FREE SHIPPING over $40
OVER 10000 FIVE-STAR REVIEWS
5% OFF ALL SUBSCRIPTIONS
100% HAPPINESS GUARANTEE
Analyze Diet
0
Revue scientifique et technique (International Office of Epizootics)2018; 37(1); 71-82; doi: 10.20506/rst.37.1.2741

Companion animals and human health: benefits, challenges, and the road ahead for human-animal interaction.

Abstract: There is ample evidence that human-animal interaction (HAI) is associated with health. Studies encompass three general categories: those that compare companion animal owners with individuals who do not own companion animals, those examining brief, 'one-off' contacts with animals, and those that review animal-assisted interventions. The health benefits demonstrated typically include reductions in depression and loneliness, while enhancing social interaction or social skills, and decreasing anxiety and arousal. Other health benefits associated with companion animals include the promotion of exercise or physical activity. The types of human-animal contact that have been evaluated include visual contact, physical contact, and looking at images of animals. The species used in interventions include dogs, cats, horses, rabbits, goats, hamsters and crickets. Despite these benefits, HAIs are also associated with problems, including allergies, asthma, zoonoses, animal bites and scratches, and human falls. Other problems include grief and negative emotions when a companion animal is injured or dies. Companion animal ownership is also expensive. Inconsistent policies concerning keeping animals in housing and enabling service animals to access public places make it difficult to live with companion animals or keep service animals in some circumstances. Additional research is needed to provide an evidence base to evaluate the efficacy of particular types of HAI using a given type of animal. This will document specific outcomes for an individual with certain characteristics and assist in promoting the future use of HAI to enhance human and animal health and well-being. L’existence d’un lien entre la santé, d’une part, et l’interaction humains–animaux d’autre part, est amplement démontrée. Les études en la matière se répartissent en trois catégories principales : comparaisons entre la situation de propriétaires d’animaux de compagnie et celle d’individus ne possédant pas d’animal de compagnie ; études sur des contacts brefs et ponctuels avec des animaux ; études analysant les interventions thérapeutiques recourant à des animaux. Parmi les bénéfices pour la santé mis en évidence dans ces études figurent l’atténuation des états dépressifs et du sentiment de solitude, une meilleure interaction sociale, un renforcement des compétences sociales et une diminution des états d’anxiété et d’agitation. Les animaux de compagnie encouragent à avoir une activité physique, ce qui est un facteur bénéfique pour la santé. Les contacts humains–animaux étudiés sont le contact visuel, le contact physique et la contemplation d’images d’animaux. Les espèces suivantes sont utilisées à des fins thérapeutiques : chiens, chats, chevaux, lapins, chèvres, hamsters et grillons. En dépit de ces avantages, les interactions humains–animaux peuvent aussi provoquer certains problèmes tels qu’allergies, asthme, maladies zoonotiques, blessures dues à des morsures et griffures et chutes. Il y a aussi le chagrin et les émotions négatives qui peuvent s’emparer d’une personne en cas de blessures ou de mort de son animal de compagnie. La possession d’un animal de compagnie entraîne des coûts. L’incohérence des réglementations sur la présence d’animaux dans les logements et sur l’accès des animaux aidants dans les espaces publics rend parfois difficile la vie avec des animaux de compagnie ou le recours aux animaux aidants. Il convient de poursuivre les recherches afin de pouvoir évaluer l’efficacité de certaines catégories d’interactions humains–animaux suivant le type d’animal utilisé. Cela permettra de connaître les résultats spécifiques que l’on peut attendre chez un individu présentant des caractéristiques particulières et contribuera à promouvoir l’utilisation future d’interactions humains–animaux pour améliorer la santé et le bien-être humain et animal. Existen abundantes pruebas de que la interacción de humanos y animales reporta salud. Los estudios realizados corresponden a tres grandes categorías: aquellos que comparan a las personas que tienen una mascota con las que no tienen; aquellos que estudian contactos breves y excepcionales con animales; y aquellos que se centran en las intervenciones auxiliadas por animales. Los beneficios para la salud más comúnmente observados y probados son un menor grado de depresión y sentimiento de soledad, acompañado de una mejora de las relaciones y aptitudes sociales, así como menores niveles de ansiedad y agitación. Entre otros beneficios para la salud asociados a la presencia de animales de compañía destaca el incremento del ejercicio físico. Los tipos de contacto entre humanos y animales que se han evaluado son el contacto visual, el contacto físico y la visión de imágenes de animales. Las especies utilizadas en las intervenciones son principalmente el perro, el gato, el caballo, el conejo, la cabra, el hámster y el grillo. Pese a todos los beneficios que deparan, las relaciones entre humanos y animales también pueden provocar problemas como alergias, asma, zoonosis, mordeduras y arañazos de animal o caídas de las personas. Asimismo, a veces surgen dificultades como el duelo o las emociones negativas que acompañan las lesiones o la muerte de una mascota. Además, la propiedad de un animal de compañía resulta cara. En algunas circunstancias, la aplicación de políticas incoherentes sobre el hecho de tener animales en las viviendas o de permitir el acceso de animales de servicio a lugares públicos dificulta la vida con mascotas o la posesión de animales de servicio. Para evaluar la eficacia de ciertas clases particulares de relación entre humanos y animales con el uso de un determinado tipo de animal se requieren más investigaciones que aporten una sólida base probatoria. Con ello será posible demostrar la obtención de resultados específicos con una persona de determinadas características y promover en el futuro la utilización de la relación entre humanos y animales para procurar a ambas partes mayores cotas de salud y bienestar.
Get Full Text
Publication Date: 2018-09-14 PubMed ID: 30209428DOI: 10.20506/rst.37.1.2741Google Scholar: Lookup
The Equine Research Bank provides access to a large database of publicly available scientific literature. Inclusion in the Research Bank does not imply endorsement of study methods or findings by Mad Barn.
LinkedInCopy
  • Journal Article
  • Review

Summary

This research summary has been generated with artificial intelligence and may contain errors and omissions. Refer to the original study to confirm details provided. Submit correction.

The research study explores the health benefits and challenges associated with human-animal interaction (HAI), using companion animals as the main subjects. The benefits highlighted are mainly psychological, physical, and social, while the challenges include allergies, injuries, cost implications, and policy inconsistencies. The study calls for more research to effectively evaluate and implement HAI as a standard health-boosting practice.

Overview of Human-Animal Interaction (HAI)

  • The study broadly categorizes HAI research into those comparing the health status of pet owners and non-pet owners, those examining brief instances of animal contact, and those scrutinizing animal-assisted interventions.
  • The general health benefits derived from HAI include reduced depression and loneliness, improved social interaction and skills, and lower anxiety and arousal levels. Some additional benefits cited are increased exercise and physical activity opportunities.
  • Types of human-animal interactions researched include visual contact, physical contact, and viewing images of animals. This interaction could be with a variety of animals such as dogs, cats, horses, rabbits, goats, hamsters, and crickets.

Challenges and Problems in HAI

  • Despite the numerous benefits gained from interacting with companion animals, the health risks cannot be ignored. These include allergies, asthma, animal-borne diseases, animal-inflicted injuries, and physical accidents such as falls.
  • Emotional distress is another problem when a companion animal gets injured or passes away, invoking grief and other negative feelings.
  • Another drawback is the financial responsibility of owning a companion animal that can be rather expensive.
  • Policy limitations also pose challenges, with inconsistent rules about animals in living spaces and the accessibility of public areas for service animals hindering the practicality of pet ownership.

The Future: Enhanced Research and Acceptance

  • The study concludes with an emphasis on the need for more extensive research in the field. This is essential to create an evidence-based understanding of the effectiveness of different types of HAI using specific animals.
  • Such research should document specific outcomes for individuals with particular characteristics. This would contribute to the promotion of HAI as an accepted approach to enhancing both human and animal health and well-being in the future.

Cite This Article

APA
Friedman E, Krause-Parello CA. (2018). Companion animals and human health: benefits, challenges, and the road ahead for human-animal interaction. Rev Sci Tech, 37(1), 71-82. https://doi.org/10.20506/rst.37.1.2741

Publication

Revue scientifique et technique (International Office of Epizootics)
ISSN: 0253-1933
NlmUniqueID: 8712301
Country: France
Language: English
Volume: 37
Issue: 1
Pages: 71-82

Researcher Affiliations

Friedman, E
    Krause-Parello, C A

      MeSH Terms

      • Animal Assisted Therapy
      • Animals
      • Human-Animal Bond
      • Humans
      • Pets
      • Quality of Life

      Citations

      This article has been cited 33 times.
      1. Liguori G, Costagliola A, Lombardi R, Paciello O, Giordano A. Human-Animal Interaction in Animal-Assisted Interventions (AAI)s: Zoonosis Risks, Benefits, and Future Directions-A One Health Approach. Animals (Basel) 2023 May 9;13(10).
        doi: 10.3390/ani13101592pubmed: 37238022google scholar: lookup
      2. Lopes-Conceição L, Peleteiro B, Araújo N, Dias T, Fontes F, Pereira S, Lunet N. Pet ownership during the first 5 years after breast cancer diagnosis in the NEON-BC cohort. Eur J Public Health 2023 Jun 1;33(3):455-462.
        doi: 10.1093/eurpub/ckad065pubmed: 37094984google scholar: lookup
      3. Mattila-Rautiainen S, Venojärvi M, Rautiainen H, Keski-Valkama A. The impact on physical performance, pain and psychological wellbeing of chronic low back pain patients during 12-weeks of equine- facilitated therapy intervention. Front Vet Sci 2023;10:1085768.
        doi: 10.3389/fvets.2023.1085768pubmed: 36998640google scholar: lookup
      4. Tóth ÁL, Kívés Z, Szovák E, Kresák R, Jeges S, Kertai B, Pelyva IZ. Sense of Coherence and Self-Rated Aggression of Adolescents during the First Wave of the COVID-19 Pandemic, with a Focus on the Effects of Animal Assisted Activities. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2022 Dec 31;20(1).
        doi: 10.3390/ijerph20010769pubmed: 36613091google scholar: lookup
      5. Junça-Silva A. Unleashing the Furr-Recovery Method: Interacting with Pets in Teleworking Replenishes the Self's Regulatory Resources: Evidence from a Daily-Diary Study. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2022 Dec 28;20(1).
        doi: 10.3390/ijerph20010518pubmed: 36612840google scholar: lookup
      6. Giraudet CSE, Liu K, McElligott AG, Cobb M. Are children and dogs best friends? A scoping review to explore the positive and negative effects of child-dog interactions. PeerJ 2022;10:e14532.
        doi: 10.7717/peerj.14532pubmed: 36570006google scholar: lookup
      7. Rathish D, Rajapakse J, Weerakoon K. Household preferences for pet keeping: Findings from a rural district of Sri Lanka. PLoS One 2022;17(11):e0277108.
        doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0277108pubmed: 36413533google scholar: lookup
      8. Junça-Silva A. The Furr-Recovery Method: Interacting with Furry Co-Workers during Work Time Is a Micro-Break That Recovers Workers' Regulatory Resources and Contributes to Their Performance. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2022 Oct 21;19(20).
        doi: 10.3390/ijerph192013701pubmed: 36294275google scholar: lookup
      9. Cabrita ARJ, Guilherme-Fernandes J, Valente IM, Almeida A, Lima SAC, Fonseca AJM, Maia MRG. Nutritional Composition and Untargeted Metabolomics Reveal the Potential of Tetradesmus obliquus, Chlorella vulgaris and Nannochloropsis oceanica as Valuable Nutrient Sources for Dogs. Animals (Basel) 2022 Oct 1;12(19).
        doi: 10.3390/ani12192643pubmed: 36230383google scholar: lookup
      10. Martos Martinez-Caja A, De Herdt V, Enders-Slegers MJ, Moons CPH. Pet ownership, feelings of loneliness, and mood in people affected by the first COVID-19 lockdown. J Vet Behav 2022 Nov;57:52-63.
        doi: 10.1016/j.jveb.2022.09.008pubmed: 36212778google scholar: lookup
      11. D'Amico F, Casalino G, Bozzo G, Camarda A, Lombardi R, Dimuccio MM, Circella E. Spreading of Pasteurella multocida Infection in a Pet Rabbit Breeding and Possible Implications on Healed Bunnies. Vet Sci 2022 Jun 18;9(6).
        doi: 10.3390/vetsci9060301pubmed: 35737353google scholar: lookup
      12. Meixner J, Kotrschal K. Animal-Assisted Interventions With Dogs in Special Education-A Systematic Review. Front Psychol 2022;13:876290.
        doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.876290pubmed: 35712211google scholar: lookup
      13. Berardi A, Di Napoli G, Ernesto M, Fabbrini G, Conte A, Ferrazzano G, Viselli F, Galeoto G. The Effectiveness of Equine Therapy Intervention on Activities of Daily Living, Quality of Life, Mood, Balance and Gait in Individuals with Parkinson's Disease. Healthcare (Basel) 2022 Mar 17;10(3).
        doi: 10.3390/healthcare10030561pubmed: 35327039google scholar: lookup
      14. Phungviwatnikul T, Lee AH, Belchik SE, Suchodolski JS, Swanson KS. Weight loss and high-protein, high-fiber diet consumption impact blood metabolite profiles, body composition, voluntary physical activity, fecal microbiota, and fecal metabolites of adult dogs. J Anim Sci 2022 Feb 1;100(2).
        doi: 10.1093/jas/skab379pubmed: 34967874google scholar: lookup
      15. Corrêa GF, Barcelos AM, Mills DS. Dog-related activities and human well-being in Brazilian dog owners: A framework and cross-cultural comparison with a British study. Sci Prog 2021 Oct;104(4):368504211050277.
        doi: 10.1177/00368504211050277pubmed: 34844454google scholar: lookup
      16. Sparkes AH. Human allergy to cats: A review of the impact on cat ownership and relinquishment. J Feline Med Surg 2022 Jan;24(1):43-52.
        doi: 10.1177/1098612X211013016pubmed: 34622709google scholar: lookup
      17. Friesinger JG, Birkeland B, Thorød AB. Human-Animal Relationships in Supported Housing: Animal Atmospheres for Mental Health Recovery. Front Psychol 2021;12:712133.
        doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.712133pubmed: 34484069google scholar: lookup
      18. Rault JL, Waiblinger S, Boivin X, Hemsworth P. The Power of a Positive Human-Animal Relationship for Animal Welfare. Front Vet Sci 2020;7:590867.
        doi: 10.3389/fvets.2020.590867pubmed: 33240961google scholar: lookup
      19. Schwarzmüller-Erber G, Stummer H, Maier M, Kundi M. Nature Relatedness of Recreational Horseback Riders and Its Association with Mood and Wellbeing. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2020 Jun 10;17(11).
        doi: 10.3390/ijerph17114136pubmed: 32531937google scholar: lookup
      20. Concepción J, de Brun C, Usmanov G, Powell L, Rogula B, Dhand A, Schmahmann JD. Personal Social Network Analysis in Cerebellar Ataxia: Exploring Correlations with Quality of Life and Functional Outcomes. Cerebellum 2026 Jan 12;25(1):8.
        doi: 10.1007/s12311-025-01953-5pubmed: 41524968google scholar: lookup
      21. Erren TC, Glenewinkel F, Wild U, Wallraff J, Lewis P. Byron's bear and dwarf rabbits in the classroom: a review of animals against academic stress. Front Vet Sci 2025;12:1693505.
        doi: 10.3389/fvets.2025.1693505pubmed: 41479420google scholar: lookup
      22. Santaniello A, Perruolo G, Amato A, Garzillo S, Mormone F, Morelli C, Formisano P, Sansone M, Fioretti A, Oriente F. Animal Assisted Activities (AAAs) with Dogs in a Dialysis Center in Southern Italy: Evaluation of Serotonin and Oxytocin Values in Involved Patients. Biomedicines 2025 Nov 29;13(12).
        doi: 10.3390/biomedicines13122944pubmed: 41462956google scholar: lookup
      23. Schultz K, Alvarez E, Brooks J, Chun R. Assessing client needs in community veterinary care: a case study from WisCARES. Front Vet Sci 2025;12:1675984.
        doi: 10.3389/fvets.2025.1675984pubmed: 41158945google scholar: lookup
      24. O'Connor A, Totton SC, Hernandez M, Meyers E, Meyers K, Abreu HM, Spofford N, Morrison J. Risk factors for, metrics of, and consequences of access to veterinary care for companion animals: A scoping review. PLoS One 2025;20(5):e0325455.
        doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0325455pubmed: 40446001google scholar: lookup
      25. Swanson KS, Allenspach K, Amos G, Auchtung TA, Bassett SA, Bjørnvad CR, Everaert N, Martín-Orúe SM, Ricke SC, Ryan EP, Fahey GC Jr. Use of biotics in animals: impact on nutrition, health, and food production. J Anim Sci 2025 Jan 4;103.
        doi: 10.1093/jas/skaf061pubmed: 40036559google scholar: lookup
      26. Haggerty DK, Wahl R, Jones N, LaChance J, Hanna M. Perceived Harm to Pet Health Associated with Human Quality of Life After a Public Health Disaster. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2025 Feb 11;22(2).
        doi: 10.3390/ijerph22020250pubmed: 40003476google scholar: lookup
      27. Gillet L, Turcsán B, Kubinyi E. Perceived costs and benefits of companion dog keeping based on a convenience sample of dog owners. Sci Rep 2025 Jan 21;15(1):2515.
        doi: 10.1038/s41598-025-85254-1pubmed: 39837873google scholar: lookup
      28. Li J, Liang L, Huang H, Pan B, Pan Y, Liu Z, Pang Y, Feng X. Survey Results on the Awareness of Laboratory Animal Welfare among Medical Graduate Students. J Am Assoc Lab Anim Sci 2024 Nov 1;63(6):636-643.
        doi: 10.30802/AALAS-JAALAS-24-000013pubmed: 39711505google scholar: lookup
      29. Junça-Silva A, Galrito M. Pets at work: integrating pet-friendly initiatives into human resources for enhanced workplace harmony. BMC Psychol 2024 Jul 2;12(1):374.
        doi: 10.1186/s40359-024-01854-ypubmed: 38956720google scholar: lookup
      30. Barr HK, Guggenbickler AM, Hoch JS, Dewa CS. Examining evidence for a relationship between human-animal interactions and common mental disorders during the COVID-19 pandemic: a systematic literature review. Front Health Serv 2024;4:1321293.
        doi: 10.3389/frhs.2024.1321293pubmed: 38385049google scholar: lookup
      31. Li Y, Wang W, Zhu L, Yang L, Wu H, Zhang X, Guo L, Lu C. Pet Ownership, Living Alone, and Cognitive Decline Among Adults 50 Years and Older. JAMA Netw Open 2023 Dec 1;6(12):e2349241.
        doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.49241pubmed: 38147332google scholar: lookup
      32. Mateo M, Montoya A, Bailo B, Köster PC, Dashti A, Hernández-Castro C, Saugar JM, Matas P, Xiao L, Carmena D. Prevalence and public health relevance of enteric parasites in domestic dogs and cats in the region of Madrid (Spain) with an emphasis on Giardia duodenalis and Cryptosporidium sp. Vet Med Sci 2023 Nov;9(6):2542-2558.
        doi: 10.1002/vms3.1270pubmed: 37725371google scholar: lookup
      33. Barcelos AM, Kargas N, Maltby J, Hall S, Mills DS. A framework for understanding how activities associated with dog ownership relate to human well-being. Sci Rep 2020 Jul 9;10(1):11363.
        doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-68446-9pubmed: 32647301google scholar: lookup
      Subscribe to our newsletter
      Join 99,727 horse owners like you who receive our email updates on horse health and nutrition.