AgingNCT03372031
The Effectiveness of Piano Therapy vs. Piano Listening on Manual Dexterity in the Elderly
A study testing Piano training (Active) and Piano Training (Passive) in people with Aging and Manual Dexterity, run by Westminster College at 1 site in United States.
Trial summary
Does active piano practice help recover hand dexterity in older adults, or does social interaction and music-listening alone affect motor performance? Researchers hypothesized improved dexterity after active piano playing, but not after passive piano listening. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 70 years and olderHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Aging, Manual Dexterity, Piano Therapy
- What is being tested?
- Piano training (Active) and Piano Training (Passive)
- Type of treatment
- Lifestyle or therapy programme
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 20 participants
- Where
- 1 siteUnited States
- Study dates
- 30 Aug 2017to 1 Dec 2017
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 70 years and older
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Able to physically and cognitively withstand 30 minute piano training sessions
Who cannot join
- -
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
United States1 site
Shanango on the Green
New Wilmington, Pennsylvania, 16172
About this study
Official title: Active Versus Passive Piano Intervention for Dexterity in Older Adults: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Does active piano practice help recover hand dexterity in older adults, or does social interaction and music-listening alone affect motor performance? Researchers hypothesized improved dexterity after active piano playing, but not after passive piano listening. 15 residents of a retirement community were partnered together and completed 2 two-week piano training modules. In module 1, one partner played piano exercises and songs while the other listened. In module 2, partners switched roles. The Purdue Pegboard Test and Box and Block Test assessed fine and gross motor dexterity, before, between, and after the training modules. A repeated measures ANOVA showed a main effect of time on overall fine and gross motor function, but there was no main effect of playing versus listening. Results did not support the hypothesis, but indicate that piano-based therapy requires greater than 2 weeks to begin improving dexterity and may influenced co-occurring socialization.
Read the detailed description
The primary finding of this study is that older adults demonstrate improvements in manual dexterity after four weeks of piano training, but do not improve significantly after just two weeks. Furthermore, it does not matter whether the participants actively play for the first part and passively listen for the second part or vice versa.
Of the three proposed mechanisms of Music Supported Therapy (MST) explained in the introduction, the findings of this study may be best explained by the emotion-motivation mechanism. Though dexterity scores were organized by whether the scores followed an active playing module, all participants experienced the same amount of music-listening and social interaction. Whether the participant was playing the music him/herself or observing, both groups were always hearing the same songs and scales for the same amount of time. The emotion-motivation mechanism states that this music-listening alone may increase cognitive processes like working memory and boost both mood and motivation. Therefore, these findings may mean that listening to piano music helps dexterity performance in older adults; but it does so if and only if the participants experience the music-listening module for a sufficient duration of time.
Along with music-listening, social interaction was consistent between active and passive groups throughout the study. This interpersonal interaction may also have had an effect on mood and motivation, as piano instructors provided high levels of encouragement and complimented the participants' progress often. Relationship quality between patient and therapist is correlated with efficacy of therapy. This concept of increased socialization contributing to dexterity improvements is also supported by a study that identified social participation as a preventative factor of perceptual speed decline in older adults.
Not finding the hypothesized effect of active versus passive condition on dexterity could be due to dexterous activities that the participants were engaged in outside of the training modules. For example, three of the 15 participants reported that they currently play piano in their free time, so it can be conjectured that those participants were engaged in active piano playing even when they were in the passive listening module. Other activities enjoyed by participants include exercise classes and painting-both of which could have been improving or maintaining their dexterity throughout the study.
- Conditions
- Aging, Manual Dexterity, Piano Therapy
- Being tested
- Piano training (Active), Piano Training (Passive)
- Keywords
- Music Supported Therapy, plasticity, multisensory integration, bimanual coupling, auditory feedback, dexterity, piano therapy
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Piano training (Active)Behavioural
Also called Piano Training (Passive)
Piano Curriculum. Participants were all trained on one of four 88-key pianos located in the assisted living facility. Piano instructors were 6 undergraduate Music Education and Music Performance majors. Each lesson of the week had a different focus: right and left hands separately, bimanually coupled, and bimanually uncoupled (Loehrer et al., 2016). Each week of the module had a different focus as well: notes played one step apart, notes played multiple steps apart (intervals), and tones played together (two-note chords) (van Vugt et al., 2016; Villeneuve et al., 2014). Each session began with skill exercises and ended with learning a simple, recognizable song. Two participants with extensive piano experience progressed to playing duets with the instructor and hymns out of a hymnal after mastery of the study curriculum. These training protocols were based on those of Schneider and colleagues' 2007 study.
Piano Training (Passive)Behavioural
Participants listened to their research partner complete 8 active piano training sessions across 2 weeks.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Active-Passive | Experimental | Active Piano training (8 sessions in two weeks) followed by listening to piano training (8 sessions in 2 weeks) (Passive condition) Receives: Behavioral: Piano training (Active); Behavioral: Piano Training (Passive) |
| Passive-Active | Experimental | Passive piano training listening (8 sessions in two weeks) followed by active piano training (8 sessions in two weeks) Receives: Behavioral: Piano training (Active); Behavioral: Piano Training (Passive) |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Purdue Pegboard
Fine Motor Manual Dexterity
Measured: 10 minutes
Box and Block Test
Gross Motor Dexterity
Measured: 5 minutes
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted13 Dec 2017
- Study start30 Aug 2017
- Primary completion21 Oct 2017
- Study completion1 Dec 2017
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (4)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for AgingStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Crossover
- Model description
- Randomized members of dyads (formed by residential treatment facility personnel) in to therapy order conditions. Two weeks piano therapy for one while the other listened followed by two week in reversed roles. Half the participants played first and listened second and the other half did the reverse.
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 20 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Westminster College
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT03372031
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- SeylerCapstone2017
- Status last verified
- Dec 2017
- First submitted
- 8 Dec 2017
- Last updated
- 15 Dec 2017
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- Yes: no identifiers. Confidential data.
Publications
Ferreira PH, Ferreira ML, Maher CG, Refshauge KM, Latimer J, Adams RD. The therapeutic alliance between clinicians and patients predicts outcome in chronic low back pain. Phys Ther. 2013 Apr;93(4):470-8. doi: 10.2522/ptj.20120137. Epub 2012 Nov 8.
PubMed 23139428Jones L, Karageorghis CI, Ekkekakis P. Can high-intensity exercise be more pleasant?: attentional dissociation using music and video. J Sport Exerc Psychol. 2014 Oct;36(5):528-41. doi: 10.1123/jsep.2013-0251.
PubMed 25356615Lovden M, Ghisletta P, Lindenberger U. Social participation attenuates decline in perceptual speed in old and very old age. Psychol Aging. 2005 Sep;20(3):423-34. doi: 10.1037/0882-7974.20.3.423.
PubMed 16248702Vuilleumier P, Trost W. Music and emotions: from enchantment to entrainment. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2015 Mar;1337:212-22. doi: 10.1111/nyas.12676.
PubMed 25773637
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 15 Dec 2017. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Active Versus Passive Piano Intervention for Dexterity in Older Adults: A Randomized Controlled Trial
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT03372031
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- SeylerCapstone2017
- Conditions
- Aging, Manual Dexterity, Piano Therapy
- Keywords
- Music Supported Therapy, plasticity, multisensory integration, bimanual coupling, auditory feedback, dexterity, piano therapy
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 20 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Westminster CollegeUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 30 Aug 2017 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 21 Oct 2017 (actual)
- Study completion
- 1 Dec 2017 (actual)
- First posted
- 13 Dec 2017 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Does active piano practice help recover hand dexterity in older adults, or does social interaction and music-listening alone affect motor performance? Researchers hypothesized improved dexterity after active piano playing, but not after passive piano listening. 15 residents of a retirement community were partnered together and completed 2 two-week piano training modules. In module 1, one partner played piano exercises and songs while the other listened. In module 2, partners switched roles. The Purdue Pegboard Test and Box and Block Test assessed fine and gross motor dexterity, before, between, and after the training modules. A repeated measures ANOVA showed a main effect of time on overall fine and gross motor function, but there was no main effect of playing versus listening. Results did not support the hypothesis, but indicate that piano-based therapy requires greater than 2 weeks to begin improving dexterity and may influenced co-occurring socialization.
Detailed description
The primary finding of this study is that older adults demonstrate improvements in manual dexterity after four weeks of piano training, but do not improve significantly after just two weeks. Furthermore, it does not matter whether the participants actively play for the first part and passively listen for the second part or vice versa.
Of the three proposed mechanisms of Music Supported Therapy (MST) explained in the introduction, the findings of this study may be best explained by the emotion-motivation mechanism. Though dexterity scores were organized by whether the scores followed an active playing module, all participants experienced the same amount of music-listening and social interaction. Whether the participant was playing the music him/herself or observing, both groups were always hearing the same songs and scales for the same amount of time. The emotion-motivation mechanism states that this music-listening alone may increase cognitive processes like working memory and boost both mood and motivation. Therefore, these findings may mean that listening to piano music helps dexterity performance in older adults; but it does so if and only if the participants experience the music-listening module for a sufficient duration of time.
Along with music-listening, social interaction was consistent between active and passive groups throughout the study. This interpersonal interaction may also have had an effect on mood and motivation, as piano instructors provided high levels of encouragement and complimented the participants' progress often. Relationship quality between patient and therapist is correlated with efficacy of therapy. This concept of increased socialization contributing to dexterity improvements is also supported by a study that identified social participation as a preventative factor of perceptual speed decline in older adults.
Not finding the hypothesized effect of active versus passive condition on dexterity could be due to dexterous activities that the participants were engaged in outside of the training modules. For example, three of the 15 participants reported that they currently play piano in their free time, so it can be conjectured that those participants were engaged in active piano playing even when they were in the passive listening module. Other activities enjoyed by participants include exercise classes and painting-both of which could have been improving or maintaining their dexterity throughout the study.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Crossover
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 2
- Model description
- Randomized members of dyads (formed by residential treatment facility personnel) in to therapy order conditions. Two weeks piano therapy for one while the other listened followed by two week in reversed roles. Half the participants played first and listened second and the other half did the reverse.
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Active-Passive | Experimental | Behavioral: Piano training (Active), Behavioral: Piano Training (Passive)Active Piano training (8 sessions in two weeks) followed by listening to piano training (8 sessions in 2 weeks) (Passive condition) |
| Passive-Active | Experimental | Behavioral: Piano training (Active), Behavioral: Piano Training (Passive)Passive piano training listening (8 sessions in two weeks) followed by active piano training (8 sessions in two weeks) |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 70 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Able to physically and cognitively withstand 30 minute piano training sessions
Key exclusion criteria (1 listed)
- -
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Piano training (Active)Also: Piano Training (Passive)Piano Curriculum. Participants were all trained on one of four 88-key pianos located in the assisted living facility. Piano instructors were 6 undergraduate Music Education and Music Performance majors. Each lesson of the week had a different focus: right and left hands separately, bimanually coupled, and bimanually uncoupled (Loehrer et al., 2016). Each week of the module had a different focus as well: notes played one step apart, notes played multiple steps apart (intervals), and tones played together (two-note chords) (van Vugt et al., 2016; Villeneuve et al., 2014). Each session began with skill exercises and ended with learning a simple, recognizable song. Two participants with extensive piano experience progressed to playing duets with the instructor and hymns out of a hymnal after mastery of the study curriculum. These training protocols were based on those of Schneider and colleagues' 2007 study. | Behavioural | Active-Passive, Passive-Active |
| Piano Training (Passive)Participants listened to their research partner complete 8 active piano training sessions across 2 weeks. | Behavioural | Active-Passive, Passive-Active |
Primary outcome
Purdue Pegboard
Time frame: 10 minutes
Fine Motor Manual Dexterity
Box and Block Test
Time frame: 5 minutes
Gross Motor Dexterity
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 15 Dec 2017.
- Background: PubMed 23139428Ferreira PH, Ferreira ML, Maher CG, Refshauge KM, Latimer J, Adams RD. The therapeutic alliance between clinicians and patients predicts outcome in chronic low back pain. Phys Ther. 2013 Apr;93(4):470-8. doi: 10.2522/ptj.20120137. Epub 2012 Nov 8.
- Background: PubMed 25356615Jones L, Karageorghis CI, Ekkekakis P. Can high-intensity exercise be more pleasant?: attentional dissociation using music and video. J Sport Exerc Psychol. 2014 Oct;36(5):528-41. doi: 10.1123/jsep.2013-0251.
- Background: PubMed 16248702Lovden M, Ghisletta P, Lindenberger U. Social participation attenuates decline in perceptual speed in old and very old age. Psychol Aging. 2005 Sep;20(3):423-34. doi: 10.1037/0882-7974.20.3.423.
- Background: PubMed 25773637Vuilleumier P, Trost W. Music and emotions: from enchantment to entrainment. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2015 Mar;1337:212-22. doi: 10.1111/nyas.12676.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: Yes. no identifiers. Confidential data.
Related trials for Aging
RecruitingPhase 2
Neuroplasticity Enhancement From Cognitive Training Reinforced by Psilocybin
Alzheimer's Disease
Recruiting
Colon-delivered Riboflavin and Gut Microbiota Composition
Microbiome Dysbiosis, Gut Health
RecruitingPhase 2
Metformin as an add-on or Monotherapy in Treatment of Aging People With Multiple Sclerosis (MS)
Multiple Sclerosis
Not yet recruitingPhase 2
Validation & Intervention Testing for Aging, Longevity and Healthspan
Aging, Functional Decline
RecruitingObservational study
Effects of Obesity on Physical Abilities and Daily Living Activities in Elderly Adults
Obesity, Sarcopenic Obesity
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
The record lists no contact. Use the official record to reach the sponsor.
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Piano training (Active) and Piano Training (Passive) in people with Aging and Manual Dexterity, run by Westminster College at 1 site in United States.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 1 inclusion and 1 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 15 Dec 2017. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in United States. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Purdue Pegboard (time frame: 10 minutes). The study lists 2 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT03372031, which also lists 4 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 15 Dec 2017.