Understanding the participation outcomes for persons with disability when partnered with assistance dogs: A scoping review.
Nicola Futeran, Lynette Mackenzie, Sarah Wilkes-Gillan and 1 others
PMID 35470459WHAT IT FOUND
Assistance dog partnerships showed mixed participation outcomes across 38 studies.
While many reported improved self-care and social interaction, others found no benefit or added burdens like financial cost and training workload. The evidence is too weak to confirm efficacy, but it helps prepare clients for realistic expectations.
Key findings
01Participation outcomes were classified as positive or significant in 47.6% of mapped domains, mixed in 38.1%, and negative or non-significant in 14.3%.
02The most frequently reported positive outcomes involved psychological demands of tasks, human-human relationships, and community activity participation, while negative outcomes often related to domestic life and financial burden.
03Contextual factors influencing outcomes included societal attitudes, support networks, and the individual's psychological characteristics, with negative attitudes creating barriers to public access.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for PTsWhat it means for OTsWhat it means for SLPs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
The underlying evidence is very low quality, with most quantitative studies being non-randomised and small. Outcomes were heterogeneous and often relied on self-report or parental report. The review excluded guide and hearing dogs, limiting generalisability to those populations. There was no standardised outcome measure across studies, making direct comparison difficult.
Declared interests
The authors declared no conflicts of interest, and the research received no specific funding.
The easy way to misread this
Do not interpret the positive themes as proof of efficacy. The review highlights potential benefits but also significant drawbacks like financial cost and public access issues. The underlying studies were mostly low-quality and non-randomised, so this evidence cannot confirm that assistance dogs improve participation for any specific individual.