Display options
Share it on

Front Psychol. 2018 Aug 29;9:1531. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01531. eCollection 2018.

Effectiveness of Art Therapy With Adult Clients in 2018-What Progress Has Been Made?.

Frontiers in psychology

Dafna Regev, Liat Cohen-Yatziv

Affiliations

  1. School of Creative Arts Therapies, University of Haifa, Haifa, Israel.

PMID: 30210388 PMCID: PMC6124538 DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01531

Abstract

In the year 2000, an important art therapy literature review addressed an essential question-does art therapy work? It discussed 17 articles dealing with the issue of the effectiveness of art therapy. Two decades later, this research field has extended its scope and is flourishing. Several current reviews of research work have described the broad range of methods implemented today, which includes qualitative and quantitative studies; other reviews have focused on art therapy with specific populations, or by age group. The aim of this systematic literature review is to contribute to the ongoing discussion in the field by exploring the latest studies dealing with the effectiveness of art therapy with a broad scope of adult clients. We conducted a comprehensive search in four databases and review of every quantitative article that has addressed outcome measures in the art therapy field from 2000 to 2017. This paper presents the latest 27 studies in the field that examine the effectiveness of art therapy with adult clients and divides them into seven clinical categories: cancer patients, clients coping with a variety of medical conditions, mental health clients, clients coping with trauma, prison inmates, the elderly, and clients who have not been diagnosed with specific issues but face ongoing daily challenges. It underscores the potential effects of art therapy on these seven clinical populations, and recommends the necessary expansions for future research in the field, to enable art therapy research to take further strides forward.

Keywords: adult; art therapy; clinical populations; effectiveness evaluation; systematic review

References

  1. Am J Occup Ther. 2013 Jul-Aug;67(4):395-404 - PubMed
  2. Palliat Support Care. 2009 Mar;7(1):87-95 - PubMed
  3. Health Technol Assess. 2015 Mar;19(18):1-120, v-vi - PubMed
  4. Psychooncology. 2008 Jul;17(7):676-80 - PubMed
  5. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol. 2014 Nov;49(11):1703-10 - PubMed
  6. Schizophr Bull. 2006 Oct;32 Suppl 1:S64-80 - PubMed
  7. Scand J Psychol. 2012 Feb;53(1):47-53 - PubMed
  8. Psychother Res. 2016 Sep;26(5):573-89 - PubMed
  9. Palliat Support Care. 2006 Mar;4(1):57-64 - PubMed
  10. Trauma Violence Abuse. 2015 Apr;16(2):220-8 - PubMed
  11. Psychooncology. 2006 May;15(5):363-73 - PubMed
  12. BMC Psychiatry. 2015 Jul 07;15:151 - PubMed
  13. Complement Ther Med. 2010 Jun-Aug;18(3-4):160-70 - PubMed
  14. Eur J Cancer Care (Engl). 2009 Jan;18(1):69-77 - PubMed
  15. Am J Psychiatry. 2014 May;171(5):523-38 - PubMed
  16. Psychooncology. 2007 Nov;16(11):980-4 - PubMed
  17. Can Med Assoc J. 1979 Nov 3;121(9):1193-254 - PubMed
  18. Psychooncology. 2011 Feb;20(2):135-45 - PubMed
  19. Res Gerontol Nurs. 2011 Oct;4(4):237-42 - PubMed
  20. Psychother Res. 2018 May;28(3):347-355 - PubMed
  21. Harefuah. 2011 Feb;150(2):79-83, 209 - PubMed
  22. Technol Health Care. 2014;22(3):453-8 - PubMed
  23. Health Technol Assess. 2012;16(8):iii-iv, 1-76 - PubMed
  24. Stress Health. 2012 Dec;28(5):397-407 - PubMed
  25. Hum Reprod. 2011 Mar;26(3):611-5 - PubMed
  26. PLoS Med. 2009 Jul 21;6(7):e1000097 - PubMed

Publication Types