Animals in higher education settings: Do animal-assisted interventions improve mental and cognitive health outcomes of students? A systematic review and meta-analysis

Abstract

BackgroundDue to the high burden of mental health issues among students at higher education institutions world-wide, animal-assisted interventions (AAIs) are being increasingly used to relieve student stress. The objective of this study was to systematically review of the effects of AAIs on the mental and cognitive health outcomes of higher education students.MethodsRandomized controlled trials using any unfamiliar animal as the sole intervention tool were included in the systematic review. Study quality was assessed using the Cochrane Risk-of-Bias tool. Where possible, effect sizes (Hedges’ g) were pooled for individual outcomes using random-effects meta-analyses. Albatross plots were used to supplement the data synthesis.ResultsOf 2.401 identified studies, 35 were included. Almost all studies used dogs as the intervention animal. The quality of most included studies was rated as moderate. Studies showed an overall reduction of acute anxiety (g= -0.57 (95%CI -1.45;0.31)) and stress. For other mental outcomes, studies showed an overall small reduction of negative affect (g= -0.47 (95%CI -1.46;0.52)), chronic stress (g= -0.23 (95%CI -0.57;0.11)) and depression, as well as small increases in arousal, happiness and positive affect (g= 0.06 (95%CI -0.78;0.90)). Studies showed no effect on heart rate and heart rate variability, a small reduction in salivary cortisol and mixed effects on blood pressure. No effect on cognitive outcomes was found.ConclusionOverall, evidence suggests that AAIs are effective at improving mental, but not physiological or cognitive outcomes of students. Strong methodological heterogeneity between studies limited the ability to draw clear conclusions.