A meta-analysis of Animal Assisted Interventions targeting pain, anxiety and distress in medical settings
Abstract
OBJECTIVES
Research suggests Animal Assisted Interventions (AAI) reduce negative outcomes in medical settings, but quantitative examinations of their effects on medical outcomes such as pain, anxiety, and distress are lacking.
DESIGN
A comprehensive literature search and meta-analysis were conducted in which 22 studies (13 child, 9 adult) met inclusion criteria. Both intervention versus control and intervention pre-post effect sizes were computed using a random effects model.
RESULTS
The overall intervention versus control effect size was large and significant (d = 1.65, 95% CI = 0.46-2.832). Similarly, the pre-post effect size was large and significant (d = 2.19, 95% CI = 0.74-3.64).
CONCLUSIONS
The results of this meta-analysis indicate that AAI can yield large effects across a number of medically relevant outcomes. There is, however, substantial methodological variation across studies and more randomized clinical trials with stronger methodological controls are needed to establish the effectiveness of AAI compared to other interventions.
How strong is the evidence?
Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid.
Read the paper
Related studies
- Chaos and quantum thermalization
- The Dalton quantum chemistry program system
- Cord Blood Leptin and Adiponectin as Predictors of Adiposity in Children at 3 Years of Age: A Prospective Cohort Study
- Quantitative metabolomics by H-NMR and LC-MS/MS confirms altered metabolic pathways in diabetes
- Stable adiabatic quantum batteries
- A novel self-lipid antigen targets human T cells against CD1c(+) leukemias
Go deeper in Evidence Hub
Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.