Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
2.3
2.4
Journals
Veterinary Sciences
Special Issues
Interdisciplinary Considerations in Human–Animal Interventions
share announcement

Interdisciplinary Considerations in Human–Animal Interventions

A special issue of Veterinary Sciences (ISSN 2306-7381).

Deadline for manuscript submissions: closed (15 May 2022) | Viewed by 48654

Special Issue Editors

Dr. Amy Johnson

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
Center for Human Animal Interventions, School of Nursing, Oakland University, 433 Meadow Brook Road, Rochester, MI 48309, USA
Interests: animal-assisted intervention; theoretical foundations, ethics; standards; practice; risk assessment and management; animal preparation; animal behavior, communication, and training; animal health, welfare, and well-being
Dr. Zenithson Ng

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
Department of Small Animal Clinical Sciences, The University of Tennessee, Institute of Agriculture, College of Veterinary Medicine, Knoxville, TN 37996, USA
Interests: canine health and behavior; feline health and behavior; animal-assisted interventions; welfare and well-being
Dr. Melissa Winkle

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
Dogwood Therapy Services, Center for Human-Animal Interventions, Oakland University, Rochester, MI 48309, USA
Interests: animal-assisted intervention; theoretical foundations, ethics; standards; practice; risk assessment and management; animal preparation; animal behavior, communication, and training; animal health, welfare, and well-being

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues,

It is advised that animals evaluated for and participating in Animal-Assisted Interventions or Human–Animal Interactions (HAIs) receive an annual wellness check from a veterinarian to determine their capability of performing their duties as “therapy” animals, and the same should be true for service animals. This Special Issue will include articles from a variety of disciplines in the areas of AAI and HAI—as well as veterinarians, veterinary behaviorists, animal shelters, animal registration organizations, and other well-known animal welfare professionals—in addition to highlighting the current standards of practice for animals working in a visitation or therapeutic environment and analyzing other animal welfare oversights. Authors are encouraged to contribute scholarly papers that deal with the interprofessional aspects of human–animal interactions (HAIs) and animal-assisted interventions (AAIs), including, but not limited to, the following topics of interest:

  • When to retire your therapy animal;
  • Emotional support animal topics (healthcare provider perspective, veterinarian perspective)
  • Service animal / assistance animal topics
  • Animals other than dogs and horses in practice
  • Diseases associated with the chronic stress of animals;
  • Behavior modification strategies for training;
  • Including medications in behavior modification training;
  • Animal welfare in animal-assisted interventions;
  • Animals’ basic needs and ensuring they are met when conducting visitation or therapy work;
  • The difference between service dogs and therapy dogs and emotional support animals

Animal Sheltering

  • Administration of antianxiety medications for dogs at the shelter;
  • The use of positive reinforcement training for dogs at the shelter;
  • Multispecies behavior and enrichment;
  • Shelter animals other than dogs and cats;
  • Husbandry in a shelter environment.

This Special Edition, entitled “Interdisciplinary Considerations in Human–Animal Interventions”, poses an important opportunity for you and your colleagues to make a worthwhile scholarly contribution to the much-needed international expansion in education, practice, and outcomes in AAIs. If you have any questions or comments, please reach out to me or the journal staff.

Dr. Amy Johnson
Dr. Zenithson Ng
Dr. Melissa Winkle
Guest Editors

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All submissions that pass pre-check are peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a single-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Veterinary Sciences is an international peer-reviewed open access monthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 2600 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Keywords

  • animal-assisted intervention
  • animal-assisted therapy
  • animal-assisted education
  • animal-assisted activities
  • taxonomy
  • theoretical foundations
  • ethics
  • standards
  • practice
  • risk assessment and management
  • animal preparation
  • animal behavior, communication and training
  • animal health, welfare and well-being

Published Papers (7 papers)

Download All Papers
Order results
Result details
Show export options expand_more Show export options expand_less
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:

Research

Jump to: Review, Other

14 pages, 570 KiB  
Article
Recommendations for Transdisciplinary Professional Competencies and Ethics for Animal-Assisted Therapies and Interventions
by Melissa Trevathan-Minnis, Amy Johnson and Ann R. Howie
Vet. Sci. 2021, 8(12), 303; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/vetsci8120303 - 02 Dec 2021
Cited by 4 | Viewed by 3067
Abstract
AAI is a transdisciplinary field that has grown exponentially in recent decades. This growth has not always been synergistic across fields, creating a need for more consistent language and standards, a call for which many professionals in the field have made. Under the [...] Read more.
AAI is a transdisciplinary field that has grown exponentially in recent decades. This growth has not always been synergistic across fields, creating a need for more consistent language and standards, a call for which many professionals in the field have made. Under the umbrella of human–animal interactions (HAI) is animal-assisted interventions (AAIs), which have a more goal-directed intention with animals who have been assessed for therapeutic, educational, or vocational work. The current article offers a brief history and efficacy of HAI, describes the limitations and gaps within the field and recommends a new set of competencies and guidelines that seek to create some of the needed common language and standards for AAI work to address these limitations. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Interdisciplinary Considerations in Human–Animal Interventions)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

10 pages, 1091 KiB  
Article
Impacts of Mobility Dogs on Kinematics during Ambulation: A Quantitative Study
by Kayla Altman, Samantha Glumm, Kendall Stainton, Ellen Herlache-Pretzer, Stacey Webster and Melissa Y. Winkle
Vet. Sci. 2021, 8(11), 250; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/vetsci8110250 - 26 Oct 2021
Viewed by 2466
Abstract
While prior research has explored various physiological consequences associated with assistive device use for ambulation, limited research has specifically explored the impact of mobility dog partnership on human kinematics. This descriptive study examined the impact of mobility dog partnership on kinematics of individuals [...] Read more.
While prior research has explored various physiological consequences associated with assistive device use for ambulation, limited research has specifically explored the impact of mobility dog partnership on human kinematics. This descriptive study examined the impact of mobility dog partnership on kinematics of individuals in the normal young adult population. Sixteen participants were video recorded while walking in a straight line for 3.7 m (12 feet) under three different conditions (ambulating with no device, ambulating with a standard cane on the left side, and ambulating with a mobility dog on the left side). Differences between joint angles under each of the conditions were analyzed. Statistically significant differences were found in left elbow flexion when comparing ambulating with a cane versus ambulating with no device; left shoulder abduction when comparing ambulating with a cane versus ambulating with a mobility dog, ambulating with a mobility dog versus no device, and ambulating with a cane versus no device; and left hip extension when comparing ambulating with a mobility dog versus no device, and when ambulating with a mobility dog versus a cane. These findings suggest that providers should evaluate and monitor potential negative impacts of assistive devices such as mobility dogs on human kinematics. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Interdisciplinary Considerations in Human–Animal Interventions)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

7 pages, 982 KiB  
Article
Evaluation of a Modified Bit Device to Obtain Saliva Samples from Horses
by Aviva Vincent, Robin Marie Peth-Pierce, Meghan A. Morrissey, Mary C. Acri, Fei Guo, Lauren Seibel and Kimberly E. Hoagwood
Vet. Sci. 2021, 8(10), 232; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/vetsci8100232 - 15 Oct 2021
Cited by 3 | Viewed by 2638
Abstract
(1) Background: Accounting for the well-being of equine partners is a responsibility of those engaged in Equine-Assisted Services (EAS). Researchers took heed of this call to action by developing an innovative way to collect data to assess the physiological indicators of stress in [...] Read more.
(1) Background: Accounting for the well-being of equine partners is a responsibility of those engaged in Equine-Assisted Services (EAS). Researchers took heed of this call to action by developing an innovative way to collect data to assess the physiological indicators of stress in equine participants. The collection of saliva is considered to be a minimally invasive method of data collection and is typically performed using a cotton swab; however, in equines, the introduction of a foreign object may induce stress; (2) Methods: Researchers used a modified bit to collect pooled saliva in an effort to further reduce stress during the saliva collection process. Additionally, the collection of pooled saliva, via the bit, increases the opportunity to consider additional analyses, such as oxytocin, which is more reliable in pooled saliva than site-specific saliva captured with a swab; (3) Results: A data analysis demonstrated that ample saliva was captured using the modified bit. Observational data supported that the horses demonstrated fewer physical stress signals to the bit than to the swab. Thus, the modified bit is a feasible and valid method for equine salivary sample collection; (4) Conclusions: The results suggest that the modified bit provides a viable method to collect equine saliva and supports national calls to prioritize animal welfare analysis, specifically for horses used within EAS. Future research should enhance methodological rigor, including in the process and timing, thereby contributing to the bit’s validation. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Interdisciplinary Considerations in Human–Animal Interventions)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

Review

Jump to: Research, Other

16 pages, 273 KiB  
Review
Recognizing and Mitigating Canine Stress during Animal Assisted Interventions
by Lisa Townsend and Nancy R. Gee
Vet. Sci. 2021, 8(11), 254; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/vetsci8110254 - 27 Oct 2021
Cited by 7 | Viewed by 7427
Abstract
Animal-assisted Interventions (AAI) proliferated rapidly since clinicians and researchers first noted the positive effects animals have on people struggling with physical and mental health concerns. The intersection of AAI with the field of animal welfare evolved from considering animals’ basic needs, such as [...] Read more.
Animal-assisted Interventions (AAI) proliferated rapidly since clinicians and researchers first noted the positive effects animals have on people struggling with physical and mental health concerns. The intersection of AAI with the field of animal welfare evolved from considering animals’ basic needs, such as freedom from pain, to recognition that animals experience nuanced emotions. Current conceptualizations of the various roles of companion animals as an adjunct to treatments for humans emphasize not only the animals’ physical comfort and autonomy, but also their mental well-being and enjoyment of AAI activities. However, numerous challenges to effective monitoring of animals involved in AAI exist. This article focuses specifically on dogs, highlighting factors that may lead handlers and therapists to miss or ignore canine stress signals during human-animal interactions and offers strategies to recognize and ameliorate dogs’ distress more consistently. The primary goals of this discussion are to summarize the current thinking on canine well-being and to highlight practical applications of animal welfare principles in real-world AAI settings. The paper highlights contextual factors (e.g., physical setting, patient demand), human influences (e.g., desire to help), and intervention characteristics (e.g., presence or absence of a dog-specific advocate) that may promote or inhibit humans’ ability to advocate for therapy dogs during AAI activities. Deidentified examples of each of these factors are discussed, and recommendations are provided to mitigate factors that interfere with timely recognition and amelioration of canine distress. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Interdisciplinary Considerations in Human–Animal Interventions)
18 pages, 339 KiB  
Review
Therapy Dog Welfare Revisited: A Review of the Literature
by Lisa Maria Glenk and Sandra Foltin
Vet. Sci. 2021, 8(10), 226; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/vetsci8100226 - 12 Oct 2021
Cited by 20 | Viewed by 7294
Abstract
During the past decade, the field of human–animal interaction(s) research has been characterized by a significant increase in scientific findings. These data have contributed to our current understanding of how humans may benefit from contact with animals. However, the animal experience of these [...] Read more.
During the past decade, the field of human–animal interaction(s) research has been characterized by a significant increase in scientific findings. These data have contributed to our current understanding of how humans may benefit from contact with animals. However, the animal experience of these interactions is still an under-researched area. This paper addresses the welfare of dogs who participate in animal-assisted interventions (AAIs) to improve health in human recipients. This paper builds on previous work by Glenk (2017) and provides an updated review of the literature on therapy dog welfare published from 2017–2021. New advances in scientific methodology, such as the determination of salivary oxytocin, breath rate and tympanic membrane temperature, are analyzed regarding their value and limitations for research in AAIs. Moreover, welfare-related social and environmental factors (e.g., freedom of choice, exploration of novel environments, inequity aversion, individual development, working experience, relationship with handler and handler skills) that profoundly influence dog perception and well-being are reviewed and discussed. Accounting for the globally increasing interest and the number of dogs utilized in AAIs, safeguarding therapy dog well-being, and identifying situations, circumstances and protocols that may challenge animal welfare remains an emerging and crucial area of scientific effort. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Interdisciplinary Considerations in Human–Animal Interventions)

Other

Jump to: Research, Review

10 pages, 416 KiB  
Systematic Review
Cat and/or Dog Ownership, Cardiovascular Disease, and Obesity: A Systematic Review
by Cristina S. Barroso, Kathleen C. Brown, David Laubach, Marcy Souza, Linda M. Daugherty and Melanie Dixson
Vet. Sci. 2021, 8(12), 333; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/vetsci8120333 - 17 Dec 2021
Cited by 7 | Viewed by 5172
Abstract
Pet ownership, the most common human–animal interaction, is believed to bestow positive health benefits onto pet owners. However, there is limited research on substantiating these assertions. The aim of this review was to systematically identify, evaluate, and summarize primary research on the relationship [...] Read more.
Pet ownership, the most common human–animal interaction, is believed to bestow positive health benefits onto pet owners. However, there is limited research on substantiating these assertions. The aim of this review was to systematically identify, evaluate, and summarize primary research on the relationship between cat and/or dog ownership and cardiovascular disease (CVD), type 2 diabetes (T2D), and obesity to inform future research on pet ownership and chronic disease. How pet ownership was defined/measured, and identification of the chronic disease variables and health behaviors most often measured were emphasized. Two researchers independently searched PubMed and Web of Science, where One Health literature are mostly likely to be indexed, for peer-reviewed literature on pet ownership and CVD, T2D, and obesity. A review of 4541 titles and abstracts for relevance resulted in 34 manuscripts eligible for full-text review. Two researchers assessed each eligible manuscript and extracted data only from those that met the inclusion criteria (n = 14). Ten studies on CVD, four studies on obesity, and zero studies on T2D met the study criteria. The CVD and obesity variables varied and were not well described. The relationship between pet ownership and CVD and obesity varied (positive, negative, mixed effects, and no effect). Generalizability lacked across all studies: most studies were with Non-Hispanic White populations. Other areas of weakness were quality of study outcomes and instrument validity. Operationalization of pet ownership varied (from no verification to confirmed pet registration). Integration of the evidence-based influence of the human–animal connection through pet ownership on CVD and obesity may make prevention, mitigation, and treatment strategies more robust. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Interdisciplinary Considerations in Human–Animal Interventions)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

23 pages, 520 KiB  
Systematic Review
Pet Ownership and Quality of Life: A Systematic Review of the Literature
by Kristel J. Scoresby, Elizabeth B. Strand, Zenithson Ng, Kathleen C. Brown, Charles Robert Stilz, Kristen Strobel, Cristina S. Barroso and Marcy Souza
Vet. Sci. 2021, 8(12), 332; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/vetsci8120332 - 16 Dec 2021
Cited by 31 | Viewed by 18778
Abstract
Pet ownership is the most common form of human–animal interaction, and anecdotally, pet ownership can lead to improved physical and mental health for owners. However, scant research is available validating these claims. This study aimed to review the recent peer reviewed literature to [...] Read more.
Pet ownership is the most common form of human–animal interaction, and anecdotally, pet ownership can lead to improved physical and mental health for owners. However, scant research is available validating these claims. This study aimed to review the recent peer reviewed literature to better describe the body of knowledge surrounding the relationship between pet ownership and mental health. A literature search was conducted in May 2020 using two databases to identify articles that met inclusion/exclusion criteria. After title review, abstract review, and then full article review, 54 articles were included in the final analysis. Of the 54 studies, 18 were conducted in the general population, 15 were conducted in an older adult population, eight were conducted in children and adolescents, nine focused on people with chronic disease, and four examined a specific unique population. Forty-one of the studies were cross-sectional, 11 were prospective longitudinal cohorts, and two were other study designs. For each of the articles, the impact of pet ownership on the mental health of owners was divided into four categories: positive impact (n = 17), mixed impact (n = 19), no impact (n = 13), and negative impact (n = 5). Among the reviewed articles, there was much variation in population studied and study design, and these differences make direct comparison challenging. However, when focusing on the impact of pet ownership on mental health, the results were variable and not wholly supportive of the benefit of pets on mental health. Future research should use more consistent methods across broader populations and the development of a pet-ownership survey module for use in broad, population surveys would afford a better description of the true relationship of pet ownership and mental health. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Interdisciplinary Considerations in Human–Animal Interventions)
►▼ Show Figures

Graphical abstract

Show export options expand_more Show export options expand_less
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:
 
Displaying articles 1-7
Back to TopTop