Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37904161›Full record

ArticleBMC geriatrics2023

The roles of pets in long-term care at home: a qualitative study.

Peter W A Reniers, R Leontjevas, I J N Declercq, M-J Enders-Slegers, D L Gerritsen, K Hediger

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC geriatrics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. The PET@home Toolkit: A Process Evaluation Study.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2024
    Article
  2. The development of the PET@home toolkit: An experience-based co-design method study.International journal of nursing studies advances · 2024
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Peter W A ReniersFaculty of Psychology, Open University of the Netherlands, Heerlen, The Netherlands. peter.reniers@ou.nl.
R LeontjevasFaculty of Psychology, Open University of the Netherlands, Heerlen, The Netherlands.
I J N DeclercqFaculty of Psychology, Open University of the Netherlands, Heerlen, The Netherlands.
M-J Enders-SlegersFaculty of Psychology, Open University of the Netherlands, Heerlen, The Netherlands.
D L GerritsenDepartment of Primary and Community Care, Radboud University Medical Centre, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Radboudumc Alzheimer Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
K HedigerFaculty of Psychology, Open University of the Netherlands, Heerlen, The Netherlands.
Open University of the Netherlands · NLRadboud University Nijmegen · NLRadboud University Medical Center · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPets play very important roles for older adults. However, whether the same roles apply to pets of care clients receiving long-term care at home (LTCH) is unclear. This study aimed primarily to explore whether the roles of pets for LTCH-clients who own pets are comparable to the roles of pets for older adults in the general population. Furthermore, we explored potential pet-related problems that might be encountered in LTCH in practice, and the potential influences of pet ownership on caregiving relationships. These insights may help improve long-term care services in LTCH.

methodsThis project started with a study using the Consensual Qualitative Research method (CQR). We conducted semi-structured interviews based on themes from our previous review (e.g., Relational Aspects, Emotional Aspects, and Social Aspects). Secondly, an online survey was used to confirm the findings from the CQR study by calculating Content Validity Index scores (in SPSS 26) regarding contents, relevance, and clarity. The survey also included open-ended questions on potential pet-related problems and their impact on caregiving relationships for LTCH-clients, family caregivers, and professional caregivers.

resultsThe CQR study found that the roles pets play for LTCH-clients (N = 8), family caregivers (N = 10), and professional caregivers (N = 10) were similar to the roles pets play for older adults in the general population. The online survey confirmed most of the CQR findings. In the survey, LTCH-clients (N = 4), family caregivers (N = 8), professional caregivers (N = 8), and researchers in human-animal studies and in geriatric care (N = 5) reported various potential problems that could arise from pet ownership by LTCH-clients, such as clients with deteriorating health being forced to part with their pets. Participants also reported potential positive and negative effects of pet ownership on caregiving relationships, such as pets being a nice topic of conversation, or, conversely, a source of disagreement in the LTCH context.

conclusionsThe roles pets play for LTCH-clients seem comparable to the roles pets play for older adults in the general population. In addition, LTCH-clients might experience pet-related problems specific to the LTCH context. Pets may influence caregiving relationships, either positively or negatively. Therefore, instruments and guidelines are needed to account for pets in LTCH.

Indexed as

CaregiversLong-Term CareAgedAnimalsCommunicationHumansPetsQualitative ResearchSurveys and QuestionnairesCommunity careHome careLong-term careOlder adultsPets

Identifiers

PMID37904161
PMCPMC10617039
OpenAlexW4388034489

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.