Exploring the Use of Arts-Based Interventions and Research Methods in Families of Seriously Ill Children: A Scoping Review.
Jill M G Bally, Meridith Burles, Shelley Spurr and 1 others
PMID 37128884WHAT IT FOUND
Children and families described drawing, photos, puppets, digital stories and painting as helping them express symptoms, feelings and coping needs to nurses and family members.
Treatment-effect evidence was mixed.
Key findings
01Across 25 included studies, art was most often used as a research method, especially drawing.
02Drawing helped young children show physical and psychosocial symptoms and gave interviewers a starting point for discussion.
03Some arts-based interventions reported slight changes, but several measured outcomes did not show clear improvement.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for RNs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
The review mapped literature rather than testing whether arts-based activities work. Most included studies were qualitative, so they describe experiences rather than prove effects. The review focused on visual art and excluded play therapy, dance, singing and performance. The included evidence was mostly about children with cancer and studies from North America, so it may not apply to other illnesses or settings. Some intervention studies had no control group or did not show clear improvement in measured outcomes. Drawings may not represent a child's actual experience and need discussion and trained interpretation. Not every child or family liked art activities, and busy clinical spaces can limit privacy and time.
Declared interests
The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest. Funding was provided by a nursing college CIHR seed grant.
The easy way to misread this
Do not read this as proof that arts-based activities improve quality of life, reduce distress or replace clinical assessment. The review mostly reports experiences and methods, and several intervention outcomes did not show clear improvement.