IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v17y2020i16p5978-d400252.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Acceptability of AAI from the Perspective of Elderly Clients, Family Members, and Staff—A Pilot Study

Author

Listed:
  • Kristýna Machová

    (Department of Ethology and Companion Animal Science, Faculty of Agrobiology, Food and Natural Resources, Czech University of Life Sciences, 165 00 Prague, Czech Republic)

  • Radka Procházková

    (Department of Statistics, Faculty of Economics and Management, Czech University of Life Sciences, 165 00 Prague, Czech Republic)

  • Petra Konigová

    (Department of Ethology and Companion Animal Science, Faculty of Agrobiology, Food and Natural Resources, Czech University of Life Sciences, 165 00 Prague, Czech Republic)

  • Ivona Svobodová

    (Department of Ethology and Companion Animal Science, Faculty of Agrobiology, Food and Natural Resources, Czech University of Life Sciences, 165 00 Prague, Czech Republic)

  • Lucie Přibylová

    (Department of Ethology and Companion Animal Science, Faculty of Agrobiology, Food and Natural Resources, Czech University of Life Sciences, 165 00 Prague, Czech Republic)

  • Mariana Vadroňová

    (Department of Ethology and Companion Animal Science, Faculty of Agrobiology, Food and Natural Resources, Czech University of Life Sciences, 165 00 Prague, Czech Republic)

Abstract

Although animal-assisted interventions (AAIs) are increasingly part of comprehensive rehabilitation and many of its effects are already well described, the methodology for performing AAI depends on the specific patient, animal, and treatment objective. Acceptability of AAI from all involved members is a little explored area. Thus, 214 respondents (32 AAI clients, 146 family members, and 36 healthcare and social care workers; 98 males, 116 females; mean age 46.3 years (±16.5 SD)) completed a list of statements focused on AAI with a dog. This list was distributed directly in nursing homes, retirement homes, and in households with home hospice care. All statements were rated on a Likert scale of 0–3. The results show that AAI is generally very well received, with over 90% of respondents considering AAI to be beneficial. The perception of AAI and trusting the handler with their dog was evaluated very positively, as well as possible concerns about hygiene. The results were in many cases affected by demographic factors of the respondents (age, gender, role in AAI, education, and size of settlement). It seems appropriate in future studies to focus on the attitude of individual groups, and thus advance the methodology of implementing AAI.

Suggested Citation

  • Kristýna Machová & Radka Procházková & Petra Konigová & Ivona Svobodová & Lucie Přibylová & Mariana Vadroňová, 2020. "Acceptability of AAI from the Perspective of Elderly Clients, Family Members, and Staff—A Pilot Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(16), pages 1-22, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:17:y:2020:i:16:p:5978-:d:400252
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/16/5978/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/16/5978/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kristýna Machová & Michaela Součková & Radka Procházková & Zdislava Vaníčková & Kamal Mezian, 2019. "Canine-Assisted Therapy Improves Well-Being in Nurses," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(19), pages 1-11, September.
    2. Balluerka, Nekane & Muela, Alexander & Amiano, Nora & Caldentey, Miquel A., 2014. "Influence of animal-assisted therapy (AAT) on the attachment representations of youth in residential care," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 103-109.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Aubrey H. Fine, 2020. "The Psycho-Social Impact of Human-Animal Interactions," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(11), pages 1-4, June.
    2. Victoria L. Brelsford & Kerstin Meints & Nancy R. Gee & Karen Pfeffer, 2017. "Animal-Assisted Interventions in the Classroom—A Systematic Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-33, June.
    3. Alexander Muela & Josune Azpiroz & Noelia Calzada & Goretti Soroa & Aitor Aritzeta, 2019. "Leaving A Mark , An Animal-Assisted Intervention Programme for Children Who Have Been Exposed to Gender-Based Violence: A Pilot Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(21), pages 1-12, October.
    4. Henderson, Linda & Grové, Christine & Lee, Felicia & Trainer, Louisa & Schena, Hannah & Prentice, Marcelle, 2020. "An evaluation of a dog-assisted reading program to support student wellbeing in primary school," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:17:y:2020:i:16:p:5978-:d:400252. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.