ArticlePeople and animals (West Lafayette, IN)2022
Perceptions and Practices of Key Worker Stakeholder Groups in Hospital Animal-Assisted Intervention Programs on Occupational Benefits and Perceived Risks.
Article in People and animals (West Lafayette, IN), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- A conceptual framework to address administrative and infection control barriers for animal-assisted intervention programs in healthcare facilities: Perspectives from a qualitative study.Infection control and hospital epidemiology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Animal-assisted intervention (AAI) programs, used widely for patient benefit, have increasingly been used for healthcare workers (HCW) to reduce occupational stress. However, there are barriers to these programs which limit their utilization, for both patients and HCW, specifically infectious disease concerns. The aim of the research project is to identify barriers and facilitators to AAI program use for healthcare worker benefit, and determine knowledge, beliefs, and practices regarding infectious disease risk and control policies, in order to understand the contextual parameters of program implementation. Methods: We collected perceptions of key stakeholders involved with hospital AAI programs (HCW and AAI workers) through semi-structured in-depth interviews. We used framework analysis to guide thematic coding, completed independently by three researchers. Results: We interviewed 37 participants in this study. We divided our themes into two topic areas: program use for HCW and perceived infectious disease risk. Use for healthcare workers included perspectives on the benefits for HCW and program barriers and facilitators (specifically collaboration and leadership). Perceived risk included opinions on infection concerns with AAI, thoughts on control measures to reduce this risk, and responsibility for safety during these programs. Conclusions: While significant benefits were reported for HCW, they were limited by administrative barriers and hazard concerns. Facilitators to surmount these barriers are best implemented with collaboration across the hospital and appropriate leadership roles to direct safe program implementation. By addressing these barriers through targeted facilitators in the form of evidence-backed guidelines, AAI programs can be used to benefit both patients and HCW.
Indexed as
Identifiers
35765567PMC9235541W3116055598What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.