Conectar
To synthesise stakeholders' experiences and perceptions of animal-assisted intervention (AAI) for people with dementia in community care settings.
Qualitative evidence synthesis.
We systematically searched Medline, CINAHL, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, PsycINFO and AgeLine for potentially eligible studies. Thematic synthesis was used to analyse the data from included studies. We assessed the methodological limitations of included studies using an adaptation of the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme checklist and used Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative Research (GRADE-CERQual) tool to assess confidence in review findings. This review is reported using the ENTREQ checklist.
We included 14 reports from 11 studies and developed three analytical themes incorporating a gardening analogy: planting–connecting with animals, growing–engaging in AAI and nurturing–making AAI work; and six subthemes: willingness to connect, building relationships, a rich experience, the benefits of AAI, individualised and holistic approach and training and support, with 15 key findings.
This review describes people's experiences and perceptions of AAI for people with dementia, and provides recommendations on the development and implementation of AAI, with moderate to high confidence. Nurses need to consider the factors that influence the implementation of AAI identified in this review, to facilitate engagement and long-term impacts while adopting AAI in community care settings.
This review may enhance healthcare professionals' understanding of AAI for people with dementia in community care settings. AAI is a complex intervention that can be delivered in varied manner. A multicomponent, flexible and individualised AAI is important. Additional training and education for staff are needed.
A man with dementia and his wife who share a love of dogs, advised at each step of the review, providing insights and perspectives and contributing as co-authors.
The aim of this study is to evaluate the relative merits of various heart failure models of care with regard to a variety of outcomes.
Systematic review.
Five databases including PubMed, Web of Science, Medline, Embase and Science Direct were searched from the inception date of databases to August 20, 2022.
This review used the Cochrane Collaboration's ‘Risk of Bias’ tool to assess quality. Only randomised controlled trails were included in this review that assessed all care models in the management of adults with heart failure. A categorical summary of the pattern of the papers was found, followed by extraction of outcome indicators.
Twenty articles (19 studies) were included. Seven examined nurse-led care, two examined multidisciplinary specialist care, nine (10 articles) examined patient self-management, and one examined nurse and physiotherapist co-led care. Regarding outcomes, this review examined how well the four models performed with regard to quality of life, health services use, HF self-care, and anxiety and depression for heart failure patients. The model of patient self-management showed more beneficial results than nurse-led care, multidisciplinary specialist care, and nurse and physiotherapist co-led care in reducing hospital days, improving symptoms, promoting self-care behaviours of HF patients, enhancing the quality of life, and strengthening self-care ability.
This systematic review synthesises the different care models and their relative effectiveness. Four different models of care were summarised. Of these models, the self-management model demonstrated better outcomes.
The self-management model is more effective in increasing self-management behaviours and self-management abilities, lowering the risk of hospitalisation and death, improving quality of life, and relieving anxiety and depression than other models.
There was no funding to remunerate a patient/member of the public for this review.
FreshRSS