Effects of animal-assisted interventions for people with dementia: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Batubara, Sakti Oktaria; Tonapa, Santo Imanuel; Saragih, Ita Daryanti; Mulyadi, Mulyadi; Lee, Bih‐O

doi:10.1016/j.gerinurse.2021.10.016

Cited by 9 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…To date, several meta-analyses (Leng et al, 2019 , 2020 ; Zafra-Tanaka et al, 2019 ; Park et al, 2020 ; Lu et al, 2021 ; Ong et al, 2021 ; Batubara et al, 2022 ; Chen et al, 2022 ) have evaluated the efficacy of AAT and PRT on BPSD in dementia. Of these meta-analyses, three (Zafra-Tanaka et al, 2019 ; Batubara et al, 2022 ; Chen et al, 2022 ) focused on the role of AAT, three (Leng et al, 2019 ; Lu et al, 2021 ; Ong et al, 2021 ) focused on the role of PRT, and one (Park et al, 2020 ) simultaneously focused on roles of AAT and PRT. Three meta-analyses (Zafra-Tanaka et al, 2019 ; Batubara et al, 2022 ; Chen et al, 2022 ) focusing on AAT revealed that AAT had no effect on cognitive function, agitation and QoL but had a positive effect on depression in patients with dementia.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Among numerous non-pharmacological treatments available, animal-assisted therapy (AAT) and pet-robotic therapy (PRT) have been extensively used in the management of dementia due to their significant impact on the lives of people of all ages and socioeconomic backgrounds (Hughes et al, 2020 ; Yu et al, 2022 ). Currently, several meta-analyses have evaluated the efficacy of AAT (Zafra-Tanaka et al, 2019 ; Batubara et al, 2022 ; Chen et al, 2022 ) and PRT (Leng et al, 2019 ; Lu et al, 2021 ; Ong et al, 2021 ) on BPSD in dementia, but reported conflicting results. Additionally, the difference between AAT and PRT in managing BPSD remains controversial, as only one study involving seven studies used a network meta-analysis to assess the comparative efficacy of these two therapies in reducing agitation (Leng et al, 2020 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Network meta-analysis of comparative efficacy of animal-assisted therapy vs. pet-robot therapy in the management of dementia

Lin

Lai

et al. 2023

Front. Aging Neurosci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveThis network meta-analysis aimed to compare and rank the efficacy of animal-assisted therapy (AAT) and pet-robotic therapy (PRT) in the management of dementia.MethodsRelevant studies were identified by searching PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, SCOPUS, and Web of Science (WoS) until October 13, 2022. Traditional meta-analysis was first conducted based on the random-effects model, then random network meta-analysis was conducted to determine the relative efficacy and rank probability of AAT and PRT.ResultsNineteen randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included in this network meta-analysis. Network meta-analysis revealed that PRT marginally benefited agitation alleviation compared with control (standard mean difference [SMD]: −0.37, 95% confidence interval [95%CI]: −0.72 to −0.01) although both AAT and PRT did not improve cognitive function, reduce depression, and improve Quality of Life (QoL). The SUCRA probabilities indicated that PRT ranked better than AAT in agitation, cognitive function, and QoL, although there were no differences between the two therapies.ConclusionThe present network meta-analysis reveals that PRT may help alleviate agitated behaviors in people with dementia. However, future studies are warranted to establish evidence of the effectiveness of PRT and further evaluate the differences between different robot types in managing dementia.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Network meta-analysis of comparative efficacy of animal-assisted therapy vs. pet-robot therapy in the management of dementia

Lin

Lai

et al. 2023

Front. Aging Neurosci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Studies on the effectiveness of animal-assisted and robotic animal interventions are characterised by varying species of animals and heterogeneous study populations including different types and severities of dementia, various intervention formats, and a range of outcomes (Batubara et al, 2022; Leng et al, 2019; Pu et al, 2019). Due to the impact of intervention characteristics on study outcomes, systematic reviews should, therefore, consider these characteristics.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This is necessary to comprehensively evaluate the interventions and their potential effects. Systematic reviews investigating animal-assisted and robotic animal interventions within dementia care have often evaluated their effectiveness but lack detailed information about intervention implementation (Aarskog et al, 2019; Babka et al, 2021; Batubara et al, 2022; Bernabei et al, 2013; Klimova et al, 2019; Leng et al, 2019; Yakimicki et al, 2018). While these reviews conclude that animal-assisted and robotic animal interventions are promising for improving psychosocial outcomes for people with dementia, characteristics such as the intervention type, content and format, the facilitators’ experience and/or background, and the intervention frequency/duration are often overlooked, and should be reported to fill this gap in the literature.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These reviews do highlight the need for future research to address these limitations in the existing literature. Moreover, existing systematic reviews of animal-assisted or robotic animal interventions delivered to people with dementia often do not include meta-analyses (Aarskog et al, 2019; Babka et al, 2021; Klimova et al, 2019; Yakimicki et al, 2018), are insufficiently focused on the dementia population (Abbott et al, 2019; Bernabei et al, 2013), and/or are very narrowly focused on particular animal species (Batubara et al, 2022; Klimova et al, 2019) or robotic animals only (Abbott et al, 2019). These reviews do not compare evidence across animal-assisted and robotic animal interventions, and many lack a robust discussion of the interventions and their characteristics to permit valid comparison and examination of potentially effective components.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Animal-assisted and robotic animal-assisted interventions within dementia care: A systematic review

2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Animal-assisted interventions and robotic animal interventions are becoming increasingly popular to support the care of people with dementia and may have the potential to improve a range of psychosocial outcomes. This review aims to identify, describe, and compare animal-assisted and robotic animal interventions delivered to people with dementia, their characteristics, effectiveness, and the proposed mechanisms underlying any potential impact. Methods A systematic literature search was conducted in MEDLINE, AMED, EMBASE, PsycINFO, OVID Nursing, PubMed, CINAHL and Web of Science. Random-effects meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were conducted to summarise studies that evaluated common outcomes (agitation, depression, quality of life). A narrative approach was used to synthesise other findings. Results Fifty-one studies were included: 18 RCTs; 12 non-randomised trials, 13 cohort studies, 7 qualitative studies and one mixed-methods study. Meta-analyses were conducted for a small number of RCTs, with effectiveness of animal-assisted interventions demonstrated for agitation. Narrative findings suggested animal-assisted and robotic animal interventions may be promising in improving depression, agitation, and quality of life. Three potential mechanisms of action were identified for both animal-assisted and robotic animal interventions, namely enhancing social connections, providing engaging and meaningful activities, and the affect-generating aspect of the human-animal bond. A fourth mechanism was identified for animal-assisted interventions only: promoting physical activity. Robotic animals appear to have a place in complex human-animal relationships, but a greater understanding of robotic animal interventions is required to harness the benefits that may be derived from their use. Conclusion Delivering these interventions appear promising in improving psychosocial outcomes for people with dementia. As most included studies had methodological limitations, these findings are preliminary, but contribute to the body of evidence providing an understanding in terms of intervention characteristics and mechanisms of action. When developing intervention guidance, attention should be given to potential mechanisms and fundamental characteristics such as session content, delivery format and facilitator role.

show abstract

Suicide (Self-Directed Violence) and the Use of Animal-Assisted Interventions

Muela

Machimbarrena

Sansinenea

et al. 2022

Handbook of Anger, Aggression, and Violence

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Effects of animal-assisted interventions for people with dementia: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Cited by 9 publications

References 35 publications

Network meta-analysis of comparative efficacy of animal-assisted therapy vs. pet-robot therapy in the management of dementia

Network meta-analysis of comparative efficacy of animal-assisted therapy vs. pet-robot therapy in the management of dementia

Animal-assisted and robotic animal-assisted interventions within dementia care: A systematic review

Suicide (Self-Directed Violence) and the Use of Animal-Assisted Interventions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About