A Systematic Literature Review of Animal Assisted Interventions in Oncology (Part I): Methods and Results

Abstract

Animal-assisted interventions (AAI) use human-animal interactions to positive effect in various contexts including cancer care. This systematic literature review is the first part of a two-part paper series focusing on the research methods and quantitative results of AAI studies in oncology. We find methodological consistency in the use of canines as therapy animals, in the types of high-risk patients excluded from studies, and in the infection precautions taken with therapy animals throughout cancer wards. The investigated patient endpoints are not significantly affected by AAI, with the exceptions of improvements in oxygen consumption, quality of life, depression, mood, and satisfaction with therapy. The AAI field in oncology has progressed significantly since its inception and has great potential to positively impact future patient outcomes. To advance the field, AAI research in oncology should consistently improve the methodological design of studies, report data more completely, and focus on the therapy animal’s well-being.

A Systematic Literature Review of Animal-Assisted Interventions in Oncology (Part II): Theoretical Mechanisms and Frameworks

“…The studies’ methods and results were summarized in Part I of this 2-paper series, and the discussed theoretical implications discussed by these 32 articles are summarized in this Part II review. 14 A general survey of the AAI literature revealed other theories of interest not mentioned by articles included in this review of AAI in oncology, and these theories are also discussed in this article. A summary of the discussed theories’ postulates and the relevant cancer-related AAI articles are organized in Table 1 .…”

“…Part I of this systematic review series makes the case that AAI in oncology will greatly benefit from specific methodological improvements and further quantitative evaluation. 14 However, more attention to the underlying reasons for the observed effects will also positively affect this work and better illuminate the path to AAI’s wider acceptance. Several articles included in Part I cite or support existing theories as potential explanations for their results.…”

“…This limits the value researchers can extract from their hard work or from results that are sometimes positive but often neutral. 14 Overlooking theoretical considerations in the field of AAI perpetuates a lack of empirical evidence based on clear hypotheses and slows progress toward a general understanding of how best to employ this alternative treatment. Lexical inconsistencies further compound these problems when AAI is parsed into its subfields.…”

“…Nevertheless, the research results laid out in Part I of this review series are still valid and useful moving forward. 14 In the study by Haylock and Cantril, 25 the authors note that they first use the qualitative methods available to determine the beneficial effects of cancer-related AAI. It then follows that, from this qualitative assessment, a theoretical framework can be extrapolated and its hypotheses tested both qualitatively and quantitatively.…”

A Systematic Literature Review of Animal Assisted Interventions in Oncology (Part II):Theoretical Mechanisms and Frameworks

“…Proposed Mechanisms of AAI studies in Oncology Part I of this systematic review series makes the case that AAI in oncology will greatly benefit from specific methodological improvements and further quantitative evaluation. 14 However, more attention to the underlying reasons for the observed effects will also impact this work and better illuminate the path to AAI's 5 wider acceptance. Several papers included in Part I cite or support existing theories as potential explanations for their results.…”