FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2887774525> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2887774525 endingPage "1220" @default.
• W2887774525 startingPage "1219" @default.
• W2887774525 abstract "The Journal of Alternative and Complementary MedicineVol. 24, No. 12 Research LettersOpen AccessCreative Commons licenseRelationship Between Patient Satisfaction and the Presence of Cats in Psychiatric WardsJulia C. Templin, Karin Hediger, Cora Wagner, and Undine E. LangJulia C. TemplinUniversity Psychiatric Clinic (UPK), University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland.*These authors contributed equally to this work and share the main authorship.Search for more papers by this author, Karin HedigerAddress correspondence to: Karin Hediger, PhD, Faculty of Psychology, Department of Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, University of Basel, Missionsstrasse 62a, 4055 Basel, Switzerland E-mail Address: karin.hediger@unibas.chFaculty of Psychology, Department of Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland.Swiss Tropical and Public Health Institute, Basel, Switzerland.Institute for Interdisciplinary Research on Human-Animal Relationship (IEMT), Basel, Switzerland.*These authors contributed equally to this work and share the main authorship.Search for more papers by this author, Cora WagnerFaculty of Psychology, Department of Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland.Search for more papers by this author, and Undine E. LangUniversity Psychiatric Clinic (UPK), University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland.Search for more papers by this authorPublished Online:14 Dec 2018https://doi.org/10.1089/acm.2018.0263AboutSectionsPDF/EPUB Permissions & CitationsPermissionsDownload CitationsTrack CitationsAdd to favorites Back To Publication ShareShare onFacebookTwitterLinked InRedditEmail IntroductionThe presence of animals in psychiatric clinics is thought to positively influence patients' satisfaction. Whereas psychiatric clinics often house animals on their premises, (i.e., 60% in Germany)1 there are no studies on the effects of free unstructured contact between patients and these animals. We investigated the relationship between the presence of cats in psychiatric wards and patient satisfaction of patients with depression, substance abuse, or depression in stationary psychiatric treatment.MethodsWe retrospectively analyzed available data from 170 in-patients treated in 2016 at the University Psychiatric Clinic (UPK) in Basel, Switzerland, with a diagnosis of psychosis, depression, or substance abuse in certain wards. The selected wards were organized in a comparable format, but either housed a cat or did not for each diagnosis group. Patients were allocated to the wards according to their diagnoses, but randomly with regard to the presence of ward cats. Patients in wards with cats could freely interact with the cats in the wards at any time. Patient satisfaction was assessed by self-report at the end of the treatment with the 27-item “Münsterlinger Patientenfragebogen” (MüPF27).2 Group differences between patients in wards with and without cats were analyzed in SPSS Statistics, using the Mann–Whitney U-test with a significance level of p ≤ 0.05.ResultsAmong the 170 patients in this study, the mean age was 51.3 years (SD = 15.5), 16 nationalities were represented, 46.50% were women, 44.1% had depression, 25.9% had substance abuse, and 30% had psychosis as a main diagnosis.Patients living in wards with a cat had significantly higher overall satisfaction than patients living in a ward without a cat (Table 1). Patients living in the presence of a cat were also more satisfied with their treatment outcome and recommended the clinic more. Moreover, they rated their recreational opportunities, the common rooms, and the collaboration with their primary nurse, social worker, other therapists, and psychologists significantly better, whereas there was no effect regarding the collaboration with the doctor. Patient groups in wards with and without cats did not differ regarding their satisfaction with their rooms, the food, and the cafeteria (Table 1).Table 1. Group DifferencesMüPF itemConditionNMSDzpCohen's dOverall satisfactionWith cat815.701.55−2.250.024a0.34 Without cat865.141.78 Treatment outcomeWith cat785.821.13−3.400.001a0.53 Without cat825.300.95 Recommendation of the clinicWith cat785.911.54−2.270.023a0.35 Without cat835.311.87 Common roomsWith cat805.441.79−1.990.047a0.31 Without cat845.061.62 Leisure opportunitiesWith cat775.301.84−2.640.008a0.42 Without cat814.531.93 Collaboration with primary nurseWith cat806.361.19−2.670.008a0.38 Without cat835.821.63 Collaboration with social workerWith cat506.021.48−2.110.035a0.39 Without cat585.192.11 Collaboration with further therapistsWith cat726.281.27−2.960.003a0.46 Without cat775.581.79 Collaboration with psychologistWith cat716.181.32−2.010.044a0.34 Without cat455.422.01 Collaboration with doctorWith cat795.971.49−1.550.1210.23 Without cat815.731.52 Patient's roomWith cat815.422.02−0.970.3310.12 Without cat865.841.58 FoodWith cat815.281.86−0.370.7080.06 Without cat865.131.96 CafeteriaWith cat715.621.61−1.220.2210.20 Without cat785.311.69 aStatistically significant.M, mean; MüPF27, 27-item Münsterlinger Patientenfragebogen; N, number of patients; SD, standard deviation; z, Z-score.DiscussionPsychiatric inpatients were significantly more satisfied with their stay at the clinic when their ward housed a cat. The observed small-to-medium effects have the potential to be clinically meaningful. Previously, the presence of animals had been shown to create a more comforting clinic environment,3 and to lead to a more positive perception of other people and rooms.4 The fact that there was no effect on satisfaction with the patient's own rooms, the food, or the cafeteria would also support this hypothesis since cats were not allowed in the patient's rooms, the dining rooms, or the cafeteria. The higher satisfaction with the collaboration with their primary nurse, their social worker, their other therapists, and their psychologists is in line with previous research reporting that people's trust and therapeutic alliance can be enhanced in the presence of a dog.5–7 However, we found no relationship between the presence of a cat and the patient's perceived collaboration with doctors. This highlights the importance of future work that examines the causal role of an animal's presence on such measures.Limitations of the study include that the retrospective cross-sectional design does not allow for causal conclusions, and that no additional measures of psychiatric illness severity, exposure to and attitudes toward the cat, and possible negative effects were available. Future studies are needed to investigate possible effects of the presence of animals in psychiatric clinics.AcknowledgmentThe authors would like to thank Lukas Imfeld for help in preparing the data.Author Disclosure StatementNo competing financial interests exist.References1. Prothmann A. Animal-assisted child psychotherapy. Theory and Practice of Animal-Assisted Psychotherapy for Children and Youth [In German]. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, 2008. Google Scholar2. Berner C. Aspects of Quality Assurance in Psychiatric Treatment: A Study of Patient Satisfaction [In German]. Unveröffentlichte Diplomarbeit, Universität Konstanz, 2001. Google Scholar3. Halm MA. The healing power of the human-animal connection. Am J Crit Care 2008;17:373–376. Medline, Google Scholar4. Wells M, Perrine R. Pets go to college: The influence of pets on students' perceptions of faculty and their offices. Anthrozoös 2001;14:161–168. Crossref, Google Scholar5. Gueguen N, Ciccotti S. Domestic dogs as facilitators in social interaction: An evaluation of helping and courtship behaviors. Anthrozoös 2008;21:339–349. Crossref, Google Scholar6. Schneider MS, Harley LP. How dogs influence the evaluation of psychotherapists. Anthrozoös 2006;19:128–142. Crossref, Google Scholar7. Wesley MC, Minatrea NB, Watson JC. Animal-assisted therapy in the treatment of substance dependence. Anthrozoös 2009;22:137–148. Crossref, Google ScholarFiguresReferencesRelatedDetailsCited byThe Importance of the Treatment Rationale for Pain in Animal-Assisted Interventions: A Randomized Controlled Trial in Healthy ParticipantsThe Journal of Pain, Vol. 57Zoonotic Risk of Encephalitozoon cuniculi in Animal-Assisted Interventions: Laboratory Strategies for the Diagnosis of Infections in Humans and Animals3 September 2021 | International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, Vol. 18, No. 17Could Animal-Assisted Therapy Help to Reduce Coercive Treatment in Psychiatry?14 November 2019 | Frontiers in Psychiatry, Vol. 10“There Is a Cat on Our Ward”: Inpatient and Staff Member Attitudes toward and Experiences with Cats in a Psychiatric Ward27 August 2019 | International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, Vol. 16, No. 17 Volume 24Issue 12Dec 2018 Information© Julia C. Templin et al. 2018; Published by Mary Ann Liebert, Inc.To cite this article:Julia C. Templin, Karin Hediger, Cora Wagner, and Undine E. Lang.Relationship Between Patient Satisfaction and the Presence of Cats in Psychiatric Wards.The Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine.Dec 2018.1219-1220.http://doi.org/10.1089/acm.2018.0263creative commons licensePublished in Volume: 24 Issue 12: December 14, 2018Online Ahead of Print:August 2, 2018Keywordspatient satisfactionpsychiatric therapyanimal-assisted interventionhuman-animal interactioncatsOpen accessThis Open Access article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.PDF download" @default.
• W2887774525 created "2018-08-22" @default.
• W2887774525 creator A5009127344 @default.
• W2887774525 creator A5027470528 @default.
• W2887774525 creator A5060890422 @default.
• W2887774525 creator A5083880750 @default.
• W2887774525 date "2018-12-01" @default.
• W2887774525 modified "2023-10-14" @default.
• W2887774525 title "Relationship Between Patient Satisfaction and the Presence of Cats in Psychiatric Wards" @default.
• W2887774525 cites W1971891273 @default.
• W2887774525 cites W1995699974 @default.
• W2887774525 cites W2002605039 @default.
• W2887774525 cites W2038507508 @default.
• W2887774525 cites W2136754019 @default.
• W2887774525 doi "https://doi.org/10.1089/acm.2018.0263" @default.
• W2887774525 hasPubMedCentralId "https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/6308284" @default.
• W2887774525 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30070897" @default.
• W2887774525 hasPublicationYear "2018" @default.
• W2887774525 type Work @default.
• W2887774525 sameAs 2887774525 @default.
• W2887774525 citedByCount "5" @default.
• W2887774525 countsByYear W28877745252019 @default.
• W2887774525 countsByYear W28877745252021 @default.
• W2887774525 countsByYear W28877745252023 @default.
• W2887774525 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2887774525 hasAuthorship W2887774525A5009127344 @default.
• W2887774525 hasAuthorship W2887774525A5027470528 @default.
• W2887774525 hasAuthorship W2887774525A5060890422 @default.
• W2887774525 hasAuthorship W2887774525A5083880750 @default.
• W2887774525 hasBestOaLocation W28877745251 @default.
• W2887774525 hasConcept C118552586 @default.
• W2887774525 hasConcept C126322002 @default.
• W2887774525 hasConcept C159110408 @default.
• W2887774525 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W2887774525 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W2887774525 hasConcept C2775944032 @default.
• W2887774525 hasConcept C2779473830 @default.
• W2887774525 hasConcept C2779904517 @default.
• W2887774525 hasConcept C512399662 @default.
• W2887774525 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W2887774525 hasConceptScore W2887774525C118552586 @default.
• W2887774525 hasConceptScore W2887774525C126322002 @default.
• W2887774525 hasConceptScore W2887774525C159110408 @default.
• W2887774525 hasConceptScore W2887774525C17744445 @default.
• W2887774525 hasConceptScore W2887774525C199539241 @default.
• W2887774525 hasConceptScore W2887774525C2775944032 @default.
• W2887774525 hasConceptScore W2887774525C2779473830 @default.
• W2887774525 hasConceptScore W2887774525C2779904517 @default.
• W2887774525 hasConceptScore W2887774525C512399662 @default.
• W2887774525 hasConceptScore W2887774525C71924100 @default.
• W2887774525 hasIssue "12" @default.
• W2887774525 hasLocation W28877745251 @default.
• W2887774525 hasLocation W28877745252 @default.
• W2887774525 hasLocation W28877745253 @default.
• W2887774525 hasLocation W28877745254 @default.
• W2887774525 hasOpenAccess W2887774525 @default.
• W2887774525 hasPrimaryLocation W28877745251 @default.
• W2887774525 hasRelatedWork W2011808192 @default.
• W2887774525 hasRelatedWork W2055142837 @default.
• W2887774525 hasRelatedWork W2102438122 @default.
• W2887774525 hasRelatedWork W2126856172 @default.
• W2887774525 hasRelatedWork W2135333052 @default.
• W2887774525 hasRelatedWork W2141197045 @default.
• W2887774525 hasRelatedWork W2161030804 @default.
• W2887774525 hasRelatedWork W2407643697 @default.
• W2887774525 hasRelatedWork W2886214291 @default.
• W2887774525 hasRelatedWork W4255302400 @default.
• W2887774525 hasVolume "24" @default.
• W2887774525 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2887774525 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2887774525 magId "2887774525" @default.
• W2887774525 workType "article" @default.