MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7024675961

Singing for better breathing: findings from the Lambeth & Southwark singing and COPD project.

2017· report· en· W7024675961 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueCreate (Canterbury Christ Church University) · 2017
Typereport
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicPickering emulsions and particle stabilization
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSingingCOPDSpirometryLung functionPulmonary diseasePulmonary rehabilitation
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction \nOver the last eight years there has been a growth of interest in the potential value of participation in singing groups for people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (CODP) and other respiratory illnesses. This is shown by the increasing number of singing for breathing groups established across the UK over this period. The British Lung Foundation have taken a leading role in promoting this activity through their ‘Singing for Lung Health’ programme. \n \nA limited number of small-scale research studies have assessed the benefits of singing for people with COPD and other lung conditions. These include three randomised controlled trials, one in Brazil, and two conducted at the Royal Brompton Hospital in London. Further studies have been carried out in Canada, New Zealand, the UK and the USA. There is limited evidence that singing improves lung function and exercise capacity, but qualitative feedback from participants has been highly positive. Testimonies point to singing having substantial subjective benefits for physical, psychological and social wellbeing, and in enabling people with COPD to better manage their lung condition. \n \nThe current study in Lambeth and Southwark, South London, was based on earlier research conducted in East Kent, UK. Morrison et al. (2013) established and evaluated a network of six community singing groups for people with COPD which ran over the course of ten months. Seventy-two people with COPD were followed up \nover this time and assessed using validated questionnaires, with St. George’s Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) as the primary outcome measure. Spirometry was also used to assess lung function. Significant improvements were found on the total and impact scores from the SGRQ, and participants also improved in their lung function. \n \nProject and evaluation. \nThe aim of the current study was to further test the feasibility of setting up a network of community singing groups for people with COPD to run over the course of ten months from end of September 2015 to end of July 2016. Recruitment took place over the period April-September 2015. The study involved two cohorts, assessed \nin September 2015 and January 2016. The two groups were comparable on all baseline measures, and were combined for the purpose of the evaluation. A total of 60 participants with breathing difficulties were recruited into the study. \n \nAssessment included a battery of validated questionnaires, with the SGRQ as the primary outcome measure. Questions were also included on use of health and social care services and medication, including the use of inhalers. Participants underwent a comprehensive assessment to measure lung function. The principal measures were the amount of air expelled forcibly from the lungs in one second (FEV1); the total volume of air forcibly expelled from the lungs (FVC), and distance walked in six minutes – the Six-Minute Walk Test (6MWT). \n \nSinging groups met weekly over the course of the project in four venues, led by two experienced and skilled facilitators. Three groups started in late September/early October 2015 and ran for 38-40 sessions and a fourth group, commenced in January 2016, and ran for 25 sessions. \n \nAt follow-up, 44 participants completed the questionnaires again and 42 completed the lung and exercise assessments (attrition rate 27-30% due to health issues and family commitments). In addition, 37 participants took part in a structured interview in April/May 2016 to gather feedback on their experiences of the singing groups and their perceptions of any benefits gained. Average level of attendance was 26 sessions, with approximately 82% participants attending at least 20 sessions. Filming and photography was also used throughout to provide a documentary record of the project, and the final film giving an account of the whole project is included with this report. \n \nSidney De Haan Research Centre for Arts and Health \nFindings from the Lambeth and Southwark Singing and COPD Project 3 \n \nAmong the participants followed-up, 31 were shown to have COPD from the lung function tests at baseline (FEV1/ FVC <0.7) - six mild, 15 moderate, nine severe, and one very severe. Findings for the total sample and for those with COPD are presented, but particular attention is given to the changes seen for participants with COPD. \n \nFindings \nThe principal quantitative findings for the COPD group were as follows: \n• A significant improvement on the SGRQ symptom scale \n• Participants with COPD reported ‘fewer bad days’ and ‘more good days’ \n• No change on FEV1 \n• A small but statistically significant decline in FVC \n• A small but statistically significant increase in FEV1/FVC \n• No change in distance walked on the 6MWT \n• No change in breathlessness after the 6MWT \n• No change in reported health service use \n \nThe accounts provided in the interviews were consistently and highly positive. Participants claimed that regular singing helped them in managing their respiratory symptoms, and reported improvements in mental wellbeing, attributing this to the singing group. Social benefits were also described, extending to participants meeting outside of the singing sessions, and group members providing each other with support and advice. \n \nReflections \nOur study shows that COPD patients who took part in singing groups experienced a reduction in symptoms, as measured by the St. George’s Respiratory Questionnaire. Detailed structured interviews also revealed a wide range of physical, psychological and social benefits, which together substantially improved the wellbeing of participants. In addition, lung function and functional exercise capacity was maintained throughout the course of the 6 – 10 month singing intervention. \n \nThe findings add to the previous body of research in supporting the value of regular singing for people with COPD, and other respiratory conditions. We agree with the conclusions reached in a recent systematic review (Lewis, et al., 2016) that further, larger-scale controlled trials are needed to establish benefits and address a range of outstanding questions on effective delivery. \n \nConfounding factors of weather and background air pollution may have had some impact on the participants in this study. Such factors can only be controlled for through multi-centre trials in which an intervention is run over a wide geographical area including inner-city and rural locations. \n \nOur experience of difficulties with recruitment indicates the need for greater resources, time and effort to ensure sufficient numbers for any future studies on singing for people with lung disease.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.016
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.103
Threshold uncertainty score0.205

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0160.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.008
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.055
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.231 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCreate (Canterbury Christ Church University)Same topicPickering emulsions and particle stabilizationFrench-language works237,207