The enteric pathogen Escherichia albertii represents an emerging food safety challenge. It has been mistakenly identified as Hafnia alvei, Shigella, or as a member of the Enteropathogenic E. coli (EPEC). Isolates of certain strains of the organism are known to possess genes encoding pathogenesis factors capable of inducing attaching/effacing (A/E) lesions, cytolethal distending toxin and a variant Shiga toxin. The pathogen has been isolated from infants and adults and has been identified as a causative agent from an outbreak of foodborne disease occurring in an industrialized nation. Recent reports have detailed the ability of this pathogen to survive on ground beef and to resist several classes of therapeutic antibiotics. The objectives of this study were to: (i) determine the efficacy of E. albertii isolates to survive lactic acid exposure as a function of solution pH, and (ii) verify its inactivation in ground beef according to the USDA recommendations for in-home preparation. Rifampicin resistant (RifR) isolates of E. albertii (ATCC 9194, 19982, 10457) were obtained according to published methods. Thermal resistance of parent and RifR isolates were compared in vitro at 55 °C to confirm no significant differences in tolerance to heat as a result of antibiotic resistance capacity. Tolerance to food grade lactic acid (Purac, Olathe, KS) (3.0% w/v) at differing pH levels (3.0, 4.0, 5.0, 7.0) was examined in physiological saline at 35 °C. Finally, ground beef patties (80% lean) inoculated with individual RifR isolates were cooked to internal temperatures of 62, 71, or 76 °C to determine resistance of different internal temperatures. Experiments comparing the in vitro tolerances of parent and RifR E. albertii isolates indicated no differences between parent and mutant with regards to heat and lactic acid challenge. E. albertii inactivation in lactic acid increased as the pH of the solution was decreased; maximum reduction at pH 3.0 was at 30 min and maximum reduction for pH 4.0 at 2.5 hours. Changes in populations of E. albertii at pH 5.0 were not different than that at pH 7.0. Cooking of beef to 62 °C internal temperature produced reductions of all RifR isolates to non-detectable levels.

Rationale & Background: Gaining excessive adiposity in pregnancy is associated with altered cardiometabolic profile and adverse pregnancy outcomes. Lifestyle interventions may reduce excess weight gain, but the effect on fat gain is unclear. Our study explored this question by 1) comparing measures of body fat (BF) by bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) and 4-site skinfold thickness (SFT); 2) assessing the impact of a nutrition+exercise intervention on adiposity changes; 3) elucidating associations between adiposity changes and cardiometabolic biomarkers and adverse pregnancy outcomes. Study Design: Participants randomized to receive a high dairy protein diet and exercise program (intervention) or standard care (control) in the Be Healthy in Pregnancy RCT (NCT 01689961) had adiposity measured at 12-17, 26-28, and 36-38 weeks gestation by BIA (%BF) and SFT (sum and %BF), and at 6 months postpartum also by DXA. Fasted blood samples collected at 12-17 and 36-38 weeks gestation were analyzed for glucose, lipid profile, insulin, leptin, adiponectin, and CRP. Pregnancy outcomes were abstracted from medical charts. Results: In 181 participants, BIA %BF and SFT %BF had good agreement in early pregnancy and postpartum, but low agreement in late pregnancy. Adiposity changes across pregnancy were similar between study arms but were greater in normal weight compared to overweight women. Insulin and leptin were negatively associated with change in SFT (sum and %BF). Triglycerides were negatively associated with change in BIA %BF, while HDL was positively associated. Neither caesarean section nor operative vaginal delivery were associated with adiposity change. Conclusion: Adiposity measured by sum of SFT and BIA %BF increased across pregnancy but was not influenced by the diet+exercise intervention. Associations of adiposity change with cardiometabolic biomarkers varied between measurement tools. The lack of adiposity measurement tools appropriate across pregnancy and in clinical settings presents a concern for assessing clinical responses to adiposity change across pregnancy. / Thesis / Master of Science (MSc) / Pregnancy is associated with a natural gain in body fat, but it can reach excessive amounts. Excess body fat is of clinical consequence as it is associated with poor cardiovascular health and abnormal pregnancy outcomes. Improving diet and physical activity habits may reduce excess weight gain, but little is known about how it influences fat gained during pregnancy. In our study body fat gain during pregnancy was similar between the lifestyle intervention and control groups. However, entering pregnancy with greater BMI was associated with less fat gain during pregnancy. Changes in body fat influenced cardiovascular blood markers, but results differed between body fat assessment tools. We also found that methods to measure body fat produce different results at different stages of pregnancy. Our findings provide insight on the factors that influence fat gain during pregnancy and highlight the need for better tools to measure body fat accurately in pregnancy.

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.

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.