Abstract
Background Animal-assisted intervention (AAI) programs, used widely for patient benefit, have increasingly been used for healthcare workers (HCW) to reduce occupational stress. However, there are barriers to these programs which limit their utilization, for both patients and HCW, specifically infectious disease concerns. The aim of the research project is to identify barriers and facilitators to AAI program use for healthcare worker benefit, and determine knowledge, beliefs, and practices regarding infectious disease risk and control policies, in order to understand the contextual parameters of program implementation.
Methods We collected perceptions of key stakeholders involved with hospital AAI programs (HCW and AAI workers) through semi-structured in-depth interviews. We used framework analysis to guide thematic coding, completed independently by three researchers.
Results We interviewed 37 participants. We divided our themes into two topic areas: program use for HCW and perceived infectious disease risk. Use for healthcare workers included perspectives on the benefits for HCW and program barriers and facilitators (specifically collaboration and leadership). Perceived risk included opinions on infection concerns with AAI, thoughts on control measures to reduce this risk, and responsibility for safety during these programs.
Conclusions While significant benefits were reported for HCW, they were limited by administrative barriers and hazard concerns. Facilitators to surmount these barriers are best implemented with collaboration across the hospital and appropriate leadership roles to direct safe program implementation. By addressing these barriers through targeted facilitators in the form of evidence-backed guidelines, AAI programs can be used to benefit both patients and HCW.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This work has been supported by funding from U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health to the Johns Hopkins Education and Research Center for Occupational Safety and Health Pilot Project Research Training Award. Indirect funding for this research was supported by the National Institutes of Health, Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development [5R01HD097692-02]. Funding for KRD is provided by a grant from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health to the Johns Hopkins Education and Research Center for Occupational Safety and Health [T42 OH0008428], and the AKC Canine Health Foundation Clinician-Scientist Fellowship 02525-E. Investigators additionally were supported by NIH/Office of the Director (K01OD019918 to M.F.D.).
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
The Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health Institutional Review Board reviewed all study materials and approved this project.
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
protected qualitative data
