Resumen
MÉTODOS: Se realizaron búsquedas en 11 bases de datos siguiendo las recomendaciones del PRISMA, y se realizó búsqueda manual de la referencias de artículos incluidos y revisiones previas. No se aplicaron filtros de lenguaje o fecha. Se incluyeron solo estudios controlados, incluyendo estudios con controles por lista de espera, que estudiaran una condición o enfermedad específica. La calidad de los estudios se valoró utilizando la herramienta de riesgo de sesgo de la colaboración Cochrane.
RESULTADOS: Se incluyeron veintiséis estudios que cumplieron todos los criterios. Nueve de los estudios fueron realizados en niños con trastornos del espectro autista, 10 en niños con parálisis cerebral, 2 en síndrome de Down, 3 en dolor, y 2 en otras condiciones. La síntesis cualitativa mostró una contribución pequeña pero significativa de la TAA al manejo de estas condiciones. El meta-análisis mostró una diferencia de medias de mejoría desde línea de base para la escala Gross Motor Function Measure-66 en niños con parálisis cerebral de 1.61 (Intervalo de confianza 95% -2.00-5.23) y una diferencia de medias en las escalas de dolor de 5 puntos de -0.81 (95% -1.32 a 0.30), ambas a favor de la TAA.
CONCLUSIÓN: La TAA podría ser útil como intervención complementaria en el manejo de niños con parálisis cerebral o dolor. Aunque los resultados son en general positivos para el manejo de niños con síndrome de Down o autismo, la diversidad de escalas utilizadas para medir desenlaces hace difícil establecer la efectividad real. La aplicación de medidas correctivas sencillas en el proceso de aleatorización mejoraría de forma importante la calidad de la evidencia. Es necesario llegar a un consenso entre investigadores en TAA con respecto a los instrumentos más apropiados para la medición de desenlaces, de modo que se pueda aportar evidencia de alta calidad en estudios posteriores.
| Idioma original | English (US) |
|---|---|
| Páginas (desde-hasta) | 580-590 |
| Número de páginas | 10 |
| Publicación | Journal of Developmental and Behavioral Pediatrics |
| DOI | |
| Estado | E-pub ahead of print - sep 1 2018 |
Citar esto
}
Effectiveness of Animal-Assisted Therapy in the Pediatric Population: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Controlled Studies : Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Controlled Studies. / Charry-Sánchez, Jesús David; Pradilla, Iván; Talero-Gutiérrez, Claudia.
En: Journal of Developmental and Behavioral Pediatrics, 01.09.2018, p. 580-590.Resultado de la investigación: Contribución a Revista › Artículo
TY - JOUR
T1 - Effectiveness of Animal-Assisted Therapy in the Pediatric Population: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Controlled Studies
T2 - Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Controlled Studies
AU - Charry-Sánchez, Jesús David
AU - Pradilla, Iván
AU - Talero-Gutiérrez, Claudia
PY - 2018/9/1
Y1 - 2018/9/1
N2 - OBJECTIVE: To synthesize the results of controlled studies evaluating the effectiveness of animal-assisted therapy (AAT) in children.METHODS: Eleven databases were searched following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses statement recommendations, and references from included studies and previous reviews were examined. No date or language filters were applied. Only controlled study designs, including those using wait-list controls, that studied a specific condition or illness were included. Study quality was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool.RESULTS: Twenty-six studies that met the inclusion criteria were retrieved. Nine were conducted in children with autism spectrum disorders, 10 in cerebral palsy (CP), 2 in Down syndrome, 3 in pain, and 2 in other conditions. Qualitative synthesis showed a small but significant contribution of AAT to the management of these conditions. Meta-analysis showed a mean difference in improvement in the Gross Motor Function Measure-66 scale in children with CP of 1.61 (95% confidence interval [CI] -2.00 to 5.23) and a mean difference for 5-point pain scales of -0.81 (95% CI -1.32 to 0.30), both favoring AAT.CONCLUSION: Animal-assisted therapy may be useful as a complementary intervention in the management of children with CP and pain. Although results are in general positive for the management of children with Down syndrome and autism, the diversity of scales used to measure outcomes makes it difficult to establish true effectiveness. The application of simple corrective measures in the randomization process would greatly improve the quality of evidence. It is necessary to reach a consensus between AAT researchers regarding appropriate instruments to provide higher-quality evidence in further studies.
AB - OBJECTIVE: To synthesize the results of controlled studies evaluating the effectiveness of animal-assisted therapy (AAT) in children.METHODS: Eleven databases were searched following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses statement recommendations, and references from included studies and previous reviews were examined. No date or language filters were applied. Only controlled study designs, including those using wait-list controls, that studied a specific condition or illness were included. Study quality was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool.RESULTS: Twenty-six studies that met the inclusion criteria were retrieved. Nine were conducted in children with autism spectrum disorders, 10 in cerebral palsy (CP), 2 in Down syndrome, 3 in pain, and 2 in other conditions. Qualitative synthesis showed a small but significant contribution of AAT to the management of these conditions. Meta-analysis showed a mean difference in improvement in the Gross Motor Function Measure-66 scale in children with CP of 1.61 (95% confidence interval [CI] -2.00 to 5.23) and a mean difference for 5-point pain scales of -0.81 (95% CI -1.32 to 0.30), both favoring AAT.CONCLUSION: Animal-assisted therapy may be useful as a complementary intervention in the management of children with CP and pain. Although results are in general positive for the management of children with Down syndrome and autism, the diversity of scales used to measure outcomes makes it difficult to establish true effectiveness. The application of simple corrective measures in the randomization process would greatly improve the quality of evidence. It is necessary to reach a consensus between AAT researchers regarding appropriate instruments to provide higher-quality evidence in further studies.
U2 - 10.1097/DBP.0000000000000594
DO - 10.1097/DBP.0000000000000594
M3 - Article
C2 - 29994814
SP - 580
EP - 590
JO - Journal of Developmental and Behavioral Pediatrics
JF - Journal of Developmental and Behavioral Pediatrics
SN - 0196-206X
ER -