TY - JOUR T1 - Moving Singing for Lung Health online: experience from a randomised controlled trial JF - medRxiv DO - 10.1101/2020.08.07.20170050 SP - 2020.08.07.20170050 AU - Keir EJ Philip AU - Adam Lewis AU - Edmund Jeffery AU - Sara Buttery AU - Phoene Cave AU - Daniele Cristiano AU - Adam Lound AU - Karen Taylor AU - William D-C Man AU - Daisy Fancourt AU - Michael I Polkey AU - Nicholas S Hopkinson Y1 - 2020/01/01 UR - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/08/11/2020.08.07.20170050.abstract N2 - Introduction Singing for Lung Health (SLH) is a popular arts-in-health activity for people with long-term respiratory conditions, which participants report provides biopsychosocial benefits, however research on impact is limited. The ‘SHIELD trial’, a randomised controlled, single (assessor) blind, trial of 12 weeks SLH vs usual care for people with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) (n=120) was set-up to help to address this. The first group started face-to-face (5 sessions) before changing to online delivery (7 sessions) due to COVID-19 related physical distancing measures. As such, the experience of this group is here reported as a pilot study to inform further research in this area.Methods We conducted semi-structured interviews and thematic analysis regarding barriers, facilitators and key considerations regarding transitioning from face-to-face to online delivery. Pilot quantitative outcomes include attendance, pre and post measures of quality of life and disease impact (SF-36, CAT score), breathlessness (MRC breathlessness scale, Dyspnoea-12), depression (PHQ9), anxiety (GAD-7), balance confidence (ABC scale) and physical activity (clinical visit PROactive physical activity in COPD tool, combining subjective rating and actigraphy).Results Attendance was 69% overall, (90% of the face-to-face sessions, 53% online sessions). Analysis of semi-structured interviews identified three themes regarding participation in SLH delivered face-to-face and online, these where 1) perceived benefits; 2) digital barriers (online); 3) digital facilitators (online). Findings were summarised into key considerations for optimising transitioning singing groups from face-to-face to online delivery. Pilot quantitative data suggested possible improvements in depression (treatment effect −4.78, p= 0.0487, MCID 5) balance confidence (treatment effect +17.21, p=0.0383, MCID 14.2), and anxiety (treatment effect −2.22, p=0.0659, MCID 2).Discussion This study identifies key considerations regarding the adaptation of SLH from face-to-face to online delivery. Pilot data suggest online group singing for people with COPD may deliver benefits related to reducing depression and anxiety, and improved balance confidence.What is the key question?Can Singing for Lung Health (SLH) be delivered online for people with COPD? And if so, what are the practical issues and how does the experience compare with face-to-face participation?What is the bottom line?SLH appears safe and enjoyable both face-to-face and online. Access barriers for online sessions included digital access and literacy. However increasing access to those previous unable to physically access sessions is also important. In this pilot, depression, anxiety and balance confidence appear to show improvements related to participation in a SLH group that transitioned from face-to-face to online delivery.Why read on?To our knowledge this is the first study to assess health impacts of online group singing sessions. Given the physical distancing measures required by the response to COVID-19, there is a need for singing groups and other similar interventions to be delivered online such as pulmonary rehabilitation. This study helps to inform this and future research in the area.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Clinical TrialClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04034212Funding StatementKP was supported by National Institute for Health Research Academic Clinical Fellowship award and the Imperial College Clinician Investigator Scholarship. The funders had no say in the design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data; preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript; and decision to submit the manuscript for publication.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:Ethical approval for this studywas granted by the National Health Service Health Research Authority, Stanmore REC (19/LO/0418).All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesData are available upon reasonable request. ER -