 Cochrane 图书馆的 Cochrane 对照试验中心资料库(2020 年,第 8 期)中进行了检索,使用了 Medline 通过 Ovid、Embase 通过 Ovid、CINAHL、PsycINFO、LILACS、Science Citation Index、CancerLit、CAIRSS、Proquest Digital Dissertations、ClinicalTrials.gov、Current Controlled Trials、RILM 音乐文献摘要、http://www.wfmt.info/Musictherapyworld/ 和国家研究登记处。我们除了最后两个数据库外,都从它们的创建日期开始检索到 2020 年 4 月;后两个数据库不再运行,因此我们检索到它们的截止日期。我们手检了音乐治疗期刊,查阅了参考文献,并联系了专家。没有语言限制。
选择标准:我们纳入了所有随机和准随机对照试验,研究内容为改善癌症成人和儿科患者的心理和身体结果的音乐干预。我们排除了接受活检和抽吸以进行诊断目的的患者。
数据收集和分析:两位综述作者独立提取数据并评估了偏倚风险。在可能的情况下,我们使用均数差值和标准化均数差值进行了荟萃分析。我们使用后测得分。在存在显著基线差异的情况下,我们使用变化得分。我们对有成人参与者的研究和有儿科参与者的研究进行了单独的荟萃分析。主要观察结果包括心理结果和身体症状,次要观察结果包括生理反应、身体功能、麻醉和镇痛摄入量、住院时间、社会和精神支持、沟通以及生活质量 (QoL)。我们使用 GRADE 评估证据的确定性。
主要结果:我们确定了 29 项新的试验进行更新。总的来说,本综述的证据基于 81 项试验,共涉及 5576 名参与者。在这 81 项试验中,74 项试验纳入了成人(N=5306)癌症患者,7 项试验纳入了儿科(N=270)癌症患者。我们将 38 项试验归类为音乐治疗试验,43 项归类为音乐医学试验。这些干预措施与标准护理进行了比较。心理结果结果表明,音乐干预可能对成人癌症患者的焦虑有较大的缓解作用,在 Spielberger 状态焦虑量表上的平均焦虑降低了 7.73 个单位(17 项研究,1381 名参与者;95%置信区间 (CI) -10.02 至 -5.44;非常低确定性证据)(范围为 20 至 80;较低的值表示较低的焦虑)。结果还表明,音乐干预对成人的抑郁有中度强烈的积极影响(12 项研究,1021 名参与者;标准化均数差值 (SMD):-0.41,95% CI -0.67 至 -0.15;非常低确定性证据)。我们没有发现音乐干预对情绪有影响的证据(SMD 0.47,95% CI 0.02 至 0.97;5 项研究,236 名参与者;非常低确定性证据)。音乐干预可能会增加癌症患者的希望,在 Herth 希望指数上的平均增加了 3.19 个单位(95% CI 0.12 至 6.25)(范围为 12 至 48;较高的分数表示更大的希望),但这一发现仅基于两项研究(N=53 名参与者;非常低确定性证据)。身体结果我们发现音乐干预对疼痛有中度缓解作用(SMD -0.67,95% CI -1.07 至 -0.26;12 项研究,632 名成人参与者;非常低确定性证据)。此外,音乐干预对疲劳有较小的治疗效果(SMD -0.28,95% CI -0.46 至 -0.10;10 项研究,498 名成人参与者;低确定性证据)。结果表明,音乐干预对成人参与者的生活质量有很大的影响,但研究结果非常不一致,汇总效应大小伴有较大的置信区间(SMD 0.88,95% CI -0.31 至 2.08;7 项研究,573 名参与者;证据非常不确定)。去除使用不当随机化方法的研究后,得到了一个中等效应大小,异质性较小(SMD 0.47,95% CI 0.06 至 0.88,P=0.02,I=56%)。少数试验纳入了儿科癌症患者。结果表明,音乐干预可能减轻焦虑,但这一发现仅基于两项研究(SMD -0.94,95% CI -1.9 至 0.03;非常低确定性证据)。由于纳入的研究数量较少,我们无法得出关于音乐干预对儿科癌症患者的情绪、抑郁、生活质量、疲劳或疼痛的影响的结论。本综述更新中的大多数研究都存在高偏倚风险,因此证据的总体确定性较低。对于几个结局(即焦虑、抑郁、疼痛、疲劳和生活质量),由音乐治疗师提供的音乐治疗干预措施的有益治疗效果在成人癌症患者中是一致的。相比之下,音乐医学干预措施在这些结局上的治疗效果在研究之间不一致。
作者结论:本系统评价表明,与标准护理相比,音乐干预可能对成人癌症患者的焦虑、抑郁、希望、疼痛和疲劳有有益的影响。两项试验的结果表明,音乐干预可能对儿童癌症患者的焦虑有有益的影响。纳入的儿科患者试验数量太少,无法就音乐对其他结局的治疗益处得出结论。对于几个结局,由经过培训的音乐治疗师提供的音乐治疗干预措施导致了研究之间的一致结果,而音乐医学干预措施则没有。此外,音乐治疗干预措施对 QoL 和疲劳有疗效证据,但对音乐医学干预措施没有。大多数试验都存在高偏倚风险,且证据确定性低或非常低;因此,这些结果需要谨慎解释。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021-10-12
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022-6-9
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022-6-29
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021-12-20
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018-3-1
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022-11-11
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022-3-29
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021-11-26
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022-5-9
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022-9-23
Medicine (Baltimore). 2025-8-8
Integr Med Res. 2025-9
Front Public Health. 2025-7-24
J Pain Symptom Manage. 2021-6
J Cancer Res Clin Oncol. 2019-7-5