The Research of Standardized Protocols for Dog Involvement in Animal-Assisted Therapy: A Systematic Review

Simple Summary Animal-assisted therapies (AATs), as discussed in this review, are structured interventions, involving pets, for patients suffering from different diseases. Although many studies have highlighted the beneficial effects of these interventions on the well-being and health of the humans given the dogs, there are few studies that highlight the involved dogs themselves. Therefore, in this study, we carried out a systematic review to investigate the characteristics of the dogs involved in AATs. Based on the results, in most papers, there is a lack of general information on the dog(s) involved, including the methods used to choose and train the dog and the animal's health status. These results highlight the need for standardized, specific methods to choose and train the dog and also suggest the need for univocal health protocols to ensure the animal's welfare, as well as the final results of the therapeutic intervention. Dogs are considered the most important species involved in animal-assisted therapy (AAT), and the scientific literature focuses on the benefits linked to the involvement of dogs in various therapeutic areas. In this study, we carried out a systematic review according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, exploring the scientific literature from the last 5 years (2016-2021) on three databases (PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science) to highlight the characteristics of the dogs involved in AATs. Based on the scientific literature relevant to such dogs, we considered different parameters (i.e., number, age, sex, breed, temperament, methods of choice and training, health status, research goals, and activities with dogs) to include studies in our paper. After screening 4331 papers identified on the searched databases, we selected 38 articles that met the inclusion criteria. Analysis of the included articles showed that the characteristics of the dogs were neglected. Our findings indicated a lack of information about the dogs, as well as the absence of standardized and univocal criteria for dog selection, training programs, and health protocols.