Erren Thomas C, Wallraff Jonas, Wild Ursula, Shaw David M, Lewis Philip
Institute and Policlinic for Occupational Medicine, Environmental Medicine and Prevention Research, University Hospital of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Department of Health, Ethics and Society, CAPHRI Research Institute, Maastricht University, Maastricht, Switzerland.
J Occup Med Toxicol. 2023 Dec 12;18(1):28. doi: 10.1186/s12995-023-00395-1.
Many systematic reviews identify support animals or animal assisted activity as a beneficial and standard practice in several medical disciplines for patients (children, adolescents, and adults) and residents in care homes. A variety of animals are used such as dogs, cats, ponies, horses, alpacas, reindeer, penguins, rabbits, and tarantulas. Our objective was to explore the evidence regarding effects of animal assisted activity on a further population of interest; namely, healthcare staff.
We asked the question "how do support animals in healthcare settings affect the well-being of healthcare staff?" As an addendum, we were also interested in what - possibly more unique - animals have visited healthcare settings at Christmas time in particular. We conducted a scoping literature review using PubMed and Web of Science (search as of 26 April 2023). RESULTS: Twenty studies (in the USA, Australia, Europe; dogs: n = 19; cats: n = 1) since 2002 included: studies with biological measures (n = 3), longitudinal survey studies with analyses (n = 5), cross-sectional survey studies with analyses (n = 2), and cross-sectional survey studies with descriptive statistics (n = 10). Overall, animal assisted activities appear to be well-received by staff and there do not seem to be negative impacts on staff well-being.
Relevant positive effects and avenues of research are identified. Our review suggests that, but not exactly how, animal assisted activity benefits staff. Study evidence is limited with most studies being cross-sectional, descriptive, having low participant numbers, and mostly only involving dogs. Nonetheless, the evidence is mostly positive. The potential of animal assisted activities impacting positively on staff well-being warrants systematic research. Gaps in hard-fact-evidence should not deter us - especially at the festive season - to encourage work with, and systematic research regarding, support animals that provide warmth, empathy, comfort, and more in healthcare settings.
许多系统评价表明，辅助动物或动物辅助活动在多个医学学科中对患者（儿童、青少年和成人）以及养老院居民而言是一种有益且规范的做法。人们使用了各种各样的动物，如狗、猫、小马、马、羊驼、驯鹿、企鹅、兔子和狼蛛。我们的目的是探索关于动物辅助活动对另一类相关人群（即医护人员）影响的证据。
我们提出了“医疗环境中的辅助动物如何影响医护人员的幸福感？”这一问题。此外，我们还特别关注在圣诞节期间到过医疗环境中、可能更独特的动物。我们使用PubMed和Web of Science进行了一项范围界定文献综述（检索截至2023年4月26日）。
自2002年以来的20项研究（来自美国、澳大利亚、欧洲；狗：n = 19；猫：n = 1）包括：有生物学测量的研究（n = 3）、有分析的纵向调查研究（n = 5）、有分析的横断面调查研究（n = 2）以及有描述性统计的横断面调查研究（n = 10）。总体而言，动物辅助活动似乎受到工作人员的欢迎，且似乎对工作人员的幸福感没有负面影响。
确定了相关的积极影响和研究途径。我们的综述表明了动物辅助活动对工作人员有益，但并未确切说明其方式。研究证据有限，大多数研究是横断面的、描述性的，参与者数量较少，且大多仅涉及狗。尽管如此，证据大多是积极的。动物辅助活动对工作人员幸福感产生积极影响的潜力值得进行系统研究。确凿证据方面的差距不应阻碍我们——尤其是在节日期间——鼓励与在医疗环境中提供温暖、同理心、安慰等的辅助动物开展合作并进行系统研究。
