ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Systematic reviews suggest that animal-assisted therapy (AAT) and pet-robot interventions (PRI) achieve a reduction in mental health variables such as depressive symptoms. However, these systematic reviews include both randomised and non-randomised studies, which prevents an adequate assessment of the effect of confounding variables. OBJECTIVE: This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the comparative effectiveness of AAT and PRI through randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in reducing depression in older adults. METHODS: Our study is a systematic review. We searched three databases of scientific articles: SCOPUS, Web of Science and PubMed. We included studies that their population was older adults, aged 65 years or older, with or without a clinical condition, clinical diagnosis based on mental examination/test or documentation from medical records, accredited by the facilities' staff. We included trials in which the comparator was a passive intervention or an active intervention. We used the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomised trials (RoB 2) to assess the risk of bias for each study. Our study was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42023393740). RESULTS: Twenty-three studies were included in this systematic review. However, only 19 trials were included in the meta-analysis. At the overall risk of bias level, 78.9% of the studies were at high risk of bias (n = 15). We found that AAT (g= -0.72; 95%CI -1.13 to -0.31; p = 0.001) has a moderate and statistically significant effect as an intervention to reduce depressive symptoms in older adults. However, the PRIs do not show a significant effect on reducing depressive symptoms in older adults. In addition, a sub-analysis based on dog-assisted therapy (g= -0.65; 95%CI -1.21 to -0.08; p = 0.025), a specific type of AAT, showed a modest effect on reducing depressive symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: Our study concluded that AAT and DAT had a moderate and statistically significant effect as interventions to reduce depressive symptoms in older adults. On the other hand, PRI did not show a significant effect in reducing depressive symptoms.
Subject(s)
Animal Assisted Therapy , Robotics , Humans , Animals , Dogs , Aged , Depression/therapy , Mental HealthABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Human actions have influenced climate changes around the globe, causing extreme weather phenomena and impacting communities worldwide. Climate change has caused, directly or indirectly, health effects such as injury and physical injuries, which impact morbidity and mortality. Similarly, there is evidence that exposure to climatic catastrophes has serious repercussions on psychological well-being, and rising temperatures and drought have detrimental effects on mental health.Despite the recent effort of researchers to develop specific instruments to assess the effects of climate change on mental health, the evidence on measures of its impact is still scarce, and the constructs are heterogeneous. The aim of this scoping review is to describe the instruments developed and validated to assess the impact of mental health related to climate change. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This review is registered at Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/zdmbk). This scoping review will follow the reporting elements chosen for systematic review and meta-analysis (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses). We proposed a PO question, as it places no restrictions on the participants (P), and the outcome (O) are measurement instruments on mental health related to climate change. A search will be conducted in different databases (PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, PsycINFO). We will use an open-source artificial intelligence screening tool (ASReview LAB) for the title and abstract review. The full-text review will be performed by three researchers. If there is a disagreement between two independent reviewers, a third reviewer will take the final decision. We will use the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments tool to assess the risk of bias for each included study. The review will be conducted starting in September 2023. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The planned scoping review does not require ethical approval since it will not involve an ethical risk to the participants. The results obtained from this study will be presented at conferences, congresses and scientific publications.
