The potential usefulness of standardized assessments to measure participant outcomes of adaptive/therapeutic horseback riding: a survey study.

Adaptive or therapeutic riding (A/TR) is a recreational activity which provides mounted and ground-based horsemanship opportunities adapted to the abilities of the participants. A/TR provides physical and psychological benefits to participants with diverse disabilities, including physical, developmental, cognitive, and age-related disabilities, promoting higher quality of life. A/TR professionals may be limited in their capacity to implement outcome assessments and report the benefits of their community-based A/TR services to a broad audience. The purpose of this study was to identify whether and how A/TR professionals currently measure participant outcomes; benefits and barriers to implementing standardized assessments in A/TR; and characteristics which would make assessments useful in the community-based A/TR environment. To address this purpose, we conducted a survey among A/TR professionals. We found that while A/TR professionals measure outcomes among their participants, they typically do not use standardized assessments. Survey respondents believed benefits of implementing standardized assessments included bolstering the A/TR profession, acquiring funding, and communicating about A/TR services to a broad audience. Respondents also identified several barriers to implementing standardized assessments including time, systemic, and expertise constraints. Respondents reported that useful standardized assessments would be relevant to all age groups and populations who receive A/TR services. Finally, respondents shared that for standardized assessments to be useful, they would need to be low-cost, require less than 10-20 min, and available in either paper or computer format. This study revealed that standardized assessments may be a strong support to the A/TR profession; however, assessments must meet the unique needs of A/TR professionals.

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.

Optimal Terminology for Services in the United States That Incorporate Horses to Benefit People: A Consensus Document.

Objectives: To recommend (1) the adoption of optimal terminology for referring to services in the United States that incorporate horses and other equines to benefit people, and (2) the discontinuation of especially problematic terminology. Design: A diverse multidisciplinary consortium of individuals, including representatives of relevant national organizations, participated in an inclusive, systematic, and comprehensive 2-year consensus-building process. Results: Twelve specific types of services were identified that relate to one of three broad areas of professional work: therapy, learning, or horsemanship. Related to the area of therapy, five distinct types of therapies were identified: counseling, occupational therapy, physical therapy, psychotherapy, and speech-language pathology. Therapy-first language is recommended that foregrounds the exact therapy (e.g., physical therapy) and adds precise equine-related descriptors as warranted (e.g., physical therapy using equine movement). Related to the area of learning, three distinct types of nontherapy services were identified. The recommended terminology for referring to these services is equine-assisted learning in education, equine-assisted learning in organizations, and equine-assisted learning in personal development. Related to the area of horsemanship, four distinct types of nontherapy services were identified. The recommended terminology for referring to these services is adaptive equestrian sports, adaptive riding or therapeutic riding, driving, and interactive vaulting. The plural term, equine-assisted services, is recommended as a concise shorthand for easily referencing multiple services that differ from each other, yet share the horse as a common thread. Terms recommended for discontinuation include equine therapy, equine-assisted activities and therapies, equine-assisted therapy, equestrian therapy, hippotherapist, hippotherapy clinic (program), horse therapy, horseback riding therapy, and therapy riding. The consensus-building process culminated in extensive but not unanimous endorsements of all terminology recommendations. Conclusions: Terminology recommended for adoption clearly describes and distinguishes 12 distinct types of services. Terminology recommended for discontinuation was found to be ambiguous, misleading, no longer useful, or to have adversely affected stakeholders. It is hoped that all recommendations will prove useful and serve to enhance the professionalism and viability of specific identified services. It is also hoped that improved precision and clarity in terminology for naming specific services will advance their future scientific development and reliable measurement of effectiveness. Not all terminology-related challenges were resolved, however, and new challenges will likely arise as services continue to evolve and diversify. Significant impacts, if any, of the terminology recommendations herein merit ongoing monitoring and the question of optimal terminology merits revisiting in the foreseeable future.