» Articles » PMID: 39649675

Animal-assisted Intervention Services Across UK Intensive Care Units: A National Service Evaluation

Overview
Publisher Sage Publications
Specialty Critical Care
Date 2024 Dec 9
PMID 39649675
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Animal-assisted interventions (AAI) can provide psychological support to critical care patients during their intensive care unit (ICU) admission. However, there are currently no data on AAI services across UK ICUs. The current study therefore aims to (i) determine how many ICUs in the UK offer services, (ii) characterise available services and (iii) explore and review local documentation for service oversight.

Methods: A service evaluation comprising two parts; a national survey of UK ICU's, analysed using descriptive statistics, and review of local service oversight documents, analysed using a framework approach.

Results: Responses from 74 sites (/242, 30.6%) were included in survey analysis. AAI services were present at 32 sites (/74, 43.2%), of which 30 offered animal-assisted activity services alone and 2 offered both animal-assisted activity and animal-assisted therapy services. Animal-assisted activity services were typically delivered on a weekly basis, lasting 30-60 min and with dogs the sole animal employed. Concern over infection prevention and control was the most common barrier to service provision, as well as a lack of supporting evidence. Sixteen sites provided 27 oversight documents for analysis, that highlighted unique and shared responsibilities between critical care staff and animal therapy handlers, including aspects of administration, welfare and infection control.

Conclusion: From a small sample, AAI services were available in less than half of ICUs. Empirical value of interventions is countered by current lack of definitive evidence of effectiveness, which should be addressed before wider implementation of AAI services and the associated resource requirements, is undertaken.

References
1.
Heale R, Forbes D . Understanding triangulation in research. Evid Based Nurs. 2013; 16(4):98. DOI: 10.1136/eb-2013-101494. View

2.
Santos W, Graham I, Lalonde M, Demery Varin M, Squires J . The effectiveness of champions in implementing innovations in health care: a systematic review. Implement Sci Commun. 2022; 3(1):80. PMC: 9308185. DOI: 10.1186/s43058-022-00315-0. View

3.
Branson S, Boss L, Hamlin S, Padhye N . Animal-Assisted Activity in Critically Ill Older Adults: A Randomized Pilot and Feasibility Trial. Biol Res Nurs. 2020; 22(3):412-417. DOI: 10.1177/1099800420920719. View

4.
Pruskowski K, Gurney J, Cancio L . Impact of the implementation of a therapy dog program on burn center patients and staff. Burns. 2019; 46(2):293-297. DOI: 10.1016/j.burns.2019.11.024. View

5.
Basile M, Rubin E, Wilson M, Polo J, Jacome S, Brown S . Humanizing the ICU Patient: A Qualitative Exploration of Behaviors Experienced by Patients, Caregivers, and ICU Staff. Crit Care Explor. 2021; 3(6):e0463. PMC: 8208441. DOI: 10.1097/CCE.0000000000000463. View