IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v17y2020i8p2968-d350188.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Patient Opinion of Visiting Therapy Dogs in a Hospital Emergency Department

Author

Listed:
  • Joanne Reddekopp

    (Faculty of Education, University of Regina, Regina, SK S4S 0A2, Canada)

  • Colleen Anne Dell

    (Department of Sociology & School of Public Health, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK S7N 5A5, Canada)

  • Betty Rohr

    (College of Medicine, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK S7N 5A5, Canada)

  • Barbara Fornssler

    (School of Public Health, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK S7N 5A5, Canada)

  • Maryellen Gibson

    (Department of Sociology, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK S7N 5A5, Canada)

  • Ben Carey

    (Department of Sociology, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK S7N 5A5, Canada)

  • James Stempien

    (Emergency Department, Royal University Hospital, Saskatoon, SK S7N 5A5, Canada)

Abstract

To date there have been no studies examining whether patients want emergency department (ED) therapy dog programs. This patient-oriented study examined the opinions of patients about whether they would want to be visited by a therapy dog in the Royal University Hospital ED. Cross-sectional survey data were collected over a six week period from a convenience sample of 100 adult patients who had not been visited by a therapy dog in the ED. Most (80%) indicated they would want a visit by a therapy dog as an ED patient. A higher proportion of individuals who currently have a pet dog (95%) or identify as having lots of experience with dogs (71%) were more likely to indicate this want compared to those without a dog (90%) or little to no experience with dogs (62%). The majority were also of the opinion that patients may want to visit a therapy dog in the ED to reduce anxiety (92%) and frustration (87%) as well as to increase comfort (90%) and satisfaction (90%) and to a lesser extent to reduce pain (59%). There was no significant difference in findings by gender or age, other than a higher proportion of older adults and females identifying cultural background and tradition as a possible reason that patients may not want to be visited by a therapy dog. The findings of this study can help guide considerations for future ED therapy dog programs.

Suggested Citation

  • Joanne Reddekopp & Colleen Anne Dell & Betty Rohr & Barbara Fornssler & Maryellen Gibson & Ben Carey & James Stempien, 2020. "Patient Opinion of Visiting Therapy Dogs in a Hospital Emergency Department," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(8), pages 1-10, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:17:y:2020:i:8:p:2968-:d:350188
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/8/2968/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/8/2968/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jessica Saunders & Layla Parast & Susan H Babey & Jeremy V Miles, 2017. "Exploring the differences between pet and non-pet owners: Implications for human-animal interaction research and policy," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(6), pages 1-15, June.
    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. Emily Shoesmith & Lion Shahab & Dimitra Kale & Daniel S. Mills & Catherine Reeve & Paul Toner & Luciana Santos de Assis & Elena Ratschen, 2021. "The Influence of Human–Animal Interactions on Mental and Physical Health during the First COVID-19 Lockdown Phase in the U.K.: A Qualitative Exploration," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(3), pages 1-15, January.
    2. Morgan M. Wright & Pamela Schreiner & B. R. Simon Rosser & Elizabeth J. Polter & Darryl Mitteldorf & William West & Michael W. Ross, 2019. "The Influence of Companion Animals on Quality of Life of Gay and Bisexual Men Diagnosed with Prostate Cancer," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(22), pages 1-8, November.
    3. Matsumura, Kenta & Hamazaki, Kei & Tsuchida, Akiko & Inadera, Hidekuni, 2022. "Pet ownership during pregnancy and mothers' mental health conditions up to 1 year postpartum: A nationwide birth cohort—the Japan Environment and Children's Study," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 309(C).
    4. Paul W.C. Wong & Rose W.M. Yu & Joe T.K. Ngai, 2019. "Companion Animal Ownership and Human Well-Being in a Metropolis—The Case of Hong Kong," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(10), pages 1-14, May.
    5. Paul A.M. Overgaauw & Claudia M. Vinke & Marjan A.E. van Hagen & Len J.A. Lipman, 2020. "A One Health Perspective on the Human–Companion Animal Relationship with Emphasis on Zoonotic Aspects," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(11), pages 1-29, May.
    6. Tzu-Lin Yeh & Wei-Te Lei & Shu-Jung Liu & Kuo-Liong Chien, 2019. "A modest protective association between pet ownership and cardiovascular diseases: A systematic review and meta-analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(5), pages 1-15, May.
    7. Kyung-Duk Min & Woo-Hyun Kim & Seongbeom Cho & Sung-il Cho, 2019. "Owners’ Attitudes toward Their Companion Dogs Are Associated with the Owners’ Depression Symptoms—An Exploratory Study in South Korea," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(19), pages 1-12, September.

    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:8:p:2968-:d:350188. 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.