Embedded Files
of the research. Several papers in the issue discuss and highlight health benefits of pet ownership and/or HAI, as well as the mixed and null results associated with both. The content of these papers is discussed and synthesized. Third are papers that evaluate the strength and quality of the science in this research area. These papers, as well as this commentary, critically evaluate existing epidemiological and intervention research, and research on the effects of pet ownership or HAI on aging adults, and make specific recommendations for future research and the translation of that research into practical settings. The recommendations in these papers are also discussed below. Close examination of the papers in this thematic issue reveals the presence of two key cross-cutting themes: 1) the importance of companion animals in the lives of older adults, and 2) the limitations of previous research strategies and the need for more rigorous research. We organize the first portion of this concluding paper around these two themes, then present a discussion of the importance of ensuring the health and welfare of the animals involved, and finally address translating research findings into practice. Based on these observations, we make specific recommendations regarding best practices for inclusion of companion animals in the lives of older adults. Importance of Companion Animals A clear theme across this series of papers is the importance of companion animals in the lives of older adults. Nearly all the papers include impressive statistics regarding the ubiquitous nature of pet ownership in western society, specifically among older adults. Most of the papers mention the potential of companion animals to play a role in, or provide opportunities for, older adults to nurture, to enhance their diminishing social networks, and to maintain functioning (physical and cognitive) and quality of life into old age. Thorpe and Kelly-Moore describe a body of research that suggests that pets may improve a variety of health outcomes including chronic conditions. Krause-Parello, Gulik, and Basin (2019) summarize the overall health benefits of HAI, emphasizing the impact of them on mitigating the effects of loneliness and loss in an aging population. Additionally, they expand the discussion of HAI to include some of the positive effects of robotic animals on psychological outcomes for long-term care residents with cognitive impairment. In fact, all the papers in this issue cite research on the health benefits of animals to older adults, including measures of psychological (e.g., depression and anxiety) and physical health (cardiovascular disease and exercise). Wells (2019) presents a nicely balanced overview of this literature with an eye to the mixed results and a discussion of positive publication bias, while Enders-Slegers and Hediger (2019) review the benefits and explore the risks and challenges associated with pet ownership and interaction for older adults. The importance of companion animals seemingly cannot be undersold in the media. One only needs to open a newspaper, magazine, social media site, or watch a morning news show to find a human-interest story involving some aspect of HAI. Most of these tell a story of how animals are good for humans, and the public seems to readily accept this information as fact. Future Directions for Research on Human–Animal Interaction in an Aging Population 284 Anthrozoös Archaeological and genomic evidence indicate that humans and animals have been interacting for tens of thousands of years (Freedmanet al., 2014), but the evidence base supporting the claim that pets are good for people has been sparse, until recently. In recent years, there has been a steep increase in the number of HAI research studies (Herzog, 2014), due in large part to research funding coming from a key source. The role of the WALTHAM Centre for Pet Nutrition (a subsidiary of Mars Petcare) has been flagged as a key driving force behind much of this research, including the Public-Private Partnership with the National Institutes of Health (Thorpe & Kelly-Moore, 2019) and the recently established GSA/WALTHAM collaboration (Resnick & McCune, 2019). While academic organizations and private companies, such as WALTHAM, may have different philosophies of management and business, uniting their individual expertise into a mutual goal, such as providing opportunities to improve the methodology of HAI research, can prove beneficial to both groups. Additionally, these collaborations among academic and research organizations and private industry may become more important in a time when research funding is more limited. Limitations of Previous Research Strategies and Recommendations for Future Research Most of the papers in this themed issue report on the mixed findings in HAI research (Wells, 2019 provides many examples): in some studies pet owners, or people who interact with animals, experience an associated positive health outcome (e.g., reduction in blood pressure); in other studies pet ownership or interaction is not associated with a similar positive health outcome (no significant difference), or is associated with a negative health outcome (e.g., increase in blood pressure). Several of the papers attempt to provide potential explanations for these mixed results. In Krauss-Parello et al.’s review (2019), the
Google Sites
Report abuse