Data Entry: Please note that the research database will be replaced by UNIverse by the end of October 2023. Please enter your data into the system https://universe-intern.unibas.ch. Thanks

Login for users with Unibas email account...

Login for registered users without Unibas email account...

 
Lack of effects of the presence of a dog on pain perception in healthy participants - a randomized controlled trial
JournalArticle (Originalarbeit in einer wissenschaftlichen Zeitschrift)
 
ID 4635944
Author(s) Wagner, Cora; Gaab, Jens; Locher, Cosima; Hediger, Karin
Author(s) at UniBasel Hediger, Karin
Wagner, Cora
Gaab, Jens
Locher, Cosima
Year 2021
Title Lack of effects of the presence of a dog on pain perception in healthy participants - a randomized controlled trial
Journal Frontiers in Pain Research
Volume 2
Pages / Article-Number 714469
Abstract Animal-assisted interventions (AAIs) have been shown to be effective in the treatment of pain. Studies suggest that relationships with animals can have comparable qualities to relationships with humans and that this enables animals to provide social support. Further, the presence of an animal can strengthen the therapeutic alliance between patients and treatment providers. This suggests that the analgesic effects of AAI might be mediated by social support from an animal or by strengthening the alliance between the patient and the treatment provider. To test these assumptions, we examined the effects of the presence of a dog on experimentally induced pain in a pain assessment and a pain therapy context. Hundred thirty-two healthy participants were randomly assigned to the conditions "pain," "pain + dog," "pain + placebo," or "pain + placebo + dog." We collected baseline and posttreatment measurements of heat-pain tolerance and the heat-pain threshold and of the corresponding subjective ratings of heat-pain intensity and unpleasantness as well as of participants' perceptions of the study investigator. The primary outcome was heat-pain tolerance. The presence of the dog did not influence the primary outcome ("pain" vs. "pain + dog": difference = 0.04, CI = -0.66 to 0.74, p = 0.905; "pain + placebo" vs. "pain + placebo + dog": difference = 0.43, CI = -0.02 to 0.88, p = 0.059). Participants did also not perceive the study investigator to be more trustworthy in the presence of the dog ("pain" vs. "pain + dog": difference = 0.10, CI = -0.67 to 0.87, p = 0.796; "pain + placebo" vs. "pain + placebo + dog": difference = 0.11, CI = -0.43 to 0.64, p = 0.695). The results indicate that the mere presence of a dog does not contribute to pain reduction and that the analgesic effects of AAI that previous studies have found is not replicated in our study as AAI did not increase perceived social support and had no effect on the alliance between the participant and the treatment provider. We assume that the animal most likely needs to be an integrated and plausible part of the treatment rationale so that participants are able to form a treatment-response expectation toward AAI.
Publisher Frontiers Media
ISSN/ISBN 2673-561X
edoc-URL https://edoc.unibas.ch/86048/
Full Text on edoc Available
Digital Object Identifier DOI 10.3389/fpain.2021.714469
PubMed ID http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35295505
ISI-Number MEDLINE:35295505
Document type (ISI) Journal Article
 
   

MCSS v5.8 PRO. 0.351 sec, queries - 0.000 sec ©Universität Basel  |  Impressum   |    
25/04/2024