| Literature DB >> 36059051 |
Fatin Amira Shahrudin1, Ahmad Aidil Arafat Dzulkarnain1, Ayu Madiha Hanafi1, Fatin Nabilah Jamal1, Nadzirah Ahmad Basri2, Shahrul Na'im Sidek3, Hazlina Md Yusof3, Madihah Khalid4.
Abstract
To map the evidence from the relevant studies regarding the use of music and sound-based intervention for autism spectrum disorder (ASD) using a scoping review study design. Scoping review was conducted according to the inclusion criteria using Google Scholar, PubMed, CINAHL, MEDLINE, and Scopus. The review was accomplished in five steps: 1) identify the inclusion criteria, 2) search for relevant studies, 3) studies selection, 4) data extraction and charting, and 5) data analysis and presentation. Four major themes emerged from 39 studies that matched the inclusion criteria as follows: 1) forms of sound therapy discussing methods of sound therapy and stimulus used, 2) duration of the intervention explain in terms of listening time and total listening sessions, 3) clinical characteristics of the intervention exploring the main interest of sound therapy study in ASD, and 4) evidence for the intervention effectiveness looking into the positive, negative, and mixed findings of previous studies. Each theme was explored to identify the knowledge gaps in sound-intervention therapy. This review demonstrated the need for further studies to address several issues including identifying the effectiveness of sound-therapy intervention for ASD according to the individual sound types, the minimum duration for ASD sound-therapy intervention and more details on the use of technology, and clinical features of the sound-therapy intervention. These elements are important to further demonstrate the effectiveness of sound therapy intervention for ASD children.Entities:
Keywords: Acoustic stimulation; Autism; Autism spectrum disorder; Autistic disorder; Early medical intervention; Music therapy
Year: 2022 PMID: 36059051 PMCID: PMC9441466 DOI: 10.30773/pi.2021.0382
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Psychiatry Investig ISSN: 1738-3684 Impact factor: 3.202
Figure 1.Total number of hits per database.
Figure 2.Flowchart of article selection.
Figure 3.Summary of the research findings from the selected articles.
Figure 4.Duration of sound-based intervention.
Evidence on the effectiveness of sound-based intervention
| Forms of sound-based intervention | Effectiveness of sound intervention | |
|---|---|---|
| Positive finding | Negative finding | |
| Auditory integration therapy | Improvement on social communication, speech, sensitivity to sounds, and behavioural problems. | No changes in sound sensitivity and behaviour deteriorated. |
| Improvement in auditory P300 evoked response potential. | Factors other than auditory integration therapy were responsible for behavioural improvement. | |
| Audio murottal intervention | Increase of a behavioural development, reduce behavioural issues. | No negative findings. |
| Improve sleep quality and reduce sleep disruption. | ||
| Listening project protocol | Reduced auditory hypersensitivities. | No negative findings. |
| Increased spontaneous sharing behaviours. | ||
| The listening project | Positive results in the areas of auditory processing. | Did not necessarily improve in all areas, consistent with the complexity of sensory sensitivities exhibited in autism. |
| Improvements in areas of sociability. | ||
| More flexible behaviour. | ||
| Improve severity level. | ||
| Tomatis | Reduce autistic symptoms. | No significant differences on the language. |
| Increase social interaction, communication, and expressive/receptive vocabulary. | The changes did not appear related to the treatment condition. | |
| Reduce stereotypical movements, hyperactivity, and attention problem. | No known indicators that can predict which subjects would respond well to the treatment. | |
| Developing verbal skills. | ||
| Improvements in daily living skills and motor skills. | ||
| Samonas sound therapy | Positive trend in social orienting towards familiar people to a certain extent and potential to facilitate joint attention behaviours. | Did not improve social orienting. |
| Improving reciprocal social interaction skills. | Improvement seen in the context of therapist–child interaction could not generalise into improvement in parent–child joint attention. | |
| Treatment effect remained constant across the time points. | ||
| MIT | Improve comprehending simple auditory commands and receptive language abilities. | No negative findings. |
| Rhythm therapy | There is an effect on sensory and symptoms. | No effect on motor development. |
| Asmaul Husna sound healing | No positive findings. | No significant changes on the tantrum. |
| Therapeutic Listening® | Increases in social communication and life role function. | No negative findings. |
| Improved behaviour, sensory tolerance and processing, receptive/expressive listening and language, and motor skills. | ||
| Active participation in singing and movements to song. | ||
| ILS | Auditory scores increase after the intervention. | No changes in terms of sensory processing. |
| Drums-Alive Program | Observe improvement in motor skills, behaviour, and attention. | No negative findings. |
| Assisted music-based intervention | Educational ability improves. | No difference in music learning ability. |
| Improvements in social communication and cognitive skills. | ||
| Stereotyped behaviours decreased. | ||
| TLC | Exhibited a trend towards acceptance and perceived beneficial attributes while using TLC. | Feasibility knowledge was gained but not positive or negative results given the small sample size and relatively short study period. |
| The Holistic Music Educational Approach for Young Children | Increased participation in the musical activities. | No negative findings. |
| Improved communication ability. | ||
| Improvisational music therapy | Improved social communication and communicative behaviours. | Decreases in social responsiveness after 5 months from baseline. |
| The rates of completion of planned measures, blinding, retention, and safety were strong features. | Recruitment rates and high intensity music therapy session attendance rates were low. | |
| Others | Increasing reciprocal social interaction and verbal communication. | Decreases in social responsiveness after 5 months from baseline. |
| Decreased behavioural problems. | Recruitment rates and high intensity music therapy session attendance rates were low. | |
| The severity of autistic symptoms significantly decreased. | Did not increase the occurrence of joint visual attention behaviours. | |
| Assist and enhance academics, cognitive and language skills. | Did not increased socialisation, musical gestures, and levels of activity. | |
| Provided a more engaging learning context. | Did not support the presence of musical ability. | |
| Improve attention and emotion for specific stimulus forms. | Did not provide further empirical support for individuals with autism. | |
| Need high personalization of the user interface to match the needs of different subject. | ||
MIT, melodic intonation therapy; ILS, integrated listening system; TLC, therapeutic listening communication