Dance therapy for schizophrenia

Juanjuan Ren; Jun Xia

doi:10.1002/14651858.CD006868.pub3

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Dance therapy for schizophrenia

Información

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD006868.pub3 Copiar DOI

Base de datos:

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Versión publicada:

04 octubre 2013see what's new

Tipo:

Intervention

Etapa:

Review

Grupo Editorial Cochrane:

Grupo Cochrane de Esquizofrenia

Copyright:

Copyright © 2013 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Cifras del artículo

Altmetric:

Citado por:

Citado 0 veces por enlace Crossref Cited-by

Contraer

Autores

Juanjuan Ren

Correspondencia a: Biological Psychiatry, Shanghai Mental Health Center, Shanghai, China

[email protected]
Jun Xia

Cochrane Schizophrenia Group, The University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK

Contributions of authors

JR ‐ study selection, data extraction, input and analysis, writing up the review in 2012 update.

JX ‐ developing the protocol, study selection, data extraction, input and analysis, writing up the review in previous version.

Sources of support

Internal sources

University of Leeds, UK.
University of Nottingham, UK.

External sources

No external support received, Not specified.

Declarations of interest

Juanjuan Ren ‐ no known conflict for interest.

Jun Xia ‐ no known conflict of interest.

Tessa Grant ‐ no known conflict of interest (2009 version of the review).

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank Judy Wright for running the trials search and Clive Adams for editorial input and Chunbo Li for his help in the preparation of this updating manuscript and editing.

We would also like to acknowledge and thank our consumer contributors, Janey Antoniou and Ben Gray of RETHINK, UK www.rethink.org, who have written Plain language summaries (PLS) of this review, Jane wrote the original PLS and Ben has written the current version for this update.

Samantha Roberts, the Trials Search Co‐ordinator of the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group ran the 2012 search.

Finally, we would like to acknowledge Tessa Grant for her help in trial selection for the previous version of this review.

Version history

Published

Title

Stage

Authors

Version

2013 Oct 04

Dance therapy for schizophrenia

Review

Juanjuan Ren, Jun Xia

https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD006868.pub3

2009 Jan 21

Dance therapy for schizophrenia

Review

Jun Xia, Tessa Jane Grant

https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD006868.pub2

2007 Oct 17

Dance therapy for schizophrenia

Protocol

Jun Xia, Tessa Jane Grant

https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD006868

Differences between protocol and review

There are no differences between protocol and review.

Keywords

MeSH

Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) Keywords

Medical Subject Headings Check Words

Humans;

PICO

Population

Intervention

Comparison

Outcome

El uso y la enseñanza del modelo PICO están muy extendidos en el ámbito de la atención sanitaria basada en la evidencia para formular preguntas y estrategias de búsqueda y para caracterizar estudios o metanálisis clínicos. PICO son las siglas en inglés de cuatro posibles componentes de una pregunta de investigación: paciente, población o problema; intervención; comparación; desenlace (outcome).

Para saber más sobre el uso del modelo PICO, puede consultar el Manual Cochrane.

Figure 1

Dance therapy

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Figure 2

Study flow diagram to show trial selection

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Figure 3

Methodological quality summary: review authors' judgements about each methodological quality item for the included study.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Figure 4

Risk of bias graph: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item presented as percentages across all included studies.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Analysis 1.1

Comparison 1 DANCE THERAPY vs STANDARD CARE, Outcome 1 Leaving the study early.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Analysis 1.2

Comparison 1 DANCE THERAPY vs STANDARD CARE, Outcome 2 Mental state: 1. Total ‐ average score (PANSS total endpoint, high = poor).

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Analysis 1.3

Comparison 1 DANCE THERAPY vs STANDARD CARE, Outcome 3 Mental state: 2. Positive symptoms ‐ average score (PANSS positive endpoint, high = poor).

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Analysis 1.4

Comparison 1 DANCE THERAPY vs STANDARD CARE, Outcome 4 Mental state: 3a. Negative symptoms ‐ average score (PANSS negative endpoint, high = poor).

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Analysis 1.5

Comparison 1 DANCE THERAPY vs STANDARD CARE, Outcome 5 Mental state: 3b. Negative symptoms ‐ not improved (PANSS negative symptom reduction less than 20% ‐ 40%).

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Analysis 1.6

Comparison 1 DANCE THERAPY vs STANDARD CARE, Outcome 6 Satisfaction with care: 1. Average endpoint score (CAT, high = good).

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Analysis 1.7

Comparison 1 DANCE THERAPY vs STANDARD CARE, Outcome 7 Quality of life: 1. Average endpoint score (MANSA, high = good).

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva


Study	Intervention	Mean	SD	N
Rohricht 2006	Dance therapy	1.3	1.6	24
Rohricht 2006	Control group	1.6	2.2	19

Analysis 1.8

Comparison 1 DANCE THERAPY vs STANDARD CARE, Outcome 8 Adverse effects: 1. Average endpoint score (EPS, high = poor, skewed data).

Ir a la figura de la revisión

Table 1. Reviews in which excluded studies may be included

Title	References	Exsiting related review
Art therapy for schizophrenia	Killaspy 1997	Ruddy 2005
Cognitive remediation therapy for schizophrenia	Tan 2010	McGrath 2000
Information and communication technology‐based cognitive remediation for supporting treatment compliance for people with serious mental illness	Tan 2010	Välimäki 2012
Music therapy plus dance therapy for schizophrenia	Qu 2007; Tang 2011; Tan 2010	Mössler 2011
Psychoeducation for schizophrenia	Yang 2005	Xia 2011

Table 1. Reviews in which excluded studies may be included

Ir a la tabla de la revisión

Table 2. Suggested design for a trial of dance therapy

Methods	Allocation: centralised sequence generation with table of random numbers or computer‐generated code, stratified by severity of illness, sequence concealed till interventions assigned. Blinding: those recruiting and assigning participants, those assessing outcomes, all blind to allocated group, blinding tested. Duration: minimum of 52 weeks.
Participants	Diagnosis: schizophrenia, if operational criteria used these should be in the context of routine care. N = 300*. Age: adults. Sex: men and women. Setting: anywhere dance therapy is available for this group.
Interventions	1. Dance therapy: the nature and frequency of this approach should be clearly described. N = 150. 2. Routine therapy. N = 150. This also should be clearly described.
Outcomes	Quality of life: healthy days, SF‐36. Service outcomes: days in hospital, time attending psychiatric outpatient clinic. Satisfaction with care: patients/carers. Global state: CGI.** Mental state: CGI. Social functioning: to include occupational status. Adverse effects: including mortality. Economic data.
Notes	* size of study to detect a 10% difference in improvement with 80% certainty. Primary outcome. * If scales are used to measure outcome then there should be binary cut off points, defined before study starts, of clinically important improvement.
CGI: Clinical Global Impression

Table 2. Suggested design for a trial of dance therapy

Ir a la tabla de la revisión

Summary of findings for the main comparison. DANCE THERAPY compared with STANDARD CARE for schizophrenia

DANCE THERAPY compared to STANDARD CARE for schizophrenia
Patient or population: patients with schizophrenia Settings: Intervention: DANCE THERAPY Comparison: STANDARD CARE
Outcomes	*Illustrative comparative risks (95% CI)**		Relative effect (95% CI)	No of Participants (studies)	Quality of the evidence (GRADE)	Comments
	Assumed risk	Corresponding risk
	STANDARD CARE	DANCE THERAPY
Service utilisation‐days in hospital	No data available	No data available
Clinical global response‐leaving the study early (short term) Follow‐up: 4 months	95 per 1000	42 per 1000 (4 to 428)	RR 0.44 (0.04 to 4.49)	45 (1 study)	⊕⊕⊕⊝ moderate^1,2
Clinical global response‐leaving the study early (long term) Follow‐up: 4 months	429 per 1000	291 per 1000 (133 to 647)	RR 0.68 (0.31 to 1.51)	45 (1 study)	⊕⊕⊝⊝ low^1,2,3
Mental state: 2a. Negative symptoms ‐ average score (PANSS negative endpoint, high = poor) Follow‐up: 4 months	The mean mental state: 2a. negative symptoms ‐ average score (PANSS negative endpoint, high = poor) in the control groups was 23.3	The mean mental state: 2a. negative symptoms ‐ average score (PANSS negative endpoint, high = poor) in the intervention groups was 4.4 lower (8.15 to 0.65 lower)		43 (1 study)	⊕⊕⊕⊝ moderate^1,2
Mental state: 2b. Negative symptoms ‐ not improved (PANSS negative symptom reduction less than 20‐40%) Follow‐up: 4 months	810 per 1000	502 per 1000 (316 to 785)	RR 0.62 (0.39 to 0.97)	45 (1 study)	⊕⊕⊕⊝ moderate^1,2
Satisfaction with care: Average endpoint score (CAT, high = good) Follow‐up: 4 months	The mean satisfaction with care: average endpoint score (CAT, high = good) in the control groups was 6.4	The mean satisfaction with care: average endpoint score (CAT, high = good) in the intervention groups was 0.4 higher (0.78 lower to 1.58 higher)		42 (1 study)	⊕⊕⊕⊝ moderate^1,2
Quality of life Manchester Short Assessment (MANSA, high = good) Follow‐up: 4 months	The mean quality of life Manchester short assessment (MANSA, high = good) in the control groups was 4.1	The mean quality of life Manchester short assessment (MANSA, high = good) in the intervention groups was 0 higher (0.48 lower to 0.48 higher)		39 (1 study)	⊕⊕⊕⊝ moderate^1,2
The basis for the assumed risk* (e.g. the median control group risk across studies) is provided in footnotes. The corresponding risk (and its 95% confidence interval) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI). CI: Confidence interval; RR: Risk ratio;
GRADE Working Group grades of evidence High quality: Further research is very unlikely to change our confidence in the estimate of effect. Moderate quality: Further research is likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and may change the estimate. Low quality: Further research is very likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and is likely to change the estimate. Very low quality: We are very uncertain about the estimate.
¹ Risk of bias: rated‐'serious': Randomised in blocks, no details reported. ² Risk of bias: rated‐'serious': Single blind, but not tested. ³ Risk of bias: rated‐'serious': Over 40% of the participants were lost to follow‐up in control group

Summary of findings for the main comparison. DANCE THERAPY compared with STANDARD CARE for schizophrenia

Ir a la tabla de la revisión

Comparison 1. DANCE THERAPY vs STANDARD CARE

Outcome or subgroup title	No. of studies	No. of participants	Statistical method	Effect size
1 Leaving the study early Show forest plot	1		Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	Subtotals only

1.1 short term	1	45	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	0.44 [0.04, 4.49]
1.2 long term	1	45	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	0.68 [0.31, 1.51]
2 Mental state: 1. Total ‐ average score (PANSS total endpoint, high = poor) Show forest plot	1	43	Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)	‐0.5 [‐11.80, 10.80]

3 Mental state: 2. Positive symptoms ‐ average score (PANSS positive endpoint, high = poor) Show forest plot	1	43	Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)	2.5 [‐0.67, 5.67]

4 Mental state: 3a. Negative symptoms ‐ average score (PANSS negative endpoint, high = poor) Show forest plot	1	43	Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)	‐4.40 [‐8.15, ‐0.65]

5 Mental state: 3b. Negative symptoms ‐ not improved (PANSS negative symptom reduction less than 20% ‐ 40%) Show forest plot	1	45	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	0.62 [0.39, 0.97]

6 Satisfaction with care: 1. Average endpoint score (CAT, high = good) Show forest plot	1	42	Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)	0.40 [‐0.78, 1.58]

7 Quality of life: 1. Average endpoint score (MANSA, high = good) Show forest plot	1	39	Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)	0.0 [‐0.48, 0.48]

8 Adverse effects: 1. Average endpoint score (EPS, high = poor, skewed data) Show forest plot			Other data	No numeric data

Comparison 1. DANCE THERAPY vs STANDARD CARE

Ir a la tabla de la revisión

The Cochrane Library

Scolaris Language Selector Scolaris Language Selector

Idioma de la Revisión Cochrane

Idioma de la web

Scolaris Content Language Banner Portlet Scolaris Content Language Banner Portlet

Scolaris Content Display Scolaris Content Display

Dance therapy for schizophrenia

Información