Introduction
Mental disorders (MDs) in children and adolescents are highly prevalent, even in high-income countries [
1]. The prevalence increased due to the global impact of COVID-19 on MDs in this population [
2]. The pathogenesis of MDs is thought to be a complex process influenced by individual and environment factors [
3]. Generally, MDs affect young people’s emotional state (mood; [
4]) and are characterized by atypical perceptions, behavior, and relationships [
5]. This, in turn, limits young people’s participation in age-appropriate activities, quality of life, and overall well-being [
5]. Moreover, young people with MDs often lose access to their creativity and spontaneity, experiencing despair in the face of daily challenges [
6] and heightened levels of stress [
7,
8].
In general, stress is associated with multifaceted behavioral and biological responses, primarily by activating the hypothalamus–pituitary–adrenal (HPA) axis [
9]. The secretion of cortisol occurs under the influence of the circadian rhythm in the adaptation process to environmental challenges. Thus, salivary sCort is a correlate of the biological stress response and is essential to maintain homeostasis [
9]. Over the course of the day, the highest level is reached in the 30–45 min after waking up, the lowest is reached around midnight. The early afternoon is an appropriate period for evaluating potential alterations in the activity of the HPA axis, triggered, for instance, by arts-related activities [
10]. Stress may cause alterations in immune function [
11]. Immunoglobulin A, a first-line mucosal protector against pathogens [
11], is produced in response to physical and psychological stress. It is also affected by an individual’s emotional state [
12].
The causal connection between MDs and stress appears bidirectional. For example, biographical stress experiences in early life may contribute to MDs [
13]. However, the development of MDs is also associated with the dysregulation of neuroendocrine system activities and underlying stress responses [
14]. Therefore, it is likely that both genetic components and gene–environment interactions give rise to MDs from an early age [
15].
Previous studies have addressed sCort and sIgA alongside other biomarkers in the context of arts participation, for example, with respect to amateur adult singers [
16,
17]. Findings suggest that favorable short-term psychobiological changes can occur in response to such interventions, but there is little information with respect to vulnerable groups including children and adolescents with MDs [
18,
19].
Creative arts therapies and interventions are common strategies in child and adolescent psychiatry (e.g., [
20‐
22]). However, the empirical evidence appears mixed. For example, cognitive behavioral therapy can be more effective than arts or music therapy for reducing symptoms of depression in children [
23]. By contrast, a meta-analysis of 11 experimental studies on music therapy found a moderate positive effect on clinical outcomes but identified a need for more studies in clinical settings [
24]. Finally, participation in activities such as listening to and making music can elicit positive feelings and influence stress symptoms in young people with mental health issues [
18]. Creative arts engagement can reduce anxiety and depression symptoms in young people [
25], while enhancing self-confidence and self-esteem, a sense of achievement and empowerment, social skills, positive behavioral changes, and resilience [
26‐
28]. However, a systematic review of adjuvant interventions suggests that creative arts participation appears to be beneficial but, overall, less effective than sports and yoga [
29].
It is of note that the term “therapeutic” typically implies the involvement of a trained therapist, while delivery through care staff or external providers suggests an emphasis on leisure or distraction activity [
28]. However, beneficial effects can occur, irrespective of the specific therapeutic goal settings. For example, Grebosz-Haring and Thun-Hohenstein [
6,
18] argue that engagement in arts activities can stimulate creative processes to increase self-confidence and self-efficacy, and bring distraction, attention, imagery, joy, and pleasure. The arts can also encourage young people to engage in more positive self-reflections and social interactions.
Creative arts interventions for hospitalized children and adolescents with diagnosed MDs produced mixed findings (e.g., [
18,
22]), probably due to conceptual and methodological flaws, which question the validity of conclusions (e.g., [
30]). Therefore, it is unclear, how different types of arts activities (musical vs. non-musical) affect young people with MDs in a clinical setting. Further, there is also a need to study the feasibility and treatment effects with respect to the individual needs and paths of recovery and rehabilitation in this vulnerable group.
The present study
The present study is part of a 2-year pilot project to assess the feasibility of a music- and arts-based intervention protocol for hospitalized children and adolescents with MDs. Specifically, we were interested in the effectiveness of short-term intensive music and arts activities on behavioral measures of mood, quality of life, and well-being as well as on biological markers related to stress and immune function. These interventions included choir singing, textile design, drama, and clownery, which were incorporated into standard treatment routines. Results of specific subsets of the protocol concerning music-related interventions were published elsewhere [
18].
We asked the following research question:
We expected that the music and creative arts activities would induce positive changes in psychological outcomes such as improvement of self-reported mood state, quality of life, and psychological well-being (H1). Furthermore, we also assumed positive changes in neuroendocrine stress (HPA axis) and immune function in terms of a reduction in sCort and an increase in sIgA (H2).
A subsidiary goal of the study was to investigate the compliance, appropriateness of inclusion criteria, attrition, dropout rate, and possible factors that might facilitate or compromise participation in clinic-based arts intervention. It is of note that individual mental conditions could interact with preferences in the different types of arts activities. Therefore, it is important to consider individual accounts of participation. However, these data are subject to a separate investigation and will not be part of the present paper. Finally, we sought to reflect on the acceptability of gathering biomarker data during a clinical intervention in the clinical setting.
Discussion
In this observational pilot study, we undertook a preliminary assessment of the effectiveness of creative arts activities in children and adolescents with MDs in a clinical setting with respect to short-term behavioral and stress-related physiological changes. Specifically, we anticipated improvements in psychobiological outcomes across the different arts activities. Indeed, results suggest partial confirmation of these hypotheses, as will be discussed here.
In line with H1, beneficial psychological effects were observed in the textile design intervention in terms of heightened alertness, while both choir singing and textile design interventions showed a tendency toward a positive change in mood. Singing led to a significant increase in PedsQL scores, indicating improved HRQL after 1 week. No further significant effects on behavioral outcomes were noted. In support of H2, sCort levels decreased over the 5 days across arts interventions, indicating reduced physiological stress. However, no other significant changes were observed in sIgA levels for any of the four interventions.
Our findings extend previous work by showing that arts interventions may have short-term positive psychophysiological benefits in this target group. In particular, the observation of overall reduced stress is significant, as it plays a critical role in young people’s agency, resilience, and mental health [
7,
8]. Implementing stress-reducing interventions in clinical and school settings can most likely help to alleviate psychiatric symptoms and enhance coping abilities. However, this hypothesis needs to be further evaluated within a framework that allows for longer intervention intervals and also more opportunity for the patients to explore different arts activities.
Interestingly, our investigation yielded few changes in the psychological measures of mood states. This contrasts with evidence from previous research in other populations, which demonstrated an improvement in mood alongside a decrease in cortisol values in response to, e.g., group singing (e.g., [
17]). Notably, our previous pilot study on choir singing and music listening in children and adolescents with MDs [
18], as well as another study involving adolescent women with depression disorders outside a clinical setting [
36], also demonstrated significantly decreased sCort levels that were uncorrelated with psychological changes. Such discrepancies could be attributed to the influence of rater and recall biases present in the self-reported psychological outcomes. Furthermore, it has been suggested that this inconsistency may have occurred because biological changes are more quickly observable than self-rated changes. Therefore, it was recommended that behavior should be observed second-by-second, and mood states should be assessed using additional measures [
18,
36].
Against our expectation, the singing intervention did not yield significant pre–post effects on psycho-biological measures. This contrasts with earlier clinical and naturalistic studies that have reported favorable influences of musical engagement (choir singing, music listening) on behavioral and physiological measures including cortisol levels in adults [
16,
17]. In our previous pilot study involving young people with MDs [
18], we did observe a cortisol reduction after 45 min of choir singing, whereas the current intervention lasted for 90 min. Further studies are needed to investigate the stress-reducing potential of singing with a focus on duration and other contextual factors.
No significant changes in sIgA were observed in our study. Consistent with previous research, conflicting results have emerged concerning the relationship between, e.g., music-related activities and immune responses [
17]. Currently, our understanding of immune activity during pleasurable activities, such as arts activities, remains limited. Given that this is a preliminary study, we are unable to offer a conclusion based on our findings.
Limitations
Our study did not employ a randomization procedure. While we fell short of achieving the intended sample size of 20 patients per group, the data collected during our recruitment process can still hold value in guiding the strategy for recruiting participants in a future, larger-scale study.
Future studies will need to establish a control group to assess experimental effects and to facilitate interpretation of the intervention effects. Additionally, it remains uncertain whether the positive biological effects are subject to specific or nonspecific components of the arts interventions as employed in this study. Furthermore, as the psychological ratings were retrospective, collected from patients themselves, it is possible that rater characteristics or recall bias influenced the outcomes increases.
Since the arts program leaders were unable to be blinded to the intervention, the potential for leader bias must be acknowledged. Additionally, it is essential to recognize the challenges in drawing definitive conclusions regarding the effects of arts activities given the limitations such as small sample size and considerable variability among the biological and psychological results.
The data do not allow us to test which aspects of arts activity were most beneficial for biological and psychological outcomes. Engagement in an arts intervention may be beneficial because of increased attention and support from the arts activity leader, doctor, or parents, as well as other patient support, social activation, or a specific benefit of the artistic activity itself.
Beyond these limitations, there remain major methodological challenges in realizing a long-term, controlled, randomized, comparative study with correspondingly large patient numbers in a clinical setting. These challenges were due to the changing nature of the symptoms and to daily mood fluctuations among the participants. Further longitudinal research with larger patient numbers and additional measurements is needed to clarify the heterogeneity of the data and to determine whether the effects remain over a long term, whether they have an impact on the recovery process, and whether they depend on the clinical picture.
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.