Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41361505›Full record

ArticleEvidence-based dentistry2025

Are therapy animals the key to happier dental visits for children?

Sara Khan

Abstract readComment
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Evidence-based dentistry, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Sara KhanDental Core Trainee 2, Forth Valley Royal Hospital, Scotland, UK. sara.khan@nhs.scot.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

a commentary onMassouda J, Ghaltakhchyan N, Judd J, Bocklage C, Selden R, TumSuden O, Nanney E, Lee J, Ginnis J, Strauman T, Sawicki C, Hodges EA, Graves C, Divaris K, Jacox L. Evaluating effects of animal-assisted therapy on paediatric dental care patients: A pilot clinical trial. J Am Dent Assoc. 2025;156:447-457. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adaj.2025.03.006 DATA SOURCES: This commentary is based on the published pilot clinical trial by Massouda et al. (2025) evaluating animal-assisted therapy (AAT) in paediatric dental care. STUDY SELECTION: The study included children aged 7-14 undergoing invasive dental procedures, allocated to either an AAT or control group. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Outcome measures included validated self-reported anxiety and pain scales, physiological stress markers, and behavioural observations. Data was synthesised narratively given pilot design and small sample size.

designA prospective, non-randomised pilot trial carried out in a university paediatric dental setting assessed the practicality and initial effects of integrating animal-assisted therapy (AAT) into dental treatment. CASE SELECTION: Thirty-nine children aged 7-14 years scheduled for invasive dental procedures were enroled. Participants were allocated to an AAT group (n = 18) or a control group (n = 21). Inclusion criteria included the ability to assent and a willingness to interact with a certified therapy animal. Exclusion criteria included previous traumatic experiences with AAT, or significant developmental or behavioural disorders affecting cooperation. DATA ANALYSIS: Physiological and psychological measures were recorded at baseline, during treatment, and post-operatively. Primary outcomes included self-reported pain and anxiety scores using validated scales. Secondary outcomes included heart rate monitoring, salivary cortisol, α-amylase, and video-coded behavioural relaxation. Given the small sample size, statistical analyses employed nonparametric 35 tests with significance set at P < 0.05.

resultsChildren exposed to the therapy dog reported significantly lower postoperative pain scores (P = 0.001) and demonstrated smaller heart rate fluctuations during stressful procedural moments, suggesting lower physiological stress responses. Behavioural observations indicated longer periods of relaxed posture in the AAT group, though this did not reach statistical significance (P = 0.204). No significant differences were detected in salivary cortisol or α-amylase. AAT was reported as safe, well-tolerated, and feasible to implement.

conclusionsAAT shows potential for reducing distress in paediatric dental settings, but larger, randomised studies are required. Within the limits of a pilot design, animal-assisted therapy may reduce pain and physiological stress in paediatric dental patients. While encouraging, larger randomised trials are needed to confirm these effects, explore mechanisms, and assess practicality and cost in routine dental practice.

Indexed as

Animal Assisted TherapyDental AnxietyDental Care for ChildrenAdolescentAnimalsChildClinical Trials as TopicFemaleHumansMalePain MeasurementPilot ProjectsProspective Studies

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.