Date Presented 3/30/2017
Service dogs provide specific tasks that increase independence and enhance quality of life for their handlers. Service dogs are often misunderstood, which leads to barriers for service dog users. This study explores the impact of service dog education with persons with chronic conditions.
Primary Author and Speaker: Mary Isaacson
Additional Authors and Speakers: Meredith Wyatt
Contributing Authors: Jody Worley
BACKGROUND: Service dogs provide specific tasks to their handlers, which increases their handlers’ independence in the home and community and enhances quality of life (Camp, 2001; Crowe et al., 2014; Gonder-Frederick et al., 2013). However, service dogs are often misunderstood. The confusion leads to barriers and misunderstanding among service dog users in the community (Winkle, Crowe, & Hendrix, 2012).
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to quantify the impact of interactive service dog education on potential service dog users’ understanding and perceptions of the benefits and ownership of service dogs and rights of service dog users. We hypothesized that interactive service dog education would significantly increase participants’ actual and perceived knowledge about service dog partnerships.
METHODS: Forty-six participants were recruited from the Center for Individuals with Physical Challenges to participate in the voluntary educational series. These individuals had various chronic conditions. The participants attended 6 wk of 1-hr service dog lectures that included an interactive demonstration of service dog skills. Participants completed a pretraining and posttraining assessment each week measuring knowledge about benefits, definitions, and laws about service dog partnerships. A survey was administered to measure perceptions about service dogs at baseline and after the conclusion of the series. Lastly, a focus group with seven participants was conducted after the conclusion of the 6-wk educational course.
RESULTS: Test results from the McNemar nonparametric test indicate there were significant changes in participants’ understanding of where service dog users have public access. The increase in correct responses to this question on the posttest was statistically significant (X
2 = 5.143, p =.016). Limitations of the tests on the nominal scale include inconsistent attendance and cognitive levels of participants. The survey was conducted at baseline and after the 6th week of training. The survey items were scored on a five-point ordinal scale of measurement (strongly disagree to strongly agree). A Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used to analyze these data for comparison. Statistically significant differences (p < .05) were observed on the following survey items: recognizing who a service dog can help, realizing the difference between the various types of service dogs, understanding the difference between a service dog and a therapy dog, knowing the laws about public places that service dogs can enter, and understanding tasks that a service dog can perform. The focus group identified three themes among the participants that complement the quantitative data.
CONCLUSION: The interactive service dog education proved to be effective in increasing potential service dog users’ perceptions and understanding about the use, benefits, and ownership of service dogs and rights of service dog users. By increasing participants’ understanding of the public access laws, participants can advocate and help decrease barriers for assistance dog users. Additionally, as potential service dog users, the participants can understand and advocate for their own rights and protections under the Americans With Disabilities Act.
IMPACT STATEMENT: Overall, participants reported a significant increase in their perceived knowledge of service dogs. Barriers to behavioral change include lack of awareness and lack of knowledge (Grol & Wensing, 2004). With an increase in knowledge and understanding, participants can be more confident in making recommendations and advocating for others with disabilities who may benefit from the use of a service dog. The Professor Paws Project is a model for providing service dog education for occupational therapists and potential service dog users.
References
Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990, Pub. L. 101–336, 42 U.S.C. §§ 12101–12213 (2000).
Camp, M. (2001). The use of service dogs as an adaptive strategy: A qualitative study. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 55, 509–517. https://doi.org/10.5014/ajot.55.5.509
Crowe, T., Perea-Burns, S., Sedillo, J., Hendrix, I., Winkle, M., & Deitz, J. (2014). Effects of partnerships between people with mobility challenges and service dogs. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 68, 194–201. https://doi.org/10.5014/ajot.2014.009324
Gonder-Federick, L., Rice, P., Warren, D., Vajda, K., & Shepard, J. (2013). Diabetic alert dogs: A preliminary study of current users. Diabetes Care, 36, e47. https://doi.org/10.2337/dc12-1998
Grol, R., & Wensing, M. (2004). What drives change? Barriers to and incentives for achieving evidence-based practice. Medical Journal of Australia, 180(6 Suppl.), S57–60.
Winkle, M., Crowe, T., & Hendrix, I. (2012) Service dogs and people with physical disabilities partnerships: A systematic review. Occupational Therapy International, 19, 54–66. https://doi.org/10.1002/oti.323
