Rhythm-centred music making in community living elderly: a randomized pilot study

Yap, Angela Frances; Kwan, Yu Heng; Tan, Chuen Seng; Ibrahim, Syed; Ang, Seng Bin

doi:10.1186/s12906-017-1825-x

Cited by 27 publications

(51 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We identified 272 systematic reviews. Eight met inclusion criteria, and we selected the four 5,[31][32][33] most recent systematic reviews, which were published in 2018. We evaluated the 131 unique primary studies contained in these systematic reviews as well as 1,572 primary studies from a search from the past 2 years.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In general, social isolation is conceptualized as an absence or paucity of contacts and interactions, whereas loneliness is conceptualized as "a subjective feeling state of being alone, separated or apart from others, and has been conceptualized as an imbalance between desired social contacts and actual social contacts." 31 Studies varied widely in their conceptions about social isolation and what if anything was measured: seven evaluated loneliness, six measured social support or network, one measured structural social capital, one measured perceived togetherness, one measured social participation, one measured social isolation, and three did not have any measurement. Among those that contained a measure, no universal instrument was used, and there was wide range in the length of the instruments and the types of questions asked (Appendix F, Table F-2).…”

Section: Limitations Of Primary Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…• The general loneliness subscale has seven negative statements such as "I feel left out," and "People are around me but not with me." Yap, 2017 31 • Social network:…”

Section: No Comparatormentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Addressing Social Isolation To Improve the Health of Older Adults: A Rapid Review

Veazie¹,

Gilbert²,

Winchell³

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This report is based on research conducted by the Scientific Resource Center under contract to the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), Rockville, MD (Contract No. 290-2017-00003-C). The findings and conclusions in this document are those of the authors, who are responsible for its contents; the findings and conclusions do not necessarily represent the views of AHRQ. Therefore, no statement in this report should be construed as an official position of AHRQ or of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. None of the investigators have any affiliations or financial involvement that conflicts with the material presented in this report. The information in this report is intended to help health care decisionmakers-patients and clinicians, health system leaders, and policymakers, among others-make well-informed decisions and thereby improve the quality of health care services. This report is not intended to be a substitute for the application of clinical judgment. Anyone who makes decisions concerning the provision of clinical care should consider this report in the same way as any medical reference and in conjunction with all other pertinent information, i.e., in the context of available resources and circumstances presented by individual patients. This report is made available to the public under the terms of a licensing agreement between the author and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. This report may be used and reprinted without permission except those copyrighted materials that are clearly noted in the report. Further reproduction of those copyrighted materials is prohibited without the express permission of copyright holders. AHRQ or U.S. Department of Health and Human Services endorsement of any derivative products that may be developed from this report, such as clinical practice guidelines, other quality enhancement tools, or reimbursement or coverage policies, may not be stated or implied.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Limitations Of Primary Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Addressing Social Isolation To Improve the Health of Older Adults: A Rapid Review

Veazie¹,

Gilbert²,

Winchell³

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Sample size varied from 20 to 2713 individuals in the reviewed studies. Included articles consisted of studies from Australia ( n = 4) [ 33 – 36 ], UK ( n = 3) [ 37 – 39 ], Singapore ( n = 2) [ 40 , 41 ], Netherlands ( n = 2) [ 42 , 43 ], Canada and USA ( n = 2) [ 44 , 45 ], with one study from the Republic of Korea [ 46 ], China [ 32 ], Spain [ 47 ], Finland [ 48 ], Sweden [ 49 ] and Malaysia [ 50 ]. Thirteen studies included an older population [ 32 , 34 , 36 , 38 – 40 , 42 , 44 , 46 – 50 ] five studies included general adults [ 35 , 37 , 41 , 43 , 45 ] and one study focused solely on young adults aged 18–25 years [ 33 ].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The impact of loneliness and social isolation on health state utility values: a systematic literature review

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Loneliness and social isolation are recognised as social problems and denote a significant health burden. The aim of this study was to conduct a systematic literature review to explore the health state utility values (HSUVs) associated with loneliness and/or social isolation. Method Peer-reviewed journals published in English language that reported both HSUVs along with loneliness and/or social isolation scores were identified through five databases. No restrictions were made relating to the population, study design or utility estimation method used. Results In total, 19 papers were included; 12 included a measure of loneliness, four studies included a measure of social isolation and three studies considered both loneliness and social isolation. All studies focused on individuals with pre-existing health conditions—where the EQ-5D-3L instrument was most frequently used to assess HSUVs. HSUVs ranged from 0.5 to 0.95 in those who reported not being lonely, 0.42 to 0.97 in those who experienced some level of loneliness, 0.3 to 0.87 in those who were socially isolated and 0.63 to 0.94 in those who were not socially isolated. Conclusion There was significant variation in HSUVs complicated by the presence of co-morbidities, population heterogeneity, variations in methods used to derive utility scores and differences in the measurement of loneliness and/or social isolation. Nevertheless, the lower HSUVs observed should be considered to significantly impact quality of life, though we also note the need for further research to explore the unique impact of loneliness and social isolation on HSUVs that can be used in the future economic evaluations.

show abstract

“…To date, some RCTs have explored the effects of music on sleep quality in older adults 9,17,18,23,24 . However, the effective duration of the intervention period for music therapy remains unclear.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of music therapy on improving sleep quality in older adults: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Chen

Tung

Fang

et al. 2021

J American Geriatrics Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives Poor sleep quality is a common issue among older adults; it can lead to a poor quality of life and impairments in cognitive function and physical health. This study aimed to conduct a systematic review and meta‐analysis of the effect of listening to music on sleep quality in older adults. Design Systematic review and meta‐analyses. Setting Five databases, including Embase, Ovid Medline, Cochrane Library, Scopus, and the Index to Taiwan Periodical Literature System, were searched to identify studies assessing the efficacy of music therapy in older adults aged 60 years and older published through February 20, 2021. Participants Adults aged 60 years and older. Measurements We searched English‐ and Chinese‐language studies of randomized control trials. All studies were reviewed by two independent investigators. The primary sleep outcome was the Pittsburgh sleep quality index. The Cochrane Collaboration tool was used to assess the risk of bias, and Review Manager 5.3 software was used to conduct the meta‐analysis. Results Five randomized control trials were included in the meta‐analysis. Older adults who listened to music experienced significantly better sleep quality than those who did not listen to music [mean difference (MD): −1.96, 95% CI −2.23 to −1.73, P = 0.003]. The subgroup analysis revealed that older adults who listened to sedative music obtained a more effective improvement in sleep quality than those who listened to rhythm‐centered music (MD: −2.35, 95% CI –3.59 to −1.10, P = 0.0002). Furthermore, listening to music for longer than 4 weeks (MD: −2.61, 95% CI −4.72 to −0.50, P = 0.02) was to be effective at improving sleep quality. Conclusions Music therapy is safe and easy to administer and can effectively improve sleep quality among older adults, particularly those listening to more sedative music for at least a four‐week duration.

show abstract

Rhythm-centred music making in community living elderly: a randomized pilot study

Cited by 27 publications

References 35 publications

Addressing Social Isolation To Improve the Health of Older Adults: A Rapid Review

Addressing Social Isolation To Improve the Health of Older Adults: A Rapid Review

The impact of loneliness and social isolation on health state utility values: a systematic literature review

Effect of music therapy on improving sleep quality in older adults: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About