Abstract
Abstract
Background
Pets offer significant health benefits, from decreased cardiovascular risks to anxiety and post-traumatic stress improvements. Animal-assisted interventions (AAI) are not frequently practiced in the intensive care unit (ICU) for fear of health risk for critical patients because there is a hypothetical risk of zoonoses.
Objectives
This systematic review aimed to collect and summarize available evidence about AAI in the ICU. The Review questions were “Do AAI improve the clinical outcome of Critically Ill Patients admitted to ICUs?” and “Are the zoonotic infections the cause of negative prognosis?”.
Methods
The following databases were searched on 5 January 2023: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), EMBASE, and PubMed. All controlled studies (randomized controlled, quasi-experimental, and observational studies) were included. The systematic review protocol has been registered on the International Prospective Register of Systematic Review (CRD42022344539).
Results
A total of 1302 papers were retrieved, 1262 after the duplicate remotion. Of these, only 34 were assessed for eligibility and only 6 were included in the qualitative synthesis. In all the studies included the dog was the animal used for the AAI with a total of 118 cases and 128 controls. Studies have high variability, and no one has used increased survival or zoonotic risk as outcomes.
Conclusions
The evidence on the effectiveness of AAIs in ICU settings is scarce and no data are available on their safety. AAIs use in the ICU must be considered experimental and follow the related regulation until further data will be available. Given the potential positive impact on patient-centered outcomes, a research effort for high-quality studies seems to be justified.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference16 articles.
1. The iahaio definitions for animal assisted intervention and guidelines for wellness of animals involved in aaI [https://iahaio.org/wp/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/iahaio_wp_updated-2018-final.pdf]
2. Lai NM, Chang SMW, Ng SS, Tan SL, Chaiyakunapruk N, Stanaway F (2019) Animal-assisted therapy for dementia. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2019(11):CD013243
3. Feng Y, Lin Y, Zhang N, Jiang X, Zhang L (2021) Effects of animal-assisted therapy on hospitalized children and teenagers: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Pediatr Nurs 60:11–23
4. Santaniello A, Sansone M, Fioretti A, Menna LF (2020) Systematic review and meta-analysis of the occurrence of ESKAPE bacteria group in dogs, and the related zoonotic risk in animal-assisted therapy, and in animal-assisted activity in the health context. Int J Environ Res Public Health 17(9):3278
5. Bert F, Gualano MR, Camussi E, Pieve G, Voglino G, Siliquini R (2016) Animal assisted intervention: a systematic review of benefits and risks. Eur J Integr Med 8(5):695–706
Cited by
1 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