Active Visual Art Therapy in the General Hospital: Facts and Challenges from an Ethical Perspective

Abstract

For decades, art in its many forms has been used to improve patients' quality of life and mental health. A growing amount of literature has shown the effectiveness of active visual art therapy (AVAT) on different patient outcomes and highlighted the need for international collaboration and harmonization of research methods. Evidence regarding AVAT inside the general hospital is still limited. This context poses unique challenges in terms of feasibility, heterogeneity, settings, and type of participants, together with significant ethical implications in terms of humanization of care. This narrative review aimed to report the available data on the effectiveness of visual art therapy in the general hospital and discuss them through the lens of the key bioethical principles of autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence, and justice introduced by Childress and Beauchamp. Current evidence supports the effectiveness of AVAT on children and adult inpatients' outcomes, particularly in the areas of pain control, anxiety, and depression, therefore supporting the individual's autonomy and beneficence. With regard to justice and equity, AVAT proved to be a safe and cost-effective adjunct intervention to medical management inside the hospital. A more in-depth understanding of the ethical aspects implied in using AVAT in the general hospital may add a further contribution to the implementation of art interventions in patient-centered care.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 4 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.