The Influence of Companion Animals on Quality of Life of Gay and Bisexual Men Diagnosed with Prostate Cancer

Morgan M. Wright, Pamela Schreiner, B. R. Simon Rosser, Elizabeth J. Polter, Darryl Mitteldorf, William West and Michael W. Ross
Additional contact information
Morgan M. Wright: Division of Epidemiology and Community Health, School of Public Health, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN 55454, USA
Pamela Schreiner: Division of Epidemiology and Community Health, School of Public Health, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN 55454, USA
B. R. Simon Rosser: Division of Epidemiology and Community Health, School of Public Health, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN 55454, USA
Elizabeth J. Polter: Division of Epidemiology and Community Health, School of Public Health, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN 55454, USA
Darryl Mitteldorf: Malecare Cancer Support, New York, NY 10001, USA
William West: Department of Writing Studies, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN 55454, USA
Michael W. Ross: Department of Family Medicine and community Health, Program of Human Sexuality, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN 55454, USA

IJERPH, 2019, vol. 16, issue 22, 1-8

Abstract: There has been almost no research on associations of companion animals with quality of life in sexual minorities. Because gay and bisexual men have less social support than their heterosexual peers, some have argued that pet companionship could provide emotional support, while others have argued the opposite, that having a pet is another stressor. This analysis examines the association between having dogs, cats, both animals, or no animals and quality of life using the 12-item Short Form (SF-12) mental and physical composite quality of life scores for gay and bisexual prostate cancer survivors, post-treatment. Participants were 189 gay, bisexual, or other men who have sex with men, who completed online surveys in 2015. Linear regression analysis found that participants with cats and participants with dogs had lower mental quality of life scores than participants without pets. After adjustment for covariates, mental health scores remained significantly lower for cat owners, dog owners, and owners of both animals compared to those of participants who did not have pets. No differences were seen for physical quality of life scores after adjustment. We conclude that pet companionship may be a net stressor for gay and bisexual men following prostate cancer treatment. As this is the first study of pet companionship in sexual minorities, further research is needed to confirm the reliability of these findings, generalizability, and temporality of the association.

Keywords: health benefits; psychological benefits; pet companionship; cancer; prostate; sexual minorities (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: I I1 I3 Q Q5 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2019
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/16/22/4457/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/16/22/4457/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:16:y:2019:i:22:p:4457-:d:286449

Access Statistics for this article

IJERPH is currently edited by Ms. Jenna Liu

More articles in IJERPH from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().