O objetivo deste estudo foi realizar uma analises econômica dos fármacos antidepressivos aplicáveis no tratamento da distimia, objetivando o uso racional de fármacos. O debate a cerca da competição alegada aos novos fármacos antidepressivos (SSRI e atípicos) e os antigos, menos dispendiosos como TCAs e IMAOs têm implicações para a prática clínica e prescrições. Distimia é uma depressão de natureza crônica mas de menor severidade que a depressão maior. Vários tratamentos com diferentes fármacos têm sido propostos, mas em decorrência de muitas variáveis, não é possível até o presente momento determinar qual o tratamento de escolha . A conclusão foi que a escolha do fármaco deve ser realizada levando-se em conta características individuais, efeitos colaterais e custos. / The objective of this study was to do the economic analyses of antidepressant drugs support for the treatment of dysthymia for the rational use perspective of antidepressants d rugs. The debate over the competing claims newer antidepressants drugs (SSRIs and atypical) and the older, cheaper TCAs and IMAOs has implications for clinical practive and prescribing expenditure. Dysthymia is a depressive disorder of chronic nature but of less severity than major depression. Many d rug treatments have been proposed for the treatment of dysthymia, but with so many potencial comparisons it is not possible at the present time to determine which is the treatment of choice. The conclusion was that the choice of drug must be made maching patient individual characteristics, side-effects and costs.

D.Cur. / In South Africa, mood disorders, specifically depression, accounts for the most psychiatric related hospital admissions. The total cost (overt and hidden) of mood disorders that result from lost productivity, can be estimated at billions of rand per year. In addition to economic costs, depression can carry great personal costs because of the social stigma associated with the diagnosis and treatment of a 'mental illness'. This stigma likely plays a big role in women' reluctance to seek, accept and adhere to treatment. The potential savings to be derived from the appropriate treatment of women suffering from depression are socially and economically significant. The focus in this thesis has been on women suffering from depression as it is estimated that at least twenty five percent of women will suffer from a major depressive episode in their life. Based on the problem statement that was included in this thesis, the researcher asked the following questions: 'What is the phenomena that constitutes the restoration process of women suffering from depression? Which processes contribute to the restoration process of women suffering from depression and facilitate these women's quest for mental health as an integral part of wholeness? How can an approach to provide quality care to women suffering from depression be described?" The primary purpose of this thesis was thus to explore and describe the processes contributing to the restoration process of women suffering from depression, in order to develop a mental health nursing approach that will provide quality care to women suffering from depression in their continuous quest for mental health. The psychiatric nurse specialist then developed and described guidelines to operationalise the approach that contributes to quality care of women suffering from depression in mental health nursing. The paradigmatic basis of this study was based on the Nursing for the Whole Person Theory (Oral Roberts University, Anna Vaughn School of Nursing, 1990:136-142) as used by the Rand Afrikaans University. This theory is based on a Judea-Christian philosophy.

Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI) / Objectives: To examine the effect of a collaborative care program for late-life depression on risk of diabetes among depressed, older adults. Method: We conducted a 9-year follow-up study of 160 older, primary care patients with a depressive disorder but without diabetes enrolled at the Indiana sites of the Improving Mood-Promoting Access to Collaborative Treatment (IMPACT) trial. Results: Surprisingly, the rate of incident diabetes in the collaborative care group (22/80 = 27.5%) was twice the rate observed in the usual care group (11/80 = 13.7%). Cox proportional hazards models adjusted for randomization status (HR = 1.94, p = .076), demographic factors (HR = 1.94, p = .075), and additionally for diabetes risk factors (HR = 1.73, p = .157) indicated that the risk of incident diabetes did not differ between the collaborative care and usual care groups, with collaborative care patients remaining at a nonsignificant increased risk. Conclusions: Our novel findings suggest that depression may not be a casual risk factor for diabetes and that depression treatment may be insufficient to reduce the excess diabetes risk of depressed, older adults.

Rapid increases in population ageing and the associated rise in the prevalence of dementia have created many challenges for the care of older people with dementia. As the majority of people now living in residential aged care facilities (RACFs) now have dementia, the need to maximise the quality of life for this group is increasingly recognised. While such issues have attracted research and policy attention in recent years, the evidence base for practice in dementia care is still underdeveloped. The need for more effective therapeutic interventions to improve the quality of life for older people with dementia is recognised, particularly those living in RACFs. The use of pets is one example of recent attempts to help create a more home-like environment and dog therapy is available in many facilities. Well designed research to demonstrate whether it actually has a positive impact on residents’ quality of life is lacking. This study is the first reported randomised controlled trial investigating dog therapy for people with dementia. Fifty-five older people with mild to moderate dementia living in three residential aged care facilities in the Greater Brisbane area participated in this study. The goal was to identify whether dog therapy accrued any benefits to residents’ well being and compare the benefits, if any, with human-only therapy intervention. The main hypothesis was that dog contact delivered in a small group recreational therapy format would have a beneficial effect on the well being of participants. It was additionally hypothesised that prior and current positive relationships with dogs would be related to improved outcomes of dog therapy and support a human-animal bond explanation of relationship development with the therapy dog(s). Participants were randomly assigned into two groups within each facility: The dog therapy group and a human-only therapy group. Session plans were structured according to a recreational therapy format. Three therapy dogs were used (a miniature Poodle, a Staffordshire Terrier and a German Shepherd Dog) with one dog present at any dog therapy session A before-and-after design was used with concealment of participants at allocation. Mixed methods were used including a panel of seven validated psychometric instruments, an observational measure and a series of four novel questionnaires, dogs for older groups with Alzheimer’s (DOGA), developed de novo specifically to investigate the effects of dog therapy on participants within this study. Measures of mood, quality of life, health and psychosocial functioning, collectively referred to as well-being, detected benefits accruing to dog therapy participants compared with human-only therapy that approached significance (p = .056) with a large effect size (partial eta squared 16.6%). A different measure of mood and apathy showed similar improvement for participants of both therapy types trialed with analyses of a smaller dataset (n = 36) revealing an overall highly significant result (p=.008) and large effect size (partial eta squared = 25.6%) for all participants. To explore the perceptions of care staff to the dog therapy intervention, a self-complete semi-structured questionnaire was completed by a sample of 21 from two of the study facilities. Content analysis revealed that staff overwhelmingly supported dog therapy with a total of 84 comments about benefits and 22 about risks. Responses were categorised and then linked into emergent themes: a temporal dimension, sense of self and increased opportunities for self expression. The opportunity provided by the therapy dog for accessible caring physical contact for participants was identified as important. General recreational therapy goals such as improved mood, reminiscence and increased levels of conversation were reported by staff to continue beyond interventions. The observed risks were: confusion over dog ownership, subsequent worry about losing the dog after sessions, jealousy over the therapy dog and one participant did not enjoy the small group format. Participants described their experiences of contact with the therapy dog as “like” above “attached”. Personal preference explanations are therefore supported, rather than “attachment”, to explain outcomes for participants. This suggests the psychosocial approach has greater relevance here than human-animal bond explanations. Effects of previous dog attachment on outcomes were inconclusive but there was some evidence that participants’ relationship with the therapy dog(s) influenced outcomes, though the nature of that relationship has not been clarified. Recommendations from the study findings are that dog therapy be conducted for people with mild to moderate levels of dementia in groups of 3-11 for a duration of around 10 weeks with sessions for 30 minutes held once or twice weekly and according to a standard format. Opportunities for participants to touch, hug and interact directly with the therapy dog should be maximised without compromising dog welfare. The findings suggest that respect for the personhood of participants is important to the success of the therapy types trialled, which further supports psychosocial therapies involving contact with people or live animals for use with people with dementia over those that minimise or exclude it.

Rapid increases in population ageing and the associated rise in the prevalence of dementia have created many challenges for the care of older people with dementia. As the majority of people now living in residential aged care facilities (RACFs) now have dementia, the need to maximise the quality of life for this group is increasingly recognised. While such issues have attracted research and policy attention in recent years, the evidence base for practice in dementia care is still underdeveloped. The need for more effective therapeutic interventions to improve the quality of life for older people with dementia is recognised, particularly those living in RACFs. The use of pets is one example of recent attempts to help create a more home-like environment and dog therapy is available in many facilities. Well designed research to demonstrate whether it actually has a positive impact on residents’ quality of life is lacking. This study is the first reported randomised controlled trial investigating dog therapy for people with dementia. Fifty-five older people with mild to moderate dementia living in three residential aged care facilities in the Greater Brisbane area participated in this study. The goal was to identify whether dog therapy accrued any benefits to residents’ well being and compare the benefits, if any, with human-only therapy intervention. The main hypothesis was that dog contact delivered in a small group recreational therapy format would have a beneficial effect on the well being of participants. It was additionally hypothesised that prior and current positive relationships with dogs would be related to improved outcomes of dog therapy and support a human-animal bond explanation of relationship development with the therapy dog(s). Participants were randomly assigned into two groups within each facility: The dog therapy group and a human-only therapy group. Session plans were structured according to a recreational therapy format. Three therapy dogs were used (a miniature Poodle, a Staffordshire Terrier and a German Shepherd Dog) with one dog present at any dog therapy session A before-and-after design was used with concealment of participants at allocation. Mixed methods were used including a panel of seven validated psychometric instruments, an observational measure and a series of four novel questionnaires, dogs for older groups with Alzheimer’s (DOGA), developed de novo specifically to investigate the effects of dog therapy on participants within this study. Measures of mood, quality of life, health and psychosocial functioning, collectively referred to as well-being, detected benefits accruing to dog therapy participants compared with human-only therapy that approached significance (p = .056) with a large effect size (partial eta squared 16.6%). A different measure of mood and apathy showed similar improvement for participants of both therapy types trialed with analyses of a smaller dataset (n = 36) revealing an overall highly significant result (p=.008) and large effect size (partial eta squared = 25.6%) for all participants. To explore the perceptions of care staff to the dog therapy intervention, a self-complete semi-structured questionnaire was completed by a sample of 21 from two of the study facilities. Content analysis revealed that staff overwhelmingly supported dog therapy with a total of 84 comments about benefits and 22 about risks. Responses were categorised and then linked into emergent themes: a temporal dimension, sense of self and increased opportunities for self expression. The opportunity provided by the therapy dog for accessible caring physical contact for participants was identified as important. General recreational therapy goals such as improved mood, reminiscence and increased levels of conversation were reported by staff to continue beyond interventions. The observed risks were: confusion over dog ownership, subsequent worry about losing the dog after sessions, jealousy over the therapy dog and one participant did not enjoy the small group format. Participants described their experiences of contact with the therapy dog as “like” above “attached”. Personal preference explanations are therefore supported, rather than “attachment”, to explain outcomes for participants. This suggests the psychosocial approach has greater relevance here than human-animal bond explanations. Effects of previous dog attachment on outcomes were inconclusive but there was some evidence that participants’ relationship with the therapy dog(s) influenced outcomes, though the nature of that relationship has not been clarified. Recommendations from the study findings are that dog therapy be conducted for people with mild to moderate levels of dementia in groups of 3-11 for a duration of around 10 weeks with sessions for 30 minutes held once or twice weekly and according to a standard format. Opportunities for participants to touch, hug and interact directly with the therapy dog should be maximised without compromising dog welfare. The findings suggest that respect for the personhood of participants is important to the success of the therapy types trialled, which further supports psychosocial therapies involving contact with people or live animals for use with people with dementia over those that minimise or exclude it.

Rapid increases in population ageing and the associated rise in the prevalence of dementia have created many challenges for the care of older people with dementia. As the majority of people now living in residential aged care facilities (RACFs) now have dementia, the need to maximise the quality of life for this group is increasingly recognised. While such issues have attracted research and policy attention in recent years, the evidence base for practice in dementia care is still underdeveloped. The need for more effective therapeutic interventions to improve the quality of life for older people with dementia is recognised, particularly those living in RACFs. The use of pets is one example of recent attempts to help create a more home-like environment and dog therapy is available in many facilities. Well designed research to demonstrate whether it actually has a positive impact on residents’ quality of life is lacking. This study is the first reported randomised controlled trial investigating dog therapy for people with dementia. Fifty-five older people with mild to moderate dementia living in three residential aged care facilities in the Greater Brisbane area participated in this study. The goal was to identify whether dog therapy accrued any benefits to residents’ well being and compare the benefits, if any, with human-only therapy intervention. The main hypothesis was that dog contact delivered in a small group recreational therapy format would have a beneficial effect on the well being of participants. It was additionally hypothesised that prior and current positive relationships with dogs would be related to improved outcomes of dog therapy and support a human-animal bond explanation of relationship development with the therapy dog(s). Participants were randomly assigned into two groups within each facility: The dog therapy group and a human-only therapy group. Session plans were structured according to a recreational therapy format. Three therapy dogs were used (a miniature Poodle, a Staffordshire Terrier and a German Shepherd Dog) with one dog present at any dog therapy session A before-and-after design was used with concealment of participants at allocation. Mixed methods were used including a panel of seven validated psychometric instruments, an observational measure and a series of four novel questionnaires, dogs for older groups with Alzheimer’s (DOGA), developed de novo specifically to investigate the effects of dog therapy on participants within this study. Measures of mood, quality of life, health and psychosocial functioning, collectively referred to as well-being, detected benefits accruing to dog therapy participants compared with human-only therapy that approached significance (p = .056) with a large effect size (partial eta squared 16.6%). A different measure of mood and apathy showed similar improvement for participants of both therapy types trialed with analyses of a smaller dataset (n = 36) revealing an overall highly significant result (p=.008) and large effect size (partial eta squared = 25.6%) for all participants. To explore the perceptions of care staff to the dog therapy intervention, a self-complete semi-structured questionnaire was completed by a sample of 21 from two of the study facilities. Content analysis revealed that staff overwhelmingly supported dog therapy with a total of 84 comments about benefits and 22 about risks. Responses were categorised and then linked into emergent themes: a temporal dimension, sense of self and increased opportunities for self expression. The opportunity provided by the therapy dog for accessible caring physical contact for participants was identified as important. General recreational therapy goals such as improved mood, reminiscence and increased levels of conversation were reported by staff to continue beyond interventions. The observed risks were: confusion over dog ownership, subsequent worry about losing the dog after sessions, jealousy over the therapy dog and one participant did not enjoy the small group format. Participants described their experiences of contact with the therapy dog as “like” above “attached”. Personal preference explanations are therefore supported, rather than “attachment”, to explain outcomes for participants. This suggests the psychosocial approach has greater relevance here than human-animal bond explanations. Effects of previous dog attachment on outcomes were inconclusive but there was some evidence that participants’ relationship with the therapy dog(s) influenced outcomes, though the nature of that relationship has not been clarified. Recommendations from the study findings are that dog therapy be conducted for people with mild to moderate levels of dementia in groups of 3-11 for a duration of around 10 weeks with sessions for 30 minutes held once or twice weekly and according to a standard format. Opportunities for participants to touch, hug and interact directly with the therapy dog should be maximised without compromising dog welfare. The findings suggest that respect for the personhood of participants is important to the success of the therapy types trialled, which further supports psychosocial therapies involving contact with people or live animals for use with people with dementia over those that minimise or exclude it.

Rapid increases in population ageing and the associated rise in the prevalence of dementia have created many challenges for the care of older people with dementia. As the majority of people now living in residential aged care facilities (RACFs) now have dementia, the need to maximise the quality of life for this group is increasingly recognised. While such issues have attracted research and policy attention in recent years, the evidence base for practice in dementia care is still underdeveloped. The need for more effective therapeutic interventions to improve the quality of life for older people with dementia is recognised, particularly those living in RACFs. The use of pets is one example of recent attempts to help create a more home-like environment and dog therapy is available in many facilities. Well designed research to demonstrate whether it actually has a positive impact on residents’ quality of life is lacking. This study is the first reported randomised controlled trial investigating dog therapy for people with dementia. Fifty-five older people with mild to moderate dementia living in three residential aged care facilities in the Greater Brisbane area participated in this study. The goal was to identify whether dog therapy accrued any benefits to residents’ well being and compare the benefits, if any, with human-only therapy intervention. The main hypothesis was that dog contact delivered in a small group recreational therapy format would have a beneficial effect on the well being of participants. It was additionally hypothesised that prior and current positive relationships with dogs would be related to improved outcomes of dog therapy and support a human-animal bond explanation of relationship development with the therapy dog(s). Participants were randomly assigned into two groups within each facility: The dog therapy group and a human-only therapy group. Session plans were structured according to a recreational therapy format. Three therapy dogs were used (a miniature Poodle, a Staffordshire Terrier and a German Shepherd Dog) with one dog present at any dog therapy session A before-and-after design was used with concealment of participants at allocation. Mixed methods were used including a panel of seven validated psychometric instruments, an observational measure and a series of four novel questionnaires, dogs for older groups with Alzheimer’s (DOGA), developed de novo specifically to investigate the effects of dog therapy on participants within this study. Measures of mood, quality of life, health and psychosocial functioning, collectively referred to as well-being, detected benefits accruing to dog therapy participants compared with human-only therapy that approached significance (p = .056) with a large effect size (partial eta squared 16.6%). A different measure of mood and apathy showed similar improvement for participants of both therapy types trialed with analyses of a smaller dataset (n = 36) revealing an overall highly significant result (p=.008) and large effect size (partial eta squared = 25.6%) for all participants. To explore the perceptions of care staff to the dog therapy intervention, a self-complete semi-structured questionnaire was completed by a sample of 21 from two of the study facilities. Content analysis revealed that staff overwhelmingly supported dog therapy with a total of 84 comments about benefits and 22 about risks. Responses were categorised and then linked into emergent themes: a temporal dimension, sense of self and increased opportunities for self expression. The opportunity provided by the therapy dog for accessible caring physical contact for participants was identified as important. General recreational therapy goals such as improved mood, reminiscence and increased levels of conversation were reported by staff to continue beyond interventions. The observed risks were: confusion over dog ownership, subsequent worry about losing the dog after sessions, jealousy over the therapy dog and one participant did not enjoy the small group format. Participants described their experiences of contact with the therapy dog as “like” above “attached”. Personal preference explanations are therefore supported, rather than “attachment”, to explain outcomes for participants. This suggests the psychosocial approach has greater relevance here than human-animal bond explanations. Effects of previous dog attachment on outcomes were inconclusive but there was some evidence that participants’ relationship with the therapy dog(s) influenced outcomes, though the nature of that relationship has not been clarified. Recommendations from the study findings are that dog therapy be conducted for people with mild to moderate levels of dementia in groups of 3-11 for a duration of around 10 weeks with sessions for 30 minutes held once or twice weekly and according to a standard format. Opportunities for participants to touch, hug and interact directly with the therapy dog should be maximised without compromising dog welfare. The findings suggest that respect for the personhood of participants is important to the success of the therapy types trialled, which further supports psychosocial therapies involving contact with people or live animals for use with people with dementia over those that minimise or exclude it.

Rapid increases in population ageing and the associated rise in the prevalence of dementia have created many challenges for the care of older people with dementia. As the majority of people now living in residential aged care facilities (RACFs) now have dementia, the need to maximise the quality of life for this group is increasingly recognised. While such issues have attracted research and policy attention in recent years, the evidence base for practice in dementia care is still underdeveloped. The need for more effective therapeutic interventions to improve the quality of life for older people with dementia is recognised, particularly those living in RACFs. The use of pets is one example of recent attempts to help create a more home-like environment and dog therapy is available in many facilities. Well designed research to demonstrate whether it actually has a positive impact on residents’ quality of life is lacking. This study is the first reported randomised controlled trial investigating dog therapy for people with dementia. Fifty-five older people with mild to moderate dementia living in three residential aged care facilities in the Greater Brisbane area participated in this study. The goal was to identify whether dog therapy accrued any benefits to residents’ well being and compare the benefits, if any, with human-only therapy intervention. The main hypothesis was that dog contact delivered in a small group recreational therapy format would have a beneficial effect on the well being of participants. It was additionally hypothesised that prior and current positive relationships with dogs would be related to improved outcomes of dog therapy and support a human-animal bond explanation of relationship development with the therapy dog(s). Participants were randomly assigned into two groups within each facility: The dog therapy group and a human-only therapy group. Session plans were structured according to a recreational therapy format. Three therapy dogs were used (a miniature Poodle, a Staffordshire Terrier and a German Shepherd Dog) with one dog present at any dog therapy session A before-and-after design was used with concealment of participants at allocation. Mixed methods were used including a panel of seven validated psychometric instruments, an observational measure and a series of four novel questionnaires, dogs for older groups with Alzheimer’s (DOGA), developed de novo specifically to investigate the effects of dog therapy on participants within this study. Measures of mood, quality of life, health and psychosocial functioning, collectively referred to as well-being, detected benefits accruing to dog therapy participants compared with human-only therapy that approached significance (p = .056) with a large effect size (partial eta squared 16.6%). A different measure of mood and apathy showed similar improvement for participants of both therapy types trialed with analyses of a smaller dataset (n = 36) revealing an overall highly significant result (p=.008) and large effect size (partial eta squared = 25.6%) for all participants. To explore the perceptions of care staff to the dog therapy intervention, a self-complete semi-structured questionnaire was completed by a sample of 21 from two of the study facilities. Content analysis revealed that staff overwhelmingly supported dog therapy with a total of 84 comments about benefits and 22 about risks. Responses were categorised and then linked into emergent themes: a temporal dimension, sense of self and increased opportunities for self expression. The opportunity provided by the therapy dog for accessible caring physical contact for participants was identified as important. General recreational therapy goals such as improved mood, reminiscence and increased levels of conversation were reported by staff to continue beyond interventions. The observed risks were: confusion over dog ownership, subsequent worry about losing the dog after sessions, jealousy over the therapy dog and one participant did not enjoy the small group format. Participants described their experiences of contact with the therapy dog as “like” above “attached”. Personal preference explanations are therefore supported, rather than “attachment”, to explain outcomes for participants. This suggests the psychosocial approach has greater relevance here than human-animal bond explanations. Effects of previous dog attachment on outcomes were inconclusive but there was some evidence that participants’ relationship with the therapy dog(s) influenced outcomes, though the nature of that relationship has not been clarified. Recommendations from the study findings are that dog therapy be conducted for people with mild to moderate levels of dementia in groups of 3-11 for a duration of around 10 weeks with sessions for 30 minutes held once or twice weekly and according to a standard format. Opportunities for participants to touch, hug and interact directly with the therapy dog should be maximised without compromising dog welfare. The findings suggest that respect for the personhood of participants is important to the success of the therapy types trialled, which further supports psychosocial therapies involving contact with people or live animals for use with people with dementia over those that minimise or exclude it.

Rapid increases in population ageing and the associated rise in the prevalence of dementia have created many challenges for the care of older people with dementia. As the majority of people now living in residential aged care facilities (RACFs) now have dementia, the need to maximise the quality of life for this group is increasingly recognised. While such issues have attracted research and policy attention in recent years, the evidence base for practice in dementia care is still underdeveloped. The need for more effective therapeutic interventions to improve the quality of life for older people with dementia is recognised, particularly those living in RACFs. The use of pets is one example of recent attempts to help create a more home-like environment and dog therapy is available in many facilities. Well designed research to demonstrate whether it actually has a positive impact on residents’ quality of life is lacking. This study is the first reported randomised controlled trial investigating dog therapy for people with dementia. Fifty-five older people with mild to moderate dementia living in three residential aged care facilities in the Greater Brisbane area participated in this study. The goal was to identify whether dog therapy accrued any benefits to residents’ well being and compare the benefits, if any, with human-only therapy intervention. The main hypothesis was that dog contact delivered in a small group recreational therapy format would have a beneficial effect on the well being of participants. It was additionally hypothesised that prior and current positive relationships with dogs would be related to improved outcomes of dog therapy and support a human-animal bond explanation of relationship development with the therapy dog(s). Participants were randomly assigned into two groups within each facility: The dog therapy group and a human-only therapy group. Session plans were structured according to a recreational therapy format. Three therapy dogs were used (a miniature Poodle, a Staffordshire Terrier and a German Shepherd Dog) with one dog present at any dog therapy session A before-and-after design was used with concealment of participants at allocation. Mixed methods were used including a panel of seven validated psychometric instruments, an observational measure and a series of four novel questionnaires, dogs for older groups with Alzheimer’s (DOGA), developed de novo specifically to investigate the effects of dog therapy on participants within this study. Measures of mood, quality of life, health and psychosocial functioning, collectively referred to as well-being, detected benefits accruing to dog therapy participants compared with human-only therapy that approached significance (p = .056) with a large effect size (partial eta squared 16.6%). A different measure of mood and apathy showed similar improvement for participants of both therapy types trialed with analyses of a smaller dataset (n = 36) revealing an overall highly significant result (p=.008) and large effect size (partial eta squared = 25.6%) for all participants. To explore the perceptions of care staff to the dog therapy intervention, a self-complete semi-structured questionnaire was completed by a sample of 21 from two of the study facilities. Content analysis revealed that staff overwhelmingly supported dog therapy with a total of 84 comments about benefits and 22 about risks. Responses were categorised and then linked into emergent themes: a temporal dimension, sense of self and increased opportunities for self expression. The opportunity provided by the therapy dog for accessible caring physical contact for participants was identified as important. General recreational therapy goals such as improved mood, reminiscence and increased levels of conversation were reported by staff to continue beyond interventions. The observed risks were: confusion over dog ownership, subsequent worry about losing the dog after sessions, jealousy over the therapy dog and one participant did not enjoy the small group format. Participants described their experiences of contact with the therapy dog as “like” above “attached”. Personal preference explanations are therefore supported, rather than “attachment”, to explain outcomes for participants. This suggests the psychosocial approach has greater relevance here than human-animal bond explanations. Effects of previous dog attachment on outcomes were inconclusive but there was some evidence that participants’ relationship with the therapy dog(s) influenced outcomes, though the nature of that relationship has not been clarified. Recommendations from the study findings are that dog therapy be conducted for people with mild to moderate levels of dementia in groups of 3-11 for a duration of around 10 weeks with sessions for 30 minutes held once or twice weekly and according to a standard format. Opportunities for participants to touch, hug and interact directly with the therapy dog should be maximised without compromising dog welfare. The findings suggest that respect for the personhood of participants is important to the success of the therapy types trialled, which further supports psychosocial therapies involving contact with people or live animals for use with people with dementia over those that minimise or exclude it.

Rapid increases in population ageing and the associated rise in the prevalence of dementia have created many challenges for the care of older people with dementia. As the majority of people now living in residential aged care facilities (RACFs) now have dementia, the need to maximise the quality of life for this group is increasingly recognised. While such issues have attracted research and policy attention in recent years, the evidence base for practice in dementia care is still underdeveloped. The need for more effective therapeutic interventions to improve the quality of life for older people with dementia is recognised, particularly those living in RACFs. The use of pets is one example of recent attempts to help create a more home-like environment and dog therapy is available in many facilities. Well designed research to demonstrate whether it actually has a positive impact on residents’ quality of life is lacking. This study is the first reported randomised controlled trial investigating dog therapy for people with dementia. Fifty-five older people with mild to moderate dementia living in three residential aged care facilities in the Greater Brisbane area participated in this study. The goal was to identify whether dog therapy accrued any benefits to residents’ well being and compare the benefits, if any, with human-only therapy intervention. The main hypothesis was that dog contact delivered in a small group recreational therapy format would have a beneficial effect on the well being of participants. It was additionally hypothesised that prior and current positive relationships with dogs would be related to improved outcomes of dog therapy and support a human-animal bond explanation of relationship development with the therapy dog(s). Participants were randomly assigned into two groups within each facility: The dog therapy group and a human-only therapy group. Session plans were structured according to a recreational therapy format. Three therapy dogs were used (a miniature Poodle, a Staffordshire Terrier and a German Shepherd Dog) with one dog present at any dog therapy session A before-and-after design was used with concealment of participants at allocation. Mixed methods were used including a panel of seven validated psychometric instruments, an observational measure and a series of four novel questionnaires, dogs for older groups with Alzheimer’s (DOGA), developed de novo specifically to investigate the effects of dog therapy on participants within this study. Measures of mood, quality of life, health and psychosocial functioning, collectively referred to as well-being, detected benefits accruing to dog therapy participants compared with human-only therapy that approached significance (p = .056) with a large effect size (partial eta squared 16.6%). A different measure of mood and apathy showed similar improvement for participants of both therapy types trialed with analyses of a smaller dataset (n = 36) revealing an overall highly significant result (p=.008) and large effect size (partial eta squared = 25.6%) for all participants. To explore the perceptions of care staff to the dog therapy intervention, a self-complete semi-structured questionnaire was completed by a sample of 21 from two of the study facilities. Content analysis revealed that staff overwhelmingly supported dog therapy with a total of 84 comments about benefits and 22 about risks. Responses were categorised and then linked into emergent themes: a temporal dimension, sense of self and increased opportunities for self expression. The opportunity provided by the therapy dog for accessible caring physical contact for participants was identified as important. General recreational therapy goals such as improved mood, reminiscence and increased levels of conversation were reported by staff to continue beyond interventions. The observed risks were: confusion over dog ownership, subsequent worry about losing the dog after sessions, jealousy over the therapy dog and one participant did not enjoy the small group format. Participants described their experiences of contact with the therapy dog as “like” above “attached”. Personal preference explanations are therefore supported, rather than “attachment”, to explain outcomes for participants. This suggests the psychosocial approach has greater relevance here than human-animal bond explanations. Effects of previous dog attachment on outcomes were inconclusive but there was some evidence that participants’ relationship with the therapy dog(s) influenced outcomes, though the nature of that relationship has not been clarified. Recommendations from the study findings are that dog therapy be conducted for people with mild to moderate levels of dementia in groups of 3-11 for a duration of around 10 weeks with sessions for 30 minutes held once or twice weekly and according to a standard format. Opportunities for participants to touch, hug and interact directly with the therapy dog should be maximised without compromising dog welfare. The findings suggest that respect for the personhood of participants is important to the success of the therapy types trialled, which further supports psychosocial therapies involving contact with people or live animals for use with people with dementia over those that minimise or exclude it.