The spinal column including its vertebrae and disks has been well examined and extensively reported in relation to age-aggregated degeneration. In contrast, paravertebral muscles are poorly represented in describing normative degeneration. Increasing evidence points to the importance of paravertebral muscle quality in low back health, and their potential as a modifiable factor in low back pain (LBP). Studies examining normative decline of paravertebral muscles are needed to advance the field’s etiological understanding. With a novel approach and based on published data, we establish and compare decline rates of imaging features for degeneration of lumbar vertebrae and disks, versus fatty infiltration in paravertebral muscles in asymptomatic adults. Our cross-sectional simulation study examined age-aggregated data from three published studies who reported on asymptomatic adults spanning 18–60 years. Prevalence rates of imaging degenerative features of the spinal column were examined via logistic regression and compared with percentage fatty infiltration in erector spinae, multifidus and psoas using synthetic data and Monte Carlo simulation with 10,000 endpoint-specific regression iterations. General linear regression models were employed to estimate marginal effects of age reported as a one-year change rate (with 95 % confidence intervals) for comparisons between all reported spinal features. Declines in multifidus (0.24 & 0.11 %/year), erector spinae (0.13 & 0.07 %/year), and psoas (0.04 %/year) occur at similarly slow rates to disk protrusion (0.25 %/year), annular fissure (0.15 %/year), and spondylolisthesis (0.29 %/year). Multifidus showed a trend for faster decline than erector spinae, particularly in men. Of the features examined, disk signal loss declined fastest, and psoas muscle the slowest. Degeneration of lumbar paravertebral muscles occurs slowly in asymptomatic adults, with a tendency to be most pronounced in multifidus. Rate of decline of spinal structures represents a novel variable that warrants inclusion as a known feature of the expected degenerative cascade, and to provide a basis for comparison to diseases of the spine in research and clinical practice. Concurrent examination of spinal features using advanced imaging to improve muscle analysis would be a strong addition to the field.
Most research into the health benefits of human-animal interaction has focused on species that interact physically with humans, such as dogs. This may be unsuitable for certain populations for reasons including accessibility and the risk of negative consequences to both the person and the animal. However, some research has associated viewing fish in aquariums with positive well-being outcomes; as there is no physical contact with the animal, this form of interaction carries less risk. At present, little is known about the specific benefits of human-fish interaction. To explore current evidence relating to the psychological and physiological benefits of interacting with fish in aquariums. Systematic searches were conducted to identify relevant primary research of any design. All forms of interaction were considered, including keeping fish as companion animals and fish aquarium-based interventions. "Non-live" alternatives, such as videos, were also considered. This review was conducted according to a registered protocol (PROSPERO ID: CRD42018090466). Nineteen studies were included. Two provided tentative evidence that keeping home aquaria is associated with relaxation. The remaining studies involved novel interactions with fish in home or public aquariums. Outcomes relating to anxiety, relaxation and/or physiological stress were commonly assessed; evidence was mixed with both positive and null findings. Preliminary support was found for effects on mood, pain, nutritional intake and body weight, but not loneliness. All studies had methodological issues and risk of bias was either high or unclear. Review findings suggest that interacting with fish in aquariums has the potential to benefit human well-being, although research on this topic is currently limited. Future research should aim to address gaps in the evidence, such as whether and how the type of human-fish interaction can influence well-being outcomes. Researchers should also aim to address the methodological concerns highlighted in this review.
To reduce the spread of COVID-19, countries worldwide placed limitations on social interaction, which is anticipated to have severe psychological consequences. Although findings are inconsistent, prior research has suggested that companion animals may positively influence human well-being and reduce loneliness. In the context of COVID-19, this has important implications, as companion animal guardians may be less negatively affected by the pandemic. The primary aim of this research was to investigate the influence of companion animals on mental well-being and loneliness during the pandemic, with specific interest in the role of ornamental fishes. A mixed-methods study was conducted, using an international sample. Quantitative data were collected via an online survey (n = 1199) and analysed using robust hierarchical multiple regression analyses; the influence of level of engagement with companion animals was examined for dogs, cats and ornamental fishes. There was no evidence that companion animal guardianship was associated with loneliness and mental well-being during the pandemic but spending more time engaging physically or socially with dogs (and to a lesser extent cats) was generally associated with poorer outcomes. Qualitative data were collected through open-ended survey responses (n = 757) and semi-structured interviews (n = 25) and analysed using reflexive thematic analysis. Two themes were developed—one related to companion animals as providers of social and emotional support, and the other to companion animals as providers of purpose and perspective. Concerns regarding the impact of the pandemic on animal welfare were also identified. Compared to other animal types, more participants expressed indifference regarding the impact of their fishes on their well-being during the pandemic, possibly because fishes cannot provide comfort via physical touch. The findings of this study reflect the wider field of human–animal interaction; although qualitative data suggest guardians believe their companion animals are a positive influence in their lives, there is little convincing quantitative data to support these beliefs. This highlights the need to refine theories regarding which aspects of companion animal guardianship may influence human well-being; the findings from this research may be useful in the refinement of such theories.