A survey on health professionals’ understanding of federal protections regarding service dogs in clinical settings
Author:
Merk Alexander1, Nelson Emily1, Provost Alisha1, Rasch Matthew1, Forster Lisa1, Nottingham Kelly2, Simon Janet3, Fredricks Todd1ORCID
Affiliation:
1. Heritage College of Osteopathic Medicine , Athens , OH , USA 2. Ohio University Graduate College , Athens , OH , USA 3. College of Health Sciences and Professions , Athens , OH , USA
Abstract
Abstract
Context
Research has been scarce on health professionals’ knowledge about guidelines regulating service dogs in a clinical setting. Gaining insight into health professionals’ understanding of Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) regulations concerning service dogs is critical for navigating compliance and reducing risk. Misinformation about service dogs could influence decisions affecting policy and care, leading to poor treatment and suboptimal health outcomes for patients with service animals.
Objectives
To assess health professionals’ knowledge about ADA regulations and beliefs about workplace protocols and training related to service dogs.
Methods
The study used snowball sampling to distribute surveys to health professionals from around the United States. Initial outreach occurred using mailing lists, investigators’ personal networks, and social media. The survey contained 24 items. True and false questions were used to test ADA knowledge and then coded as correct or incorrect. Most closed-end questions were measured on a 5-point Likert scale using frequencies and descriptive statistics. A one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was conducted to test whether variables, such as encounters to service dogs, affected knowledge of ADA requirements.
Results
The survey was completed by 441 health professionals from around the country. Most (234; 53.1%) worked in a hospital and came from a range of professional backgrounds (nurses, 155 [35.2%]; physicians, 71 [16.1%]). While nearly three-quarters (318 [73.1%]) of participants said their workplace had a policy on service animals, 113 (34.9%) of those said they were unfamiliar with the policy and 236 (54.5%) said they had not received adequate training on the topic. Most participants did not know basic ADA policy requirements related to service dogs. Only those who were extremely familiar with policy (F=4.613; p=0.001) and those who strongly agreed that they knew the differences between service dogs and other classes of animals (F=5.906; p=0.000) scored higher on the knowledge test than those who disagreed.
Conclusions
Our results suggest that increased familiarity and training leads to higher knowledge about service dogs and ADA policy. Health professionals need additional education on ADA service dog regulations and hospital policy in order to minimize risk and ensure patients with service dogs receive optimal care.
Publisher
Walter de Gruyter GmbH
Subject
Complementary and alternative medicine,Complementary and Manual Therapy
Reference28 articles.
1. Winkle, M, Crowe, TK, Hendrix, I. Service dogs and people with physical disabilities partnerships: a systematic review. Occup Ther Int 2012;19:54–66. https://doi.org/10.1002/oti.323. 2. Hall, SS, MacMichael, J, Turner, A, Mills, DS. A survey of the impact of owning a service dog on quality of life for individuals with physical and hearing disability: a pilot study. Health Qual Life Outcome 2017;15:1–9. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12955-017-0640-x. 3. Crowe, TK, Perea-Burns, S, Sedillo, JS, Hendrix, IC, Winkle, M, Deitz, J. Effects of partnerships between people with mobility challenges and service dogs. Am J Occup Ther. 2014;68:194–202. https://doi.org/10.5014/ajot.2014.009324. 4. Schoenfeld-Tacher, R, Hellyer, P, Cheung, L, Kogan, L. Public perceptions of service dogs, emotional support dogs, and therapy dogs. Int J Environ Res Publ Health 2017;14:642. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph14060642. 5. Walther, S, Yamamoto, M, Thigpen, AP, Garcia, A, Willits, NH, Hart, LA. Assistance dogs: historic patterns and roles of dogs placed by ADI or IGDF accredited facilities and by non-accredited U.S. Facilities. Front Vet Sci 2017;4:1. https://doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2017.00001.
Cited by
4 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
1. Service Animals in Health Care Settings;JAMA;2024-06-04 2. Limitations of Current Studies;SpringerBriefs in Modern Perspectives on Disability Research;2024 3. Results in the Existing Literature;SpringerBriefs in Modern Perspectives on Disability Research;2024 4. Care of Patients with Service or Therapy Animals;Journal of Christian Nursing;2023-01
|
|