Defining Terms Used for Animals Working in Support Roles for People with Support Needs.

The nomenclature used to describe animals working in roles supporting people can be confusing. The same term may be used to describe different roles, or two terms may mean the same thing. This confusion is evident among researchers, practitioners, and end users. Because certain animal roles are provided with legal protections and/or government-funding support in some jurisdictions, it is necessary to clearly define the existing terms to avoid confusion. The aim of this paper is to provide operationalized definitions for nine terms, which would be useful in many world regions: "assistance animal", "companion animal", "educational/school support animal", "emotional support animal", "facility animal", "service animal", "skilled companion animal", "therapy animal", and "visiting/visitation animal". At the International Society for Anthrozoology (ISAZ) conferences in 2018 and 2020, over 100 delegates participated in workshops to define these terms, many of whom co-authored this paper. Through an iterative process, we have defined the nine terms and explained how they differ from each other. We recommend phasing out two terms (i.e., "skilled companion animal" and "service animal") due to overlap with other terms that could potentially exacerbate confusion. The implications for several regions of the world are discussed.

The impact of BPO on cost reduction in mid-sized health care systems.

At the convergence of two politico-economic "hot topics" of the day--outsourcing and the cost of health care-lie opportunities for mid-sized health systems to innovate, collaborate, and reduce overhead. Competition in the retail health care market can serve as both an impetus and an inhibitor to such measures, though. Here we are going to address the motivations, influences, opportunities, and limitations facing mid-sized, US non-profit health systems in business process outsourcing (BPO). Advocates cite numerous benefits to BPO, particularly in cost reduction and strategy optimization. BPO can elicit cost savings due to specialization among provider firms, returns to scale and technology, standardization and automation, and gains in resource arbitrage (off-shoring capabilities). BPO can also free an organization of non-critical tasks and focus resources on core competencies (treating patients). The surge in BPO utilization has rarely extended to the back-office functions of many mid-sized health systems. Health care providers, still a largely fragmented bunch with many rural, independent non-profit systems, have not experienced the consolidation and organizational scale growth to make BPO as attractive as other industries. Smaller firms, spurning merger and acquisition pressure from large, tertiary health systems, often wish to retain their autonomy and identity; hence, they face a competitive cost disadvantage compared to their larger competitors. This article examines the functional areas for these health systems in which BPO is not currently utilized and dissects the various methods available in which to practice BPO. We assess the ongoing adoption of BPO in these areas as well as the barriers to adoption, and identify the key processes that best represent opportunity for success. An emphasis is placed on a collaborative model with other health systems compared to a single system, unilateral BPO arrangement.