Singing as an adjunct therapy for children and adults with cystic fibrosis

Combined effect of pulmonary rehabilitation and music therapy in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

[Purpose] We aimed to analyze parameters of pulmonary function and physiological, psychological, and physical factors in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) receiving pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) and music therapy (MT). [Participants and Methods] This randomized crossover comparative study included in-patients diagnosed with COPD and a ratio of forced expiratory volume measured at the first second and forced vital capacity (FEV1/FVC) of <70% after administration of a bronchodilator. Patients were randomly divided into two groups that received either PR only or MT and PR (n=13 each). The PR program included conditioning, respiratory muscle training, and endurance training, whereas the MT program included vocal, singing, and breathing exercises using a keyboard harmonica. The programs lasted 8 weeks, in which pre- and post-intervention data were compared every 4 weeks. [Results] The FEV1/FVC in the MT group improved after the intervention. Expiratory volume control was obtained better with feedback by sound than with expiration practice. In the MT and PR program, it was easier to adjust the timing and volume of breathing, obtain expiratory volume control, and, thus, improve FEV1/FVC than in conventional practice. [Conclusion] Combining MT with PR improves parameters of pulmonary function in patients with COPD. Music therapy is a novel approach that, in combination with PR, may be used in COPD management.

Airway clearance techniques for cystic fibrosis: an overview of Cochrane systematic reviews

BACKGROUND

Cystic fibrosis is a life-limiting genetic condition in which thick mucus builds up in the lungs, leading to infections, inflammation, and eventually, deterioration in lung function. To clear their lungs of mucus, people with cystic fibrosis perform airway clearance techniques daily. There are various airway clearance techniques, which differ in terms of the need for assistance or equipment, and cost.

OBJECTIVES

To summarise the evidence from Cochrane Reviews on the effectiveness and safety of various airway clearance techniques in people with cystic fibrosis.

METHODS

For this overview, we included Cochrane Reviews of randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials (including cross-over trials) that evaluated an airway clearance technique (conventional chest physiotherapy, positive expiratory pressure (PEP) therapy, high-pressure PEP therapy, active cycle of breathing techniques, autogenic drainage, airway oscillating devices, external high frequency chest compression devices and exercise) in people with cystic fibrosis.We searched the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews on 29 November 2018.Two review authors independently evaluated reviews for eligibility. One review author extracted data from included reviews and a second author checked the data for accuracy. Two review authors independently graded the quality of reviews using the ROBIS tool. We used the GRADE approach for assessing the overall strength of the evidence for each primary outcome (forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1), individual preference and quality of life).

MAIN RESULTS

We included six Cochrane Reviews, one of which compared any type of chest physiotherapy with no chest physiotherapy or coughing alone and the remaining five reviews included head-to-head comparisons of different airway clearance techniques. All the reviews were considered to have a low risk of bias. However, the individual trials included in the reviews often did not report sufficient information to adequately assess risk of bias. Many trials did not sufficiently report on outcome measures and had a high risk of reporting bias.We are unable to draw definitive conclusions for comparisons of airway clearance techniques in terms of FEV1, except for reporting no difference between PEP therapy and oscillating devices after six months of treatment, mean difference -1.43% predicted (95% confidence interval -5.72 to 2.87); the quality of the body of evidence was graded as moderate. The quality of the body of evidence comparing different airway clearance techniques for other outcomes was either low or very low.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is little evidence to support the use of one airway clearance technique over another. People with cystic fibrosis should choose the airway clearance technique that best meets their needs, after considering comfort, convenience, flexibility, practicality, cost, or some other factor. More long-term, high-quality randomised controlled trials comparing airway clearance techniques among people with cystic fibrosis are needed.

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.

Clinical Trials.Gov: A Topical Analyses

ClinicalTrials.gov was established as a web-based registry for clinical trials of human participants in 2000. Mandatory registration started in 2008. Given more than a decade of registered trials, it's important to understand the "topic" areas and their evolution over time from this resource. This information may help in identifying current knowledge gaps. We use dynamic topic model (DTM) methods to discover topics and their evolution over last 17 years. Our model suggests that there are disease or organ specific trials such as 'Cardiovascular disorders', Heart & Brain conditions', or 'Breast & Prostate cancer' as well as trials registered for general health. General health trials are less likely to be FDA regulated, but both health and pain management, as well as surgical, heart, and brain trials have upward trend in recent years while advanced cancer trials have downward trended. Our model derives unique insights from metadata associated with each topic area.