RESULTS
disruptive behaviors
SECONDARY
Ten boys and six girls aged between 6 and 12 years (mean age 8.5 years) were recruited, and all completed both clinical examinations conducted between January 2018 and June 2019. The interval between the first and second visits varied from 2 to 13 days (mean 4 days, median 5 days). One examiner (K. C.) saw 10 study participants, and 5 were seen by another (E. L.), while KC saw one participant at the first and EL at the second visit. Most study participants (All the study participants complied satisfactorily without any disruptive behaviors while undergoing the clinical examinations, regardless of whether or not the dental therapy dog was present in the operatory room (Figure CONSORT flow diagram showing the data for the primary and secondary outcomesAll study participants reported maximum scores for satisfaction after having undergone the clinical examination with the presence of the dental therapy dog in the clinic operatory. Moreover, all parents/guardians with one exception who scored “2” scored “5,” that is, agree, upon answering the statement: “I appreciated that the child was supported by (name of the therapy dog),” and 13 of 16 parents/guardians scored “5,” that is, agree, upon answering the: “I appreciated meeting (name of the therapy dog)” whereas 3 of 16 parents/guardians scored “4” on the same statement.