Whether or not a pet affects the health of an elderly individual in a nursing home facility has not been fully determined. Examples of pets as therapy go back to the 9th century when they were used to teach disabled people to care for another living being. Florence Nightingale was a supporter of pet therapy and noted that it may be a person’s only pleasure later in life (Reynolds, 2012). While it seems that the companionship and interaction through caring touch of an animal would logically lead to better health outcomes for nursing home residents, there is very little evidence-based research to implement pet therapy. This paper will discuss the methods, research challenges, and outcomes of pet therapy among the elderly in care facilities, as this alternative treatment tries to emerge in an environment that requires evidence-based decision making.

Pet therapy methods are varied. Individuals entering care facilities often have to give up their animals, and 38,000 pets are put down every year as a result. Many people feel that losing a pet is equal to losing a human relation, yet only 20 percent of care facilities have policies regarding pet ownership in nursing homes (Reynolds, 2012). While pets are a complicated policy issue, they can exist in many styles. Residents could keep individual pets, such as birds or fish that can be contained, but nursing homes may also have resident cats or dogs that are trusted inhabitants of the facility. Robotic animals have also been used to increase communication among elderly residents suffering from dementia, and the results were positive whether or not the resident understood that the animal was robotic (Naganuma, Ohkubo, & Kato, 2015). Pets, robotic or living, remind residents of prior interactions with pets in the past, and this nostalgic pleasantness reduces blood pressure and depressive symptoms (Smith, Johnson & Rolph, 2011).

Research regarding pet therapy in nursing homes is limited but increasing in availability, as the potential positive outcomes become realized. Challenges to research include small sample sizes and problems with establishing control groups. There are also difficulties in ensuring hygiene and disease prevention. Possibly the most detrimental aspect to research is the inability to blind the subjects. The qualitative instruments used to perform research, such as psychological well-being questionnaires, lead subjects to overestimate their mental health following exposure to pets (Cherniack & Cherniack, 2014). They are influenced by their want to have or keep a pet. The subjective nature of much of the research leads to results that are not repeatable. Every situation is very unique to the individual.

Despite pitfalls in research methods, pet therapy has shown promising results. Residents that did not get to live with pets but were able to have pets visit and interact with them exhibited positive results. Physical contact with animals encouraged longer conversations among residents. Residents were described as happier when able to interact with animals (Smith et al., 2011). Emotional well-being and happiness decreases stress in the body, which helps to achieve better health outcomes and decrease the cost of care.

Finding methods to increase the quality of care given to nursing home residents and reduce costs is invaluable in today’s healthcare system. Pet therapy may be one answer to this challenge. The methods are variable, which means there is flexibility available to promote policies that include pets in nursing homes. However, the research into the outcomes of pet therapy must become more strict and numerous before it can direct evidence-based decision-making in the direction of this alternative treatment. It is logical that pets will increase the happiness of nursing home residents and therefore their health. However, the numbers must prove this before action can get nursing home residents their pets.