BACKGROUND: The effectiveness of music-based interventions (MI) in autism has been attested for decades. Yet, there has been little empirical investigation of the active ingredients, or processes involved in music-based interventions that differentiate them from other approaches.
OBJECTIVES: Here, we examined whether two processes, joint engagement and movement, which have previously been studied in isolation, contribute as important active ingredients for the efficacy of music-based interventions.
METHODS: In two separate analyses, we investigated whether (1) joint engagement with the therapist, measured using a coding scheme verified for reliability, and (2) movement elicited by music-making, measured using a computer-vision technique for quantifying motion, may drive the benefits previously observed in response to MI (but not a controlled non-MI) in children with autism.
RESULTS: Compared to a non-music control intervention, children and the therapist in MI spent more time in triadic engagement (between child, therapist, and activity) and produced greater movement, with amplitude of motion closely linked to the type of musical instrument.
CONCLUSIONS: Taken together, these findings provide initial evidence of the active ingredients of music-based interventions in autism.
BACKGROUND: Music therapy is based on the use of musical elements by a trained and qualified therapist. Clinical researches have suggested that children with Autism Spectrum Disorders (ASD) may benefit from MT. In this regard, this study examines if MT is more effective than simply listening to music for children with ASD.
METHOD: A 8-month RCT has been carried out comparing music therapy (MT) to music listening (ML) for children with ASD aged from 4 to 7 years old. Thirty-seven participants were randomly assigned to one of the two groups (MT vs. ML). The outcome measures were the Clinical Global Impression (CGI), the Childhood Autism Rating Scale (CARS) and the Aberrant Behavior Checklist (ABC) in each condition (MT and ML).
RESULTS: CGI scores decreased more for participants in the MT than in the ML condition. This clinical improvement was associated with an improvement of autistic symptoms on lethargy and stereotypy ABC subscales.
CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that music therapy is more efficient than music listening for children with ASD. The present study thus supports the consideration of MT as a rightful add-on to ASD healthcare programs.
Music has been identified as a strength in people with Autism Spectrum Disorder; however, there is currently no neuroscientific evidence supporting its benefits. Given its universal appeal, intrinsic reward value and ability to modify brain and behaviour, music may be a potential therapeutic aid in autism. Here we evaluated the neurobehavioural outcomes of a music intervention, compared to a non-music control intervention, on social communication and brain connectivity in school-age children (ISRCTN26821793). Fifty-one children aged 6-12 years with autism were randomized to receive 8-12 weeks of music (n = 26) or non-music intervention (n = 25). The music intervention involved use of improvisational approaches through song and rhythm to target social communication. The non-music control was a structurally matched behavioural intervention implemented in a non-musical context. Groups were assessed before and after intervention on social communication and resting-state functional connectivity of fronto-temporal brain networks. Communication scores were higher in the music group post-intervention (difference score = 4.84, P = .01). Associated post-intervention resting-state brain functional connectivity was greater in music vs. non-music groups between auditory and subcortical regions (z = 3.94, P < .0001) and auditory and fronto-motor regions (z = 3.16, P < .0001). Post-intervention brain connectivity was lower between auditory and visual regions in the music compared to the non-music groups, known to be over-connected in autism (z = 4.01, P < .00001). Post-intervention brain connectivity in the music group was related to communication improvement (z = 3.57, P < .0001). This study provides the first evidence that 8-12 weeks of individual music intervention can indeed improve social communication and functional brain connectivity, lending support to further investigations of neurobiologically motivated models of music interventions in autism.
IMPORTANCE: Music therapy may facilitate skills in areas affected by autism spectrum disorder (ASD), such as social interaction and communication.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate effects of improvisational music therapy on generalized social communication skills of children with ASD.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Assessor-blinded, randomized clinical trial, conducted in 9 countries and enrolling children aged 4 to 7 years with ASD. Children were recruited from November 2011 to November 2015, with follow-up between January 2012 and November 2016.
INTERVENTIONS: Enhanced standard care (n = 182) vs enhanced standard care plus improvisational music therapy (n = 182), allocated in a 1:1 ratio. Enhanced standard care consisted of usual care as locally available plus parent counseling to discuss parents' concerns and provide information about ASD. In improvisational music therapy, trained music therapists sang or played music with each child, attuned and adapted to the child's focus of attention, to help children develop affect sharing and joint attention.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome was symptom severity over 5 months, based on the Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule (ADOS), social affect domain (range, 0-27; higher scores indicate greater severity; minimal clinically important difference, 1). Prespecified secondary outcomes included parent-rated social responsiveness. All outcomes were also assessed at 2 and 12 months.
RESULTS: Among 364 participants randomized (mean age, 5.4 years; 83% boys), 314 (86%) completed the primary end point and 290 (80%) completed the last end point. Over 5 months, participants assigned to music therapy received a median of 19 music therapy, 3 parent counseling, and 36 other therapy sessions, compared with 3 parent counseling and 45 other therapy sessions for those assigned to enhanced standard care. From baseline to 5 months, mean ADOS social affect scores estimated by linear mixed-effects models decreased from 14.08 to 13.23 in the music therapy group and from 13.49 to 12.58 in the standard care group (mean difference, 0.06 [95% CI, -0.70 to 0.81]; P = .88), with no significant difference in improvement. Of 20 exploratory secondary outcomes, 17 showed no significant difference.
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Among children with autism spectrum disorder, improvisational music therapy, compared with enhanced standard care, resulted in no significant difference in symptom severity based on the ADOS social affect domain over 5 months. These findings do not support the use of improvisational music therapy for symptom reduction in children with autism spectrum disorder.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: isrctn.org Identifier: ISRCTN78923965.
BACKGROUND: Preliminary studies have indicated that music therapy may benefit children with autism spectrum disorders (ASD).
OBJECTIVES: To examine the effects of improvisational music therapy (IMT) on social affect and responsiveness of children with ASD.
DESIGN: International, multicentre, three-arm, single-masked randomised controlled trial, including a National Institute for Health Research (NIHR)-funded centre that recruited in London and the east of England. Randomisation was via a remote service using permuted blocks, stratified by study site.
SETTING: Schools and private, voluntary and state-funded health-care services.
PARTICIPANTS: Children aged between 4 and 7 years with a confirmed diagnosis of ASD and a parent or guardian who provided written informed consent. We excluded children with serious sensory disorder and those who had received music therapy within the past 12 months.
INTERVENTIONS: All parents and children received enhanced standard care (ESC), which involved three 60-minute sessions of advice and support in addition to treatment as usual. In addition, they were randomised to either one (low-frequency) or three (high-frequency) sessions of IMT per week, or to ESC alone, over 5 months in a ratio of 1 : 1 : 2.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was measured using the social affect score derived from the Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule (ADOS) at 5 months: higher scores indicated greater impairment. Secondary outcomes included social affect at 12 months and parent-rated social responsiveness at 5 and 12 months (higher scores indicated greater impairment).
RESULTS: A total of 364 participants were randomised between 2011 and 2015. A total of 182 children were allocated to IMT (90 to high-frequency sessions and 92 to low-frequency sessions), and 182 were allocated to ESC alone. A total of 314 (86.3%) of the total sample were followed up at 5 months [165 (90.7%) in the intervention group and 149 (81.9%) in the control group]. Among those randomised to IMT, 171 (94.0%) received it. From baseline to 5 months, mean scores of ADOS social affect decreased from 14.1 to 13.3 in music therapy and from 13.5 to 12.4 in standard care [mean difference: music therapy vs. standard care = 0.06, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.70 to 0.81], with no significant difference in improvement. There were also no differences in the parent-rated social responsiveness score, which decreased from 96.0 to 89.2 in the music therapy group and from 96.1 to 93.3 in the standard care group over this period (mean difference: music therapy vs. standard care = -3.32, 95% CI -7.56 to 0.91). There were seven admissions to hospital that were unrelated to the study interventions in the two IMT arms compared with 10 unrelated admissions in the ESC group.
CONCLUSIONS: Adding IMT to the treatment received by children with ASD did not improve social affect or parent-assessed social responsiveness.
FUTURE WORK: Other methods for delivering music-focused interventions for children with ASD should be explored.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN78923965.
FUNDING: This project was funded by the NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 21, No. 59. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.
BACKGROUND: Although music therapy (MT) is considered an effective intervention for young people with mental health needs, its efficacy in clinical settings is unclear. We therefore examined the efficacy of MT in clinical practice.
METHODS: Two hundred and fifty-one child (8-16 years, with social, emotional, behavioural and developmental difficulties) and parent dyads from six Child and Adolescent Mental Health Service community care facilities in Northern Ireland were randomised to 12 weekly sessions of MT plus usual care [n = 123; 76 in final analyses] or usual care alone [n = 128; 105 in final analyses]. Follow-up occurred at 13 weeks and 26 weeks postrandomisation. Primary outcome was improvement in communication (Social Skills Improvement System Rating Scales) (SSIS) at 13 weeks. Secondary outcomes included social functioning, self-esteem, depression and family functioning.
RESULTS: There was no significant difference for the child SSIS at week 13 (adjusted difference in mean 2.4; 95% CI -1.2 to 6.1; p = .19) or for the guardian SSIS (0.5; 95% CI -2.9 to 3.8; p = .78). However, for participants aged 13 and over in the intervention group, the child SSIS communication was significantly improved (6.1, 95% CI 1.6 to 10.5; p = .007) but not the guardian SSIS (1.1; 95% CI -2.9 to 5.2; p = .59). Overall, self-esteem was significantly improved and depression scores were significantly lower at week 13. There was no significant difference in family or social functioning at week 13.
CONCLUSIONS: While the findings provide some evidence for the integration of music therapy into clinical practice, differences relating to subgroups and secondary outcomes indicate the need for further study. ISRCTN Register; ISRCTN96352204.
OBJECTIVES: To compare the effects of 1) active group music therapy and 2) receptive group music therapy to group counseling in treatment of major depressive disorder (MDD).
DESIGN & SETTING: On top of standard care, 14 MDD outpatients were randomly assigned to receive 1) active group music therapy (n=5), 2) receptive group music therapy (n=5), or 3) group counseling (n=4). There were 12 one-hour weekly group sessions in each arm.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Participants were assessed at baseline, 1 month (after 4 sessions), 3 months (end of interventions), and 6 months. Primary outcomes were depressive scores measured by Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) Thai version. Secondary outcomes were self-rated depression score and quality of life.
RESULTS: At 1 month, 3 months, and 6 months, both therapy groups showed statistically non-significant reduction in MADRS Thai scores when compared with the control group (group counseling). The reduction was slightly greater in the active group than the receptive group. Although there were trend toward better outcomes on self-report depression and quality of life, the differences were not statistically significant.
CONCLUSION: Group music therapy, either active or receptive, is an interesting adjunctive treatment option for outpatients with MDD. The receptive group may reach peak therapeutic effect faster, but the active group may have higher peak effect. Group music therapy deserves further comprehensive studies.
The effectiveness of music-based interventions (MI) in autism has been attested for decades. Yet, there has been little empirical investigation of the active ingredients, or processes involved in music-based interventions that differentiate them from other approaches.
OBJECTIVES:
Here, we examined whether two processes, joint engagement and movement, which have previously been studied in isolation, contribute as important active ingredients for the efficacy of music-based interventions.
METHODS:
In two separate analyses, we investigated whether (1) joint engagement with the therapist, measured using a coding scheme verified for reliability, and (2) movement elicited by music-making, measured using a computer-vision technique for quantifying motion, may drive the benefits previously observed in response to MI (but not a controlled non-MI) in children with autism.
RESULTS:
Compared to a non-music control intervention, children and the therapist in MI spent more time in triadic engagement (between child, therapist, and activity) and produced greater movement, with amplitude of motion closely linked to the type of musical instrument.
CONCLUSIONS:
Taken together, these findings provide initial evidence of the active ingredients of music-based interventions in autism.
