© RgStudio via Getty Images
It ’ s hard being remote . If patients talk while I ’ m singing , I can see that they ’ re speaking , but can ’ t hear what they ’ re saying . Whereas in person , I would hear that .”
We measured the number of participants experiencing a change in mood , distraction from the ward – as recorded by engagement with the session – and the number of relaxation markers noted per participant after each session .
Qualitatively , comments were gathered on a sessional basis from the patients and ward staff , and on a weekly basis from the musician and the person facilitating the sessions . Most of the comments provided on the sessions by ward staff were positive , with people saying : ‘ It ’ s really good ’; ‘ So lovely what you are doing ’; ‘ So nice to watch ’; and ‘ Can I join in ?’
In one instance the music was seen as disruptive , with a staff member commenting : ‘ I can ’ t hear myself think ’.
Comments provided on the sessions by patients were also mostly positive and included : ‘ Made my afternoon ’; ‘ Brightened my day up ’; ‘ A pleasure , it was nice ’; ‘ I did enjoy it ’; ‘ Utterly lovely , a delight ’; ‘ I ’ ve had a thoroughly lovely time ’; ‘ It was lovely ’; ‘ Beautiful singing , glorious ’; ‘ It ’ s good of you to remember me at this critical time ’; and ‘ You ’ ve made a positive impression ’.
However , the music could be disruptive , with one patient complaining that the music was ‘ too loud ’.
Comments provided by the staff member facilitating the sessions reflected both the positive impact of the sessions and some of the practical challenges of implementing the activity .
They included : ‘ It was nice to see the distraction in particularly distressed / upset patients ’; ‘ It was apparent that the majority of patients and staff members enjoyed the sessions and it had an overall positive impact on the ward ’; ‘ There was a positive shift in mood when patients sang along and the ward team became involved ’; and ‘ It also helped to increase interaction between patients and staff members ’.
However , the direct attention offered by the facilitator could conflict with the musical interaction : ‘ On occasion patients would be more interested in conversation than the music and it would be difficult to get them to engage in the session ’.
Technology could be problematic , and some staff said that issues with the iPad connection would delay time with patients , which meant that they ‘ were not able to see too many patients within the agreed time frame ’.
Another issue raised was that ‘ some patients found the iPad confusing and this would occasionally cause distress ’.
48 OTnews February 2022