Therapeutic and Economic Benefits of Service Dogs Versus Emotional Support Dogs for Veterans With PTSD.

OBJECTIVE: This work aimed to assess the therapeutic and economic benefits of service dogs versus emotional support dogs for veterans with posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). METHODS: Veterans with PTSD (N=227) participating in a multicenter trial were randomly assigned to receive a service or emotional support dog; 181 veterans received a dog and were followed up for 18 months. Primary outcomes included overall functioning (assessed with World Health Organization Disability Assessment Scale II [WHODAS 2.0]) and quality of life (Veterans RAND 12-Item Health Survey [VR-12]). Secondary outcomes included PTSD symptoms (PTSD Checklist for DSM-5), suicidal ideation, depression, sleep quality, health care costs and utilization, medication adherence, employment, and productivity. RESULTS: Participants paired with a dog had a mean±SD age of 50.6±13.6 years (range 22-79), and most were male (80%), White (66%), and non-Hispanic (91%). Adjusted linear mixed repeated-measures models indicated no difference between the two groups on WHODAS 2.0 or VR-12 scores. Participants with service dogs had a 3.7-point greater reduction in PTSD symptoms versus participants with emotional support dogs (p=0.036). No reduced health care utilization or cost was associated with receiving a service dog. Veterans with service dogs had an increase of 10 percentage points in antidepressant adherence compared with those with emotional support dogs (p<0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Both groups appeared to benefit from having a service or emotional support dog. No significant differences in improved functioning or quality of life were observed between the groups. Those in the service dog group had a greater reduction in PTSD symptoms and better antidepressant adherence, improvements that should be explored further.

Quantifying the emotional experiences of partners of veterans with PTSD service dogs using ecological momentary assessment.

The objective of this study was to investigate the day-to-day experiences of positive and negative emotions among partners of veterans assigned service dogs for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). As part of a larger clinical trial, a total of N = 87 partners of post-9/11 veterans with PTSD were recruited from a nonprofit service dog provider and participated in an ecological momentary assessment (EMA) protocol. The sample included partners of veterans who received a PTSD service dog after baseline (n = 48, treatment group) and partners of veterans on the waitlist for a service dog (n = 39, control group). Data were collected twice daily for two weeks at baseline and again at follow-up three months later, for approximately 56 assessments per participant (28 at baseline, 28 at follow up). Participants completed an average of 84% of questionnaires at baseline (n = 23.6) and 86% (n = 24.1) at follow-up. A total of 3780 EMA questionnaires were collected among partners for this analysis. Data were analyzed using a generalized linear mixed model. Three months following baseline, partners of veterans with service dogs reported statistically significant higher levels of positive emotions than the control partners (p = .01, d = 0.39) with small-to-medium effect sizes for each individual positive emotion. No statistically significant differences were reported for negative emotions (p = .77, d = 0.21). This study quantitatively identifies higher levels of positive emotion in partners who are cohabitating with a PTSD service dog compared to those partners who remained on the waitlist. Given the influence that positive emotions have on well-being and coping, findings suggest that the influence of service dogs may go beyond veterans to influence their cohabitating partners.

Hearing dogs for people with severe and profound hearing loss: a wait-list design randomised controlled trial investigating their effectiveness and cost-effectiveness.

BACKGROUND: Hearing loss increases the risk of poor outcomes across a range of life domains. Where hearing loss is severe or profound, audiological interventions and rehabilitation have limited impact. Hearing dogs offer an alternative, or additional, intervention. They live permanently with recipients, providing sound support and companionship. METHODS: A single-centre, randomised controlled trial (RCT) evaluated the impacts of a hearing dog on mental well-being, anxiety, depression, problems associated with hearing loss (responding to sounds, fearfulness/social isolation), and perceived dependency on others. Participants were applicants to the UK charity 'Hearing Dogs for Deaf People'. Eligibility criteria were as follows: first-time applicant; applying for a hearing dog (as opposed to other support provided by the charity). Participants were randomised 1:1 to the following: receive a hearing dog sooner than usual [HD], or within the usual application timeframe (wait-list [WL] comparator). The primary outcome was mental well-being (Short Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-Being Scale) 6 months (T1) after HD received a hearing dog. The cost-effectiveness analysis took a health and social care perspective. RESULTS: In total, 165 participants were randomised (HD n = 83, WL n = 82). A total of 112 (67.9%) were included in the primary analysis (HD n = 55, WL n = 57). At T1, mental well-being was significantly higher in the HD arm (adjusted mean difference 2.53, 95% CI 1.27 to 3.79, p < 0.001). Significant improvements in anxiety, depression, functioning, fearfulness/social isolation, and perceived dependency, favouring the HD arm, were also observed. On average, HD participants had used fewer statutory health and social care resources. In a scenario whereby costs of provision were borne by the public sector, hearing dogs do not appear to be value for money. If the public sector made a partial contribution, it is possible that hearing dogs would be cost-effective from a public sector perspective. CONCLUSIONS: Hearing dogs appear to benefit recipients across a number of life domains, at least in the short term. Within the current funding model (costs entirely borne by the charity), hearing dogs are cost-effective from the public sector perspective. Whilst it would not be cost-effective to fully fund the provision of hearing dogs by the public sector, a partial contribution could be explored. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial was retrospectively registered with the International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number (ISRCTN) registry on 28.1.2019: ISRCTN36452009 .

Good Days and Bad Days: Measuring Health-Related Quality of Life in People With Epilepsy.

OBJECTIVES: Cost-effectiveness analyses typically require measurement of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) to estimate quality-adjusted life-years. Challenges with measuring HRQoL arise in the context of episodic conditions if patients are less likely-or even unable-to complete surveys when having disease symptoms. This article explored whether HRQoL measured at regular time intervals adequately reflects the HRQoL of people with epilepsy (PWE). METHODS: Follow-up data from the Epilepsy Support Dog Evaluation study on the (cost-)effectiveness of seizure dogs were used in which HRQoL is measured in 25 PWE with the EQ-5D at baseline and every 3 months thereafter. Seizure count is recorded daily using a seizure diary. Regression models were employed to explore whether PWE were more likely to complete the HRQoL survey on a good day (ie, when seizures are absent or low in frequency compared with other days) and to provide an estimate of the impact of reporting HRQoL on a good day on EQ-5D utility scores. RESULTS: A total of 111 HRQoL measurements were included in the analyses. Regression analyses indicated that the day of reporting HRQoL was associated with a lower seizure count (P<.05) and that a lower seizure count was associated with a higher EQ-5D utility score (P<.05). CONCLUSIONS: When HRQoL is measured at regular time intervals, PWE seem more likely to complete these surveys on good days. Consequently, HRQoL might be overestimated in this population. This could lead to underestimation of the effectiveness of treatment and to biased estimates of cost-effectiveness.

To live with a wagging tailed assistant - Service and hearing dog ownership from the perspective of Swedish owners.

Individuals who have a functional or health impairment, are often in great need of conventional healthcare, social care and support, as well as help from family and friends. The use of dogs may be an important assistive support for this population. Assistance dogs are trained to assist with their owners' specific needs. The aim of this study is to explore service and hearing dog ownership from the owner´s perspective, by examining the owner's expectations before training a dog, and experiences after having a certified dog. This study was designed as a longitudinal intervention study with pre-post design. The participants included in the study trained their own dogs to become service or hearing dogs. A number of open-ended questions were answered by the participants before the training of the dog started, three months after the dog was certified, and 1-3 years after the first follow-up. Data were analysed using thematic content analysis. The participants' expectations of what the dog would contribute after being certified was high. Their perceived experiences in many ways reflected their expectations. For example, they perceived that the dog contributed to improved health status, a more active lifestyle, improved ability to feel secure, and that they had become more independent. They also felt that the dog had strengthened their social relationships. Negative experiences were also identified. Not being allowed to bring their dog into public places and negative attitudes from other people were examples of this. This study shows that individuals being supported by an assistance dog experience the dog as an invaluable help in their everyday life. By improving the owners' lives in many ways, a certified service or hearing dog is a novel and important assistive support for people with a functional or health impairment.

Which one to follow? Service animal policy in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Service animals are an invaluable resource to improving health among individuals with disabilities, and their use is steadily growing. Yet, United States' current federal and state policies surrounding service animals are contradictory and burdensome, and often do not adequately protect the rights of service animal handlers. OBJECTIVE: To review each state's service animal policies surrounding criminal interference, misrepresentation of a service animal, and public accessibility. To also identify inconsistencies among states' individual policies, between state policies, and between state and federal policies, and discuss the implications of these inconsistencies. METHODS: Westlaw legal research database was used to comprehensively review each state's policies regarding the use of a service animal. RESULTS: 26 states have one or more policies that are incongruous with the Americans with Disabilities Act. Further, 34 states have contradictions within their own policies and between other states. 31 states provide protections against fraudulent service animals, and there are variations in the degree of protection and ability to enforce these laws. CONCLUSIONS: Because service animals are a vital resource to this particularly vulnerable population, it is imperative that our policies encourage their use and protect the rights of handlers. Yet, inconsistencies among current policies create confusion and ultimately deter individuals with disabilities from taking full advantage of their service animal. We are in need of clear, cohesive policy at all levels of government in order to improve health literacy and ensure that those with disabilities are able to benefit from the positive health impacts of a service animal.