The New Status Quo: Enhancing Access to Human–Animal Interactions to Alleviate Social Isolation & Loneliness in the Time of COVID-19

Access to human–animal interactions (HAI) have been influenced by the COVID-19 pandemic. Service animals that were trained and accustomed to daily access to public places had to adjust to staying at home. Therapy animals and their handlers who previously visited with many of the populations most vulnerable to the virus have had to halt their programming. Professionals who utilize animal-assisted interventions (AAI) have had to develop new strategies for providing goal-oriented care. Even the landscape for companion animals has been significantly altered, leading to behavioral changes and new practices for pet owners and veterinarians. While animals and their human companions face new challenges, our recognition of the power of the human–animal bond (HAB) has grown, as it provides a vital need for connection during this time of isolation. In this paper, we will not only focus on describing the new status quo related to various kinds of animals and the public’s access to HAI, but will also offer suggestions for sharing the human–animal bond during a time in which physical connections are limited. Organizational insights from the service and therapy animal fields will be explored, and findings related to the auspiciousness of new initiatives, such as animal-related engagement (ARE), will be presented. Recommendations for people who share their lives with any of these kinds of animals will be made to ensure both human and animal welfare. Finally, future research and best practices will be suggested, so we can empirically understand and develop these revised offerings to ultimately bring HAI to a wider audience than ever before.

A World of Touch in a No-Touch Pandemic

Touch is essential when living with dementia for communication and remaining connected with the world, and it is also unavoidable when performing body care. Thus, it is impossible to think of living and caring for people with dementia in the absence of touch. Drawing from my ethnographic fieldwork conducted with therapy animals and people living with dementia in Scottish care facilities, in this article I argue that the public health measures taken against the spread of COVID-19 infections need to be reimagined by taking into consideration the role of touch. Furthermore, I try to draw attention to the lessons that we should learn about touch and the role of intimate bodily entanglements in dementia care from the high COVID-19 death tolls amongst British care home residents.

Microbial Sharing between Pediatric Patients and Therapy Animals during Hospital Animal-Assisted Intervention Programs

BackgroundMicrobial sharing between humans and animals has been demonstrated in a variety of settings. However, the extent of microbial sharing that occurs within the healthcare setting during animal-assisted intervention programs, a validated and valuable part of holistic patient wellness, is unknown. Understanding microbial transmission between patients and therapy animals can provide important insights into potential health benefits for patients, in addition to addressing concerns regarding potential pathogen transmission that limits program utilization. This study evaluated the potential for microbial sharing between pediatric patients and therapy dogs, and tested whether patient-dog contact level and a dog decolonization protocol modified this sharing.Methods and ResultsPatients, therapy animals, and the hospital environment were sampled before and after every group therapy session and samples underwent 16S rRNA sequencing to characterize microbial communities. Both patients and animals experienced changes in the relative abundance and overall diversity of their nasal microbiome, suggesting that exchange of microorganisms had occurred. Increased contact was associated with greater sharing between patients and therapy animals, as well as between patients. A topical chlorhexidine-based dog decolonization intervention was associated with decreased microbial sharing between therapy dogs and patients, particularly from the removal of rarer microbiota from the dog, but did not significantly affect sharing between patients.ConclusionThese data suggest that the therapy animal is both a potential source of and a vehicle for the transfer of microorganisms to patients but not necessarily the only source. The relative contribution of other potential sources (e.g., other patients, the hospital environment) should be further explored to determine their relative importance.

Ethics of Animal-Assisted Psychotherapy

Animal-assisted psychotherapy is increasingly popular and attracts considerable attention in science. Integrating animals into therapy aims at generating added value in health and well-being of humans as well as non-human animals. This approach is reflected in the One Health perspective. However, animal-assisted psychotherapy raises issues regarding the ethical standards in the therapy setting in general and ethical reflections about our responsibilities towards therapy animals in particular. According to a dominant account in animal ethics, our moral obligations are based on welfare concerns. But this approach can be supplemented by a contextual view that highlights the moral relevance of particular relationships in animal-assisted psychotherapy. Therapy animals place moral duties on the therapist that go beyond welfare considerations and can be based on relation-based reasoning in the therapeutic context.

817. Exploring Microbial Community Alterations during Hospital Animal-Assisted Intervention Programs

Background Animal-assisted interventions, or pet therapy, is increasingly used by healthcare facilities given the numerous benefits in various settings. However, therapy animals may serve as vectors of hospital-associated pathogens. Yet, both pathogenic and protective commensal microbes could be transferred between patients and therapy animals. This pilot study aims to quantify the microbial sharing between patients and therapy dogs, and determine if contact level and a decolonization intervention modifies this sharing. Methods We collected pediatric patient and therapy dog nasal samples before and after each group therapy visit. Contact level was based on interaction time and key behaviors. Therapy dog handlers performed normal practices for two control visits, then switched to a decolonization protocol (chlorhexidine shampoo prior to the visit, and chlorhexidine wipes during the visit) for two intervention visits. Sample DNA was sequenced for the 16S rRNA gene V1-3 region to assess microbiota composition and diversity. Results We collected 105 samples (79 from patients and 26 from dogs) over 13 study visits. There was an increase in within-sample (alpha) diversity levels after the visits in patients and dogs in control visits, and an overall decrease in intervention visits. Patients were more similar in their microbial composition (beta diversity) to other patients and to dogs after visits. Patients with higher dog contact were more similar to other patients in control and intervention visits using the unweighted metric, but only in control visits for the weighted metric. Conclusion These findings indicate that microbes are shared between patients and therapy dogs during animal-assisted interventions, shown by the increase in alpha diversity levels and microbial community shifts. High contact increased interactions in all pathways, resulting in greater microbial sharing. With the dog pathway blocked, the intervention reduced spread of unique dog taxa, but sharing still occurred in high contact patients. This shows that, while there is potential for the dog to be a vector, other potential pathways are important for microbial sharing during group therapy visits. Infection control efforts should reflect all possible pathways of microbial transmission. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures

Normative Tensions in the Popular Representation of Children with Disabilities and Animal-Assisted Therapy

This article contributes to the critical disability and human-nonhuman animal studies literatures through a discourse analysis of newspaper stories about animal-assisted therapy (AAT) and children with disabilities published in the United States and Canada. The articles in our corpus form a recognizable genre that we call AAT human-nonhuman animal interest stories. We pose two central questions of the genre: (1) how is the therapeutic value of AAT constituted? and (2) what are the effects, in discourse, of associating nonhuman animals and children with disabilities in narratives of therapeutic benefit? We emphasize the normative tensions associated with the representation of children with disabilities and nonhuman animals in news stories about AAT. On one hand, news articles objectify children with disabilities, inscribe their need to be made “normal” and silence their own experiences of AAT. On the other hand, they are written in ways that extend and strengthen the disabled body and self through connections with nonhuman therapy animals. They disrupt sharp species distinctions and present narratives of how interspecies relationships formed through participation in AAT co-constitute the agency of nonhuman therapy animals and children with disabilities. We argue that the normative tensions in the popular representation of AAT present important possibilities for intervening in public discourse about disability and nonhuman animals.

Risks Associated with Animal-Assisted Intervention Programs: A Literature Review

The benefits of animal-assisted interventions (AAI), to utilize companion animals as an adjunctive treatment modality, is well-established and a burgeoning research field. However, few studies have evaluated the potential hazards of these programs, such as the potential for therapy animals to transfer hospital-associated pathogens between individuals and the hospital environment. Here we review the current literature on the possible risks of hospital-based AAI programs, including zoonotic pathogen transmission. We identified twenty-nine articles encompassing reviews of infection control guidelines and epidemiological studies on zoonotic pathogen prevalence in AAI. We observed substantial heterogeneity in infection control practices among hospital AAI programs. Few data confirmed pathogen transmission between therapy animals and patients. Given AAI’s known benefits, we recommend that future research utilize a One Health framework to evaluate microbial dynamics among therapy animals, patients, and hospital environments. This framework may best promote safe practices to ensure the sustainability of these valuable AAI programs.HighlightsDespite the many benefits of animal-assisted interventions (AAI) for patients, there is a risk of therapy animals becoming vectors of hospital pathogens.There is an absence of literature on transmission of hospital pathogens between patients and therapy animals during an AAI session.More research is needed to improve the safety and utilization of this important adjunctive therapy.

Organization of animal-assisted therapy: From voluntary activities to work of professionals

Humankind has always known about the usefulness in integration of animals for the achievement of such routine goals as hunting, household and territory protection, transportation, scouting foreign territories and materials, and overcoming physical limitations. Animals are also highly valued as agents of socialisation resulting in the integration of various species in the work of various professions. Social work also increasingly makes use of professional activities involving animals while working with clients. Terms such as therapy animals, animal-assisted therapy, animal-assisted activities, and animal-assisted education are becoming more relevant in the daily work of social workers, physiotherapists, occupational therapists, psychotherapists and other professionals. Animals are more and more often found in hospitals, schools, care facilities, prisons and other settings. Animal-assisted therapy is a general term including various activities, causing difficulty to understand and differentiate between the types of therapy performed with various animal species, which creates the need to study the experience in ensuring work with therapy animals in various settings. The results obtained in this study reflect the experiences working with therapy animals of various professionals including the goal of integrating therapy animals in professional activity, the goal of the activity and the steps thereof, target groups and the expected results.

A Systematic Literature Review of Animal-Assisted Interventions in Oncology (Part I): Methods and Results

Animal-assisted interventions (AAIs) use human-animal interactions to positive effect in various contexts including cancer care. As the first installment of a 2-part series, this systematic literature review focuses on the research methods and quantitative results of AAI studies in oncology. We find methodological consistency in the use of canines as therapy animals, in the types of high-risk patients excluded from studies, and in the infection precautions taken with therapy animals throughout cancer wards. The investigated patient endpoints are not significantly affected by AAI, with the exceptions of improvements in oxygen consumption, quality of life, depression, mood, and satisfaction with therapy. The AAI field in oncology has progressed significantly since its inception and has great potential to positively affect future patient outcomes. To advance the field, future research should consistently improve the methodological design of studies, report data more completely, and focus more on the therapy animal’s well-being.