Animal hoarding: a systematic review

Abstract

Objectives:

Animal hoarding is a special manifestation of hoarding disorder, characterized by the accumulation of animals and failure to provide them with minimal care. The main objective of this systematic review is to evaluate the characteristics of animal hoarding, focusing on the profile of affected individuals and the features of accumulation behavior.

Methods:

A systematic search of the literature was conducted in the electronic databases MEDLINE, Scopus, and LILACS until October 2022. We included case series (n ≥ 10) and cross-sectional studies assessing animal hoarding.

Results:

A total of 374 studies were initially retrieved. Most studies were classified as having poor quality and significant risk of bias. A total of 538 individuals with animal hoarding were evaluated. These individuals were predominantly middle-aged, unmarried women who lived alone in urban areas. Most of their residences had unsanitary conditions. Recidivism rates varied from 13-41%. Cats and dogs were the main hoarded species, mostly acquired through unplanned breeding, and disease, injury, behavioral problems, and a lack of hygiene were characreristic of their condition. Animal carcasses were found in up to 60% of the properties.

Conclusion:

Animal hoarding is a complex condition that requires urgent attention. More research is necessary to develop effective strategies that can save community resources, improve animal and human welfare, and prevent recidivism.

Animal hoarding; hoarding disorder; hoarding; compulsive behavior

Introduction

The first scientific publication describing people who lived with many animals consisted of cases from New York city.¹ The term “animal hoarding” refers to the compulsive need to collect and own animals that results in accidental or unintentional neglect or abuse.² Hoarding behavior is included in the DSM-IV-TR as a symptom of obsessive-compulsive disorder, or obsessive-compulsive personality disorder.³ In the DSM-5,⁴ hoarding disorder was classified as an independent disorder, described in the chapter on Obsessive-Compulsive and Related Disorders.³

Animal hoarding may be considered a special manifestation of hoarding disorder, although some researchers argue that it might be an independent nosological entity. The accumulation of animals coupled with the inability to provide them with veterinary care, sanitation, physical space, and nutrition are components of the animal hoarding diagnosis; however, animal hoarding behavior might entail addiction, dementia, or even focal delusion.⁵,⁶ People who hoard animals can be classified in three main categories: 1) “overwhelmed caregivers” – individuals whose problems with animals are triggered by changes in circumstances or resources, 2) “rescuers” – individuals with a strong sense or mission to save animals, and 3) “exploiters” – individuals lacking empathy who acquire animals to serve their own needs.⁷

Animal hoarding is a public health problem due to serious health and welfare risks that affect people and animals.⁶,⁸ However, the frequency of animal hoarding is still unknown.⁶ Keeping a large number of animals in the same space could result in feces and urine accumulation, attracting pests, and increasing the risk infectious diseases.⁶ Hoarded animals might develop abnormal behaviors such as fear, sensitivity to touch, attachment and attention seeking, separation-related behavior, urination and defecation when left alone, or repetitive behaviors.⁹ Poor insight and pervasive neglect are generally characteristic of people who hoard animals; their houses may lack working bathrooms, cooking facilities, heat, electricity, or running water, and their beds may be soiled with human or animal excrement.¹⁰,¹¹ Deceased animals might be kept in freezers, outbuildings, or otherwise preserved.¹² Managing animal hoarding cases is also costly and cumbersome, involving public health, social services, psychiatric treatment, veterinary treatment, legal counselling, housing, sanitation, and animal control agencies.⁸

Studies on animal hoarding have been of relatively poor quality. The main objective of this systematic review is to evaluate the characteristics of animal hoarding, focusing on the profile of affected individuals and the features of accumulation behavior.

Methods

Search strategy and study selection criteria

A systematic search of the literature was conducted until October 2022 in the MEDLINE, LILACS, and Scopus electronic databases. The search terms “animals” and “hoarding” were applied. The entire search strategy in MEDLINE and LILACS was “Animals AND hoarding”, in Scopus, the entire search strategy was “TITLE-ABS-KEY (animals) AND TITLE-ABS-KEY (hoarding)”. No restrictions were established regarding language or year of publication. We included original studies (n > 10) assessing adults. We excluded studies that did not include humans and neurobiological studies. Review studies were manually searched for additional references.

Six independent reviewers systematically assessed articles by titles, abstracts and, finally, full reading for inclusion eligibility (BC, BCB, BW, GS, LS, and LD). Disagreements were resolved through arbitration with a seventh reviewer (IGB). The included case series were evaluated using the Quality Assessment Tool for Case Series Studies of the U.S. National Institutes of Health’s National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute,¹³ while the included cross-sectional studies were evaluated using its Quality Assessment Tool for Observational Cohort and Cross-Sectional Studies.¹⁴ We considered scores ≥ 7 indicative of good quality and a low risk of bias, scores of 5 or 6 indicative of fair quality, including susceptibility to some bias but not enough to invalidate the results; and scores ≤ 4 indicative of poor quality and significant risk of bias.¹⁵

Data extraction process

We developed a data extraction table based on the Cochrane template.¹⁶ Six investigators (BC, BCB, BW, GS, LS, and LD) extracted the data and a seventh reviewer (IGB) verified the extracted data.

This systematic review was registered in PROSPERO (protocol CRD42022372622).

Results

Description of the studies

A total of 374 articles were identified in MEDLINE, LILACS, and Scopus. Duplicate articles (n=19) were excluded. After applying the forementioned exclusion criteria, 49 articles were selected for full text review.

Among the articles reviewed in full, 31 were excluded: 15 were literature reviews¹¹,¹²,¹⁷-²⁹; five were non-research publications³⁰-³⁴; five evaluated hoarded animals³⁵-³⁹; two investigated antibodies⁴⁰,⁴¹; three did not involve animal hoarding⁶,⁴²,⁴³; and one included children.⁴⁴ Thus, 18 articles were included in the final selection (Figure 1).

Figure 1
Flowchart of the study selection process.

Characteristics of included studies

All of the selected studies were observational.¹,⁵,⁸,¹⁰,⁴⁵-⁵⁸ Six of the studies were conducted in the USA,¹,⁵,¹⁰,⁴⁵,⁴⁶,⁵² five in Brazil,⁵⁰,⁵¹,⁵⁵-⁵⁷ four in Australia,⁸,⁴⁸,⁴⁹,⁵⁴ two in the UK,⁵³,⁵⁸ and one in Spain.⁴⁷

The sample sizes varied, ranging from 10⁵³ to 83⁵⁸ participants (Table 1). Most studies were case series from animal control agencies and humane societies.¹,⁵,¹⁰,⁴⁵-⁴⁹,⁵²-⁵⁴

Table 1
Characteristics of the included studies

First author	Country	Sample size	Source	Diagnostic criteria
Worth1	United States	34	Analysis of records and personal interviews of 31 cases from the New York City Department of Health and ASPCA	ND
Patronek10	United States	54	Case reports from animal control agencies and humane societies	Own definition
HARC45	United States	71	Case reports from animal control agencies and humane societies	HARC
Berry5	United States	56	Cases identified through media reports	HARC
Steketee46	United States	16 11	Cases recruited through animal protection agencies Controls recruited from media advertisements	HARC
Calvo47	Spain	24	Case reports from humane societies	HARC
Joffe48	Australia	29	Analysis of the records of people convicted for offences related to animal hoarding in NSW	HARC
Ockenden49	Australia	22	Case reports from the RSPCA Victoria and municipal councils	HARC
Cunha50,57	Brazil	39	Reports from Curitiba Secretaries of Health, the Environment and Social Assistance (Secretarias Municipais de Saúde, Meio Ambiente e Assistência Social de Curitiba)	DSM-5
Ferreira,51,55 Paloski56	Brazil	33	Reports from the Municipal Secretariat for Animal Rights of Porto Alegre (Secretaria Especial dos Direitos Animais)	DSM-5
Dozier52	United States	17	Case files from the San Diego County Animal Control and the Nebraska Humane Society	ND
Elliott,6 Snowdon54	Australia	50	Cases referred to RSPCA in NSW	Patronek’s definition
Hill53	United Kingdom	10	Cases referred to RSPAC GMAH	ND
Wilkinson58	England	83	Cases identified through media reports	DSM-5

• ASPCA = American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals; GMAH = Greater Manchester Animal Hospital; HARC = Hoarding of Animals Research Consortium; ND = not described; NSW = New South Wales; RSPCA = Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals.

Two studies used the veterinary classification of animal hoarders.⁸,¹⁰ Six studies used Hoarding of Animals Research Consortium⁴⁵ criteria.⁵,⁴⁵-⁴⁹ Three studies applied the DSM-5⁵⁷ criteria.⁵⁰,⁵¹,⁵⁵-⁵⁸ Three studies did not cite the criteria used to define animal hoarding.¹,⁵²,⁵³

Most studies (14/18) were of poor quality and had a significant risk of bias (Tables 2 and 3).

Table 2
Quality Assessment of Included Case Series using the NHLBI’s Quality Assessment Tool for Case Series Studies¹³

First author	Objective	Study population	Consecutive cases	Subjects comparison	Intervention	Outcomes	Length of follow-up	Statistical methods	Results	Total (yes)
Worth1	No	No	NR	Yes	No	No	No	No	No	1
Patronek10	Yes	Yes	NR	Yes	No	No	No	No	Yes	4
HARC45	Yes	No	NR	Yes	No	No	No	Yes	Yes	4
Berry5	Yes	No	NR	No	No	Yes	No	No	Yes	3
Calvo47	Yes	Yes	NR	Yes	No	No	No	No	Yes	4
Joffe48	Yes	Yes	NR	Yes	No	Yes	No	Yes	Yes	6
Ockenden49	Yes	Yes	NR	Yes	No	Yes	No	No	Yes	5
Dozier52	Yes	No	NR	No	No	Yes	No	No	Yes	3
Hill53	Yes	No	NR	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	7
Wilkinson58	Yes	Yes	NR	Yes	No	Yes	No	No	Yes	5

• HARC = Hoarding of Animals Research Consortium; NHLBI = U.S. National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; NR = not reported.

Table 3
Quality Assessment of Included Cross-Sectional Studies using the NHLBI’s Quality Assessment Tool for Observational Cohort and Cross-Sectional Studies.¹⁴

First author	Objective	Study population	Participation rate	Criteria	Sample size	Exposure	Timeframe	Exposure levels	Exposure measures	Exposure assessments	Outcome measures	Blinding	Follow-up	Statistical	Total (yes)
Steketee46	Yes	Yes	NR	No	No	No	No	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	2
Cunha50	Yes	No	yes	Yes	No	No	No	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	3
Ferreira51	Yes	Yes	yes	Yes	No	No	No	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	4
Elliott8	Yes	Yes	NR	Yes	No	No	No	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	3
Snowdon54	Yes	Yes	NR	Yes	No	No	No	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	3
Ferreira55	Yes	Yes	yes	Yes	No	No	No	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	4
Paloski56	Yes	Yes	yes	Yes	No	No	No	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	4
Cunha57	Yes	Yes	yes	Yes	No	No	No	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	4

• NA = not applicable; NHLBI = U.S. National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; NR = not reported.

Prevalence and incidence

The prevalence of animal hoarding was addressed in four studies: two studies reported 0.8 cases per 100,000 population in USA,¹,¹⁰ one reported 3.71 cases per 100,000 population in Brazil,⁵⁰ and another reported 1.78 cases per 100,000 population in England⁵⁸ (Table 4).

Table 4
Prevalence and sociodemographic profile of animal hoarders, and the characteristics of accumulation behavior

First author	Prevalence/incidence	Female (%)	Age (years) (%)	Marital status (%)	Lives alone (%)	Level of education (%)	Number of animals	Species hoarded (%)	Acquisition methods (%)	Recidivism (%)
Worth1	0.8 cases/100,000 population (Manhattan)	61.8	Mean 60 (owners of dogs), mean 30 (owners of cats/mixed/other)	No partner (55.5), married (30.5), unknown (13.9)	ND	High school (100)	Mean 34 (cats), 23 (dogs)	Cats (45.1), dogs (41.9), mixed and other (12.9)	ND	ND
Patronek10	0.8 new cases/year/100,000 population	76	≥ 60 (46), 40-59 (37), < 40 (11)	No partner (72.2)	55.6	ND	Median 39	Cats (65), dogs (60), farm animals (11), birds (11)	Unplanned breeding (38.9), deliberate breeding (13), sought from the public or collecting strays (25.9), brought by public (9.3), purchased (7.4)	ND
HARC45	ND	83.1	Median 55 women, median 53 men	No partner (71.8)	46.5	ND	Range 10-918. Men: mean 55.8 median 47; women: mean 90.1 median 50	Cats (81.7), dogs (54.9), birds (16.9), small mammals (11.3), horses (5.6), cattle or sheep or goats (5.6), reptiles (5.6)	Unplanned breeding (56), sought from the public (46)	Yes (25.3)
Berry5	ND	73.2	50-54 (54.5) women, 50-54 (33.3) men	ND	ND	ND	Range 218 (dogs), 1-400 (cats)	Dogs (46.4), cats (33.9), birds (5.4), farm animals (5.4), rabbits (3.6), horses (3.6), exotic species (1.8)	ND	ND
Steketee46	ND	94 (hoarders), 91 (controls)	Mean 49.7 (hoarders), mean 43.7 (controls)	Hoarders: never married (56); controls: never married (55)	48	Hoarders: college (52); controls: college (60)	Hoarders: mean 23.7; controls: mean 35.1	Hoarders: cats (46.7), dogs (10), others (43.3); controls: cats (31.6), dogs (21.5), others (46.9)	ND	ND
Calvo47	ND	51.8	≥ 65 (63), 41-65 (31.6), < 41 (5.3 )	ND	83	ND	Range12-159 (total). 9-159 (dogs), 1-75 (cats); mean 50	Dogs (80.9), cats (19.4)	Uncontrolled breeding (78.2), deliberate breeding (17.4), collecting strays (69.5)	Yes (12.5)
Joffe48	ND	72.4	Mean 54.8	ND	ND	ND	Range 6-500, mean 80, median 41	Dogs (79.3), cats (69), horses (41.4), birds (27.6), goat (20.7), sheep (13.8), fowl (13.8), donkey (10.3), others (27.8)	Breeding (51.7), collecting strays (3.4), purchased (3.4), breeding and purchased (17.2), breeding and strays (7), purchased and strays (7), unknown (10.3)	Yes (24.1)
Ockenden49	ND	63	30-39 (9.1), 40-49 (18.2), 50-59 (45.5), 60-69 (9.1), 70-79 (4.5), 80-89 (13.6)	ND	45.5	ND	Range 10-180	Cats (50, dogs (22.7), horses (13.6), mixed species (13.6)	Uncontrolled breeding (81.8), collecting strays (31.8), active source or purchase (22.7)	Yes (40.9), no (22.7), unknown (36.4)
Cunha50,57	3.71 cases/100,000 population	74.3	Mean 62.2, < 60 (42), > 60 (58)	ND	41	Illiterate (12.8), primary school (48.7), high school (25.6), college (12.8)	Range 1-105 (dogs), 1-60 (cats). Mean 20 (dogs), 13.6 (cats)	Dogs (28.2), cats (3.69), dogs and cats (64.1), other (25.6)	ND	ND
Ferreira,51,55 Paloski56	ND	73	Mean 61.4	No partner (88), married (12)	52	Illiterate (3), primary school (36), high school (40), college (21)	Range 3-101, mean 41	Dogs (67.4), cats (28.1), ducks (3.7)	ND	ND
Dozier52	ND	ND	ND	ND	ND	ND	Range 2-274, mean 94	Cats (65), dogs (59), rabbits (35), other (46)	ND	ND
Elliott,8 Snowdon54	ND	78	< 40 (16), 40-59 (44), 60-69 (22), > 70 (10), missing (8)	No partner (44), married (34), unknown (22)	40	ND	Range 6-300, mean 53, median 35	Cats (75), dogs (52), birds (17), other (34)	Unplanned breeding (60), planned breeding (28), collecting strays (38), purchased (6), sought from the public (32), other sources (23), animal rescue networks (19), animal pounds (9), searching advertisements/Internet (2)	ND
Hill53	ND	80	Mean 56	ND	30	ND	Range 7-33, median 16	Cats (100)
Wilkinson58	1.78 new cases/year/100,000 population	64	Mean 49 ≥ 60 (27)	ND	71	ND	Range 5-201, mean 44	Cats (61.5), dogs (60), small mammals (19), birds (17.9), horses (10.3), reptiles (12.8), farm animals (5.1), other (12.8)	ND	Yes (39)

• HARC = Hoarding of Animals Research Consortium; ND = not described.

Sociodemographic profile of individuals with animal hoarding disorder

The majority of those who hoard animals are women (ranging from 51.8 to 94%)¹,⁵,⁷,¹⁰,⁴⁵-⁵¹,⁵³-⁵⁸ (Table 4) and middle-aged,¹,⁵,⁷,⁹,⁴⁵,⁴⁶,⁴⁸,⁴⁹,⁵¹,⁵³-⁵⁶,⁵⁸; two studies reported a higher frequency of older adults.⁴⁷,⁵⁰,⁵⁷ In most studies, the affected individuals were unmarried.¹,⁸,¹⁰,⁴⁵,⁵¹,⁵⁴-⁵⁶ The rates of those who lived alone varied from 30⁵³ to 83%.⁴⁷ One study observed that the oldest-old who hoarded animals were predominantly single men.⁴⁹

Regarding education level, one study reported that animal hoarders had a high education level,¹ although another reported that most affected individuals had only completed primary school.⁵⁷ Four studies found that affected individuals were unemployed, retired, or disabled.⁸,⁴⁵,⁴⁸,⁵³,⁵⁴

Most affected individuals lived in urban areas,¹,⁸,¹⁰,⁴⁷,⁵⁰,⁵¹,⁵⁵-⁵⁸ although one study found that a significantly lower proportion lived in major cities.⁴⁸ One study reported that half of urban dwellers who hoarded animal lived in middle-class areas and 40% lived in working-class areas.⁴⁷ Up to 61% of affected individuals owned/mortgaged their homes, 21% lived in Department of Housing properties, and 13% lived in private rental properties.⁸

Unsanitary residential conditions varied from 31⁴⁸ to 93%.⁴⁵ One study reported that environmental scores were relatively low: 60% of the residences were overflowing with rubbish; 70% had overflowing litter trays; and in 40% animal feces/urine were observed away from litter trays.⁵³ Around 17% of residences were condemned or deemed unfit¹⁰,⁴⁵ due to clutter or fire hazard.⁴⁵

Characteristics of accumulation behavior

The mean number of animals per case varied from 14⁵⁰,⁵⁷ to 94⁵² (Table 4). The most common species were cats¹,⁸,¹⁰,⁴⁵,⁴⁶,⁴⁹,⁵²-⁵⁴,⁵⁸ and dogs.⁵,⁴⁷,⁴⁸,⁵⁰,⁵¹,⁵⁵-⁵⁷ Other types were also reported, including ducks, rabbits, rodents, birds, farm animals, and reptiles.¹,⁵,¹⁰,⁴⁵,⁴⁶,⁴⁸,⁴⁹,⁵¹,⁵²,⁵⁷,⁵⁸

The hoarding cases were classified as follows: 24⁸,⁵⁴ to 60%⁵³ were overwhelmed caregivers, 21%⁸,⁵³,⁵⁴ were rescuers, and 10%⁸,⁵⁴ were exploiters. Forty to 80% of animals were acquired through unplanned breeding.⁸,¹⁰,⁴⁵,⁴⁷,⁴⁹,⁵³,⁵⁴ One-third of convicted individuals claimed to be animal breeders.⁴⁸

The most commonly reported reasons for hoarding were love for animals, the desire to save animals, feeling that no one else would care for the animals, and having animals as their only friends or as surrogate children.¹,¹⁰,⁴⁵,⁵²

The initial complaint about animal hoarding generally came from neighbors, humane societies, social service agencies, police, or anonymous reports to investigative agencies.¹⁰,⁴⁷,⁵² The most frequent reasons for the complaint were unsanitary conditions, an excessive number of animals, animals in need of medical attention, stench, malnourished animals, odd human behavior, and noise.¹⁰,⁴⁷,⁵²

The rates of recidivism varied from 12.5⁴⁷ to 40.9%.⁴⁹ Recidivism was more frequent in men but was observed in all ages.⁴⁹ The duration of hoarding varied from 5 to 10 years,⁴⁷,⁵³ although one study reported a mean of 23 years.⁵⁰,⁵⁵,⁵⁶

Animal living conditions

In 54⁴⁶ to 90%⁵³ of the cases, the animals inside the house (Table 5). The animals were caged in 13⁵⁷ to 35%⁸ of the cases. Fifty-one percent of the animals lived in individual or collective kennels, and 25.6% lived chained outdoors.⁵⁷ Rescuers and overwhelmed caregivers were more likely to keep animals in the house than exploiters and so-called breeders.⁸,⁵⁴

Table 5
Animal living conditions

First author	Accommodation (%)	Poor condition (%)	Euthanasia (%)	Dead animals (%)
Worth1	ND	ND	ND	ND
Patronek8	ND	Yes (80)	ND	Yes (59.3)
HARC43	ND	ND	ND	ND
Berry3	ND	ND	ND	Yes (33.9)
Steketee44	Free access to the home: hoarders (85), controls (55)	Hoarders: yes (43.8); controls: yes (9.1)	ND	ND
Calvo45	Caged (25), inside the home (17), in the yard (17), both (39)	Lack of hygiene (91.7), internal or external parasitic infestations (91.7), injuries (87.5), sickness (77.7), alopecia (70.8), lameness (58.3), collapsed (58.3), cachexia (45.8), mutilation (16.6), fearfulness (95.8), aggression (42.8), signs of cannibalism (13.6)	Yes (29.2)	Yes (12.5)
Joffe46	ND	Behavioral (100), inflammation/infection (96.6), nutritional (89.7), degenerative (48.3), neoplastic (34.5), trauma (27.6)	ND	Yes (41.4)
Ockenden47	ND	Behavioral (45.5), nutritional (36.6), parasites (31.8), injuries (18.2)	Yes (45.4)	Yes (36.4)
Cunha48,55	Free in the yard (92.3), inside the home (53.8), individual kennels (25.6), collective kennels (25.6), chained outdoors (25.6), caged (12.8)	Yes (20.5)	ND	ND
Ferreira,49,53 Paloski54	ND	ND	ND	ND
Dozier50	ND	Yes (70)	ND	ND
Elliott,6 Snowdon52	Inside the home (66.6), in the yard (52), caged (35),	Yes (75)	ND	Yes (6)
Hill51	Inside the home (90), in the yard (0), both (10)	ND	ND	ND
Wilkinson56	ND	yes (53)	Yes (53)	Yes (53)

• HARC = Hoarding of Animals Research Consortium; ND = not described.

The prevalence of poor animal living conditions varied from 20⁵⁷ to 100%.⁴⁸ The number of animals kept did not seem related to health conditions, behavior, or welfare-related issues.⁴⁹ Contagious diseases were more common in cases with > 30 animals.⁴⁹ A lack of hygiene, inflammatory, infectious, or nutritional diseases, injuries, and behavioral problems, such as fearfulness, aggression, and even signs of cannibalism were found among the animals.⁴⁷-⁴⁹ Almost one-third of the animals were euthanized,⁴⁷ the main reason for which was aggressive behavior.⁴⁹ Animal carcasses were found in 6⁸ to 60%¹⁰ of the properties. There was no relationship between dead animals and the age or sex of the hoarders.⁴⁹

Associated psychiatric conditions

Associated psychiatric conditions were investigated in only three studies.⁴⁶,⁵⁴,⁵⁵ Individuals who hoarded animals > 20 years seem to have a higher occurrence of bipolar disorder, obsessive-compulsive disorder, psychosis, and memory deficit.⁵⁵

Outcomes

Twenty-six percent of affected individuals were placed under guardianship, institutional care, or some form of supervised living.¹⁰ Up to 25% underwent a court-ordered psychological assessment or mental health evaluation.⁵,¹⁰,⁵² Seventeen percent were ordered to maintain regular contact with mental health staff.⁴⁸ Between 40 and 70% were charged with animal cruelty.⁵,⁴⁹

Up to 60% of those with animal hoarding disorder were prohibited from owning animals.¹⁰,⁴⁸ Thirty-six percent were under court-ordered monitoring.¹⁰,⁴⁹ Half of the affected individuals had a history fines,⁵,⁴⁹,⁵⁸ and 41% had been jailed in the past⁵,¹⁰,⁵⁸ due to animal deaths.⁵

Discussion

The purpose of this systematic review was to evaluate animal hoarding, focusing on the profile of affected individuals and the characteristics of accumulation behavior. A total of 18 studies were included (538 affected individuals), the majority of which were of poor quality and had a significant risk of bias. In most studies, the population consisted of middle-aged, unmarried women who lived alone in urban areas in unsanitary conditions. The most frequently hoarded species were dogs and cats, which were acquired through unplanned breeding and lived in poor conditions.

Animal hoarding is a rare condition, with a prevalence of up to 3.71 cases per 100,000.⁵⁰ The higher prevalence in Brazil may be related to the lack of public policies to manage dog and cat populations. In Brazil, animal adoption occurs independently or via non-governmental rescue networks. In the USA, animal shelters require adopters to be > 21 years of age and to provide sterilization and vaccination, a safe and appropriate environment, training, and pay an adoption fee. The incidence of animal hoarding may be underestimated in the general population, since most published cases were severe. People with milder cases of animal hoarding disorder could have been excluded from published studies due to their reserved nature, the lack of a definition of animal hoarding, and the limited resources of investigative organizations.²⁷,²⁸,⁴⁷,⁴⁸

Most cases of animal hoarding were of middle-aged women who lived alone.¹,¹⁰,⁴⁵ Men tended to hoard dogs,⁵⁹ while women tended to hoard cats,⁶⁰ suggesting sex differences in hoarding patterns.⁴⁷ While women were overrepresented among hoarders, they were underrepresented with respect to animal cruelty, bestiality, and fighting.²⁵ Our review showed that most affected individuals lived in urban areas, but one possible explanation might be selection bias, since data were generally provided by animal control agencies and humane societies.

The lack of interpersonal relationships among affected individuals might be related to a lack of social skills, and animals might provide them some “emotional comfort.”⁴⁶ A recent study found that hoarding symptoms were associated with an increased ability to feel and share emotions and decreased empathy.⁶¹ Social isolation among older adults is related to hoarding symptom severity.⁶² There is no consensus about whether social isolation is a cause or an effect of animal hoarding, or to what extent broadening these individuals’ social networks might have reduced their need for animals.⁴⁵ One additional problem is that a social support network may stimulate people with animal hoarding disorder to engage in non-governmental rescue networks or even create their own shelters, thus facilitating the acquisition of new animals, further aggravating the problem.²⁷ Moreover, community residents may begin dropping off unwanted pets at the hoarder’s residence, since it serves as a convenient shelter.⁶³ However, it seems that the animals were acquired primarily through unplanned breeding, and public management could include sterilization⁴⁹ and encourage the adoption of hoarded animals.⁶⁴

Animal hoarding is also associated with neglect of the home environment. The extent of sanitation problems seems higher in animal hoarding than object hoarding.¹¹ Squalor is characteristic of most animal hoarders’ residences,¹¹ including a high injury risk due to physical hazards, inadequate lighting, and structural damage.⁴⁸

It should be mentioned that, compared with people who hoard objects, animal hoarders seem less likely to seek treatment.¹² Evidence suggests that individual or group cognitive-behavioral therapy interventions following a specific hoarding disorder protocol is more effective than other types of psychotherapy or pharmacologic treatments.⁶⁵,⁶⁶ In fact, cognitive-behavioral therapy improved hoarding symptoms by 25%, although less than a third of patients experience clinically meaningful change.⁶⁷

Animal hoarding may be a special complex manifestation of hoarding disorder¹² or a different psychiatric disorder altogether.¹¹,²⁷,⁵¹ As demonstrated in this review, its sociodemographic, psychiatric, and clinical aspects are understudied. Animal hoarding behavior may also occur in other medical conditions or other psychiatric disorders and, thus, psychiatric assessment is essential to diagnosis. Studies involving laboratory tests, cognitive assessment, and brain imaging must be conducted to exclude other diagnoses, such as dementia.

As limitations of this review, data on comorbidities, medications, and global cognitive evaluation were unavailable. We could not find any study that evaluated treatment for animal hoarding, although we believe that interventions should involve humans, animals, and the environment.²⁷ Communities should be informed about animal hoarding to facilitate the early detection of cases.²⁸

Animal hoarding is a complex condition that requires urgent attention. Currently, its nosological status, underlying neurobiology, and best treatment approaches remain elusive. We suggest informing communities about animal hoarding to facilitate the early detection of cases, in addition to sterilization and strategies for adopting hoarded animals. People who hoard animals should undergo clinical and psychiatric evaluation. More research is necessary to develop effective prevention, intervention, and monitoring strategies to save community resources, improve animal and human welfare, and prevent recidivism. Further studies should include only individuals with primary animal hoarding disorder to better comprehend its clinical and psychiatric characteristics.

References

• ¹
  Worth D, Beck AM. Multiple ownership of animals in New York City. Trans Stud Coll Physicians Philla. 1981;3:280-300.
• ²
  Cassiday KL, Franklin R. Anxiety and Depression Association of America [Internet]. Animal hoarding. 2016 [cited 2022 April 9]. https://adaa.org/understanding-anxiety/obsessive-compulsive-disorder-ocd/hoarding-basics/animal-hoarding
  » https://adaa.org/understanding-anxiety/obsessive-compulsive-disorder-ocd/hoarding-basics/animal-hoarding
• ³
  Fontenelle LF, Grant JE. Hoarding disorder: a new diagnostic category in ICD-11? Rev Bras Psiquiatr. 2014;36:S28-39.
• ⁴
  American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5). Arlington: American Psychiatric Publishing; 2013.
• ⁵
  Berry C, Patronek G, Lockwood R. Long term outcomes in animal hoarding cases. Animal Law. 2005;11:167-94.
• ⁶
  Ung JE, Dozier ME, Bratiotis C, Ayers CR. An exploratory investigation of animal hoarding symptoms in a sample of adults diagnosed with hoarding disorder. J Clin Psychol. 2017;73:1114-25.
• ⁷
  Patronek GJ, Loar L, Nathanson JN. Animal hoarding: structuring interdisciplinary responses to help people, animals and communitites at risk. Boston: Hoarding of Animals Research Consortium; 2006.
• ⁸
  Elliott R, Snowdon J, Halliday G, Hunt GE, Coleman S. Characteristics of animal hoarding cases referred to the RSPCA in New South Wales, Australia. Aust Vet J. 2019;97:149-56.
• ⁹
  McMillan FD, Vanderstichel R, Stryhn H, Yu J, Serpell JA. Behavioural characteristics of dogs removed from hoarding situations. Appl Anim Behav Sci. 2016;178:69-79.
• ¹⁰
  Patronek GJ. Hoarding of animals: an under-recognized public health problem in a difficult to study population. Public Health Rep. 1999;114:81-7.
• ¹¹
  Frost RO, Patronek G, Rosenfield E. Comparison of object and animal hoarding. Depress Anxiety. 2011;28:885-91.
• ¹²
  Lockwood R. Animal hoarding: the challenge for mental health, law enforcement, and animal welfare professionals. Behav Sci Law. 2018;36:698-716.
• ¹³
  National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute [Internet]. Study quality assessment tools: quality assessment tool for case series studies. 2019 [cited 2022 November 12]. https://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/health-topics/study-quality-assessment-tools
  » https://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/health-topics/study-quality-assessment-tools
• ¹⁴
  National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute [Internet]. Study quality assessment tools: quality assessment tool for observational cohort and cross-sectional studies. 2019 [cited 2022 November 12]. https://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/health-topics/study-quality-assessment-tools
  » https://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/health-topics/study-quality-assessment-tools
• ¹⁵
  Stumpf BP, Souza LC, Mourão MSF, Rocha FL, Fontenelle LF, Barbosa IG. Cognitive impairment in hoarding disorder: a systematic review. CNS Spectr. 2023;28:300-12.
• ¹⁶
  Chandler J, McKenzie J, Boutron I, Welch V. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2016;10:1-72.
• ¹⁷
  Vaca-Guzman M, Arluke A. Normalizing passive cruelty: the excuses and justifications of animal hoarders. Anthrozoos. 2005;18:338-57.
• ¹⁸
  Gross W. Animal hoarding – Social and psychological aspects. Deutsche Tierärztliche Wochenschrift. 2009;116:84-9.
• ¹⁹
  Nathanson JN. Animal hoarding: slipping into the darkness of comorbid animal and self-neglect. J Elder Abuse Negl. 2009;21:307-24.
• ²⁰
  Patronek JG, Nathanson JN. A theoretical perspective to inform assessment and treatment strategies for animal hoarders. Clin Psychol Rev. 2009;29:274-81.
• ²¹
  Brown S. Theoretical concepts from self psychology applied to animal hoarding. Soc Anim. 2011;19:175-93.
• ²²
  Colombo E, Prato-Previde E. Animal hoarding: lifestyle, animal abuse or psychopathology? A critical review of the literature. Ric Psicol. 2013;4:317-60.
• ²³
  Gahr M, Connemann BJ, Freudenmann RW, Kölle MA, Schönfeldt-Lecuona CJ. Animal hoarding: a mental disorder with implications for public health. Fortschr Neurol Psychiatr. 2014;82:330-6.
• ²⁴
  aloski LH, Ferreira EA, Costa DB, De Huerto ML, De Oliveira CR, Argimon IIL, et al. Animal hoarding disorder: a systematic review. Psico. 2017;48:243-49.
• ²⁵
  Felthous AR, Calhoun AJ. Females who maltreat animals. Behav Sci Law. 2018;36:752-65.
• ²⁶
  Rodrigues CM. Animal accumulators from the perspective of health promotion and surveillance. ABCS Health Sci. 2019;44:195-202.
• ²⁷
  Nadal Z, Ferrari M, Lora J, Revollo AR, Nicolas F, Astegiano S, et al. Noah’s syndrome: systematic review of animal hoarding disorder. HAI Bull. 2020;10:1-21.
• ²⁸
  Guerra S, Sousa L, Ribeiro O. Report practices in the field of animal hoarding: a scoping study of the literature. J Ment Health. 2021;30:646-59.
• ²⁹
  Volkan K. Hoarding and animal hoarding: psychodynamic and transitional aspects. Psychodin Psychiatry. 2021;49:24-47.
• ³⁰
  Nathanson JN, Patronek GJ. Animal hoarding: how the semblance of a benevolent mission becomes actualized as egoism and cruelty. In: Oakley B, Knafo A, Madhavan G, Wilson DS, editors. Pathological altruism. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2011. p. 107-116.
• ³¹
  Honey L. Animal hoarding: not just an animal welfare issue. Vet Rec. 2014;174:569-71.
• ³²
  Malcolm E. Shedding light on animal hoarding. Aust Vet J. 2014;92:N12.
• ³³
  Svanberg I, Arluke A. The Swedish swan lady: reaction to an apparent animal hoarding case. Soc Anim. 2016;24:63-77.
• ³⁴
  Tomaso VG. Analysis of denunciations of excess dogs and cats in the municipality of São Paulo from 2006 to 2015 [Dissertation]. São Paulo: University of São Paulo; 2017.
• ³⁵
  Wootten M. Rethinking legal regulation of animal hoarding. Altern Law J. 2017;42:137-142.
• ³⁶
  Strong S, Federico J, Banks R, Williams C. A collaborative model for managing animal hoarding cases. J Appl Anim Welf Sci. 2019;22:267-78.
• ³⁷
  Jacobson L, Giacinti JA, Robertson J. Medical conditions and outcomes in 371 hoarded cats from 14 sources: a retrospective study (2011-2014). J Feline Med Surg. 2020;22:484-91.
• ³⁸
  Williams B, Harris P, Gordon C. What is equine hoarding and can ‘motivational interviewing’ training be implemented to help enable behavioural change in animal owners? Equine Vet Educ. 2022;34:29-36.
• ³⁹
  Whitfort A, Woodhouse F, Ho S, Chun M. A retrospective analysis of typologies of animal abuse recorded by the SPCA, Hong Kong. Animals (Basel). 2021;11:1830.
• ⁴⁰
  Cunha GR, Pellizzaro M, Martins CM, Rocha SM, Yamakawa AC, Silva ECD, et al. Spatial serosurvey of anti-Toxoplasma gondii antibodies in individuals with animal hoarding disorder and their dogs in Southern Brazil. PLoS One. 2020;15:e0233305.
• ⁴¹
  Cunha GR, Pellizzaro M, Martins CM, Rocha SM, Yamakawa AC, Silva EC, et al. Serological survey of anti-Leptospira spp. antibodies in individuals with animal hoarding disorder and their dogs in a major city of Southern Brazil. Vet Med Sci. 2022;8:530-6.
• ⁴²
  Frost RO, Steketee G, Williams L. Hoarding: a community health problem. Health Soc Care Community. 2000;8:229-34.
• ⁴³
  Campos-Lima AL, Torres AR, Yücel M, Harrison BJ, Moll J, Ferreira GM, et al. Hoarding pet animals in obsessive-compulsive disorder. Acta Neuropsychiatr. 2015;27:8-13.
• ⁴⁴
  Crawford D. Animal hoarding and its effects on children: observations from a humane law enforcement professional. Child Aust. 2020;45:170-4.
• ⁴⁵
  Hoarding of Animals Research Consortium (HARC). Health implications of animal hoarding. Health Soc Work. 2002;27:125-36.
• ⁴⁶
  Steketee G, Gibson A, Frost RO, Alabiso J, Arluke A, Patronek G. Characteristics and antecedents of people who hoard animals: an exploratory comparative interview study. Rev Gen Psychol. 2011;15:114-24.
• ⁴⁷
  Calvo P, Duarte C, Bowen J, Bulbena A, Fatjó J. Characteristics of 24 cases of animal hoarding in Spain. Anim Welf. 2014;23:199-208.
• ⁴⁸
  Joffe M, O’Shannessy DO, Dhand NK, Westman M, Fawcett A. Characteristics of persons convicted for offences relating to animal hoarding in New South Wales. Aust Vet J. 2014;92:369-75.
• ⁴⁹
  Ockenden EM, De Groef B, Marston L. Animal hoarding in Victoria, Australia: an exploratory study. Anthrozoos. 2014;27:33-47.
• ⁵⁰
  Cunha GR, Martins CM, Ceccon-Valente MF, Silva LL, Martins FD, Floeter D, et al. Frequency and spatial distribution of animal and object hoarder behavior in Curitiba, Paraná State, Brazil. Cad Saude Publica. 2017;33:e0001316.
• ⁵¹
  Ferreira EA, Paloski LH, Costa DB, Fiametti VS, Oliveira CR, Argimon IIL, et al. Animal hoarding disorder: a new psychopathology? Psychiatry Res. 2017;258:221-5.
• ⁵²
  Dozier ME, Bratiotis C, Broadnax D, Le J, Ayers CR. A description of 17 animal hoarding case files from animal control and a humane society. Psychiatry Res. 2019;272:365-8.
• ⁵³
  Hill K, Yates D, Dean Rachel, Stavisky J. A novel approach to welfare interventions in problem multi-cat households. BMC Vet Res. 2019;15:434.
• ⁵⁴
  Snowdon J, Halliday G, Elliott R, Hunt GE, Coleman S. Mental health of animal hoarders: a study of consecutive cases in New South Wales. Aust Health Rev. 2019;44:480-4.
• ⁵⁵
  Ferreira EA, Paloski LH, Costa DB, Moret-Tatay C, Irigaray TQ. Psychopathological comorbid symptoms in animal hoarding disorder. Psychiatry Q. 2020;91:853-62.
• ⁵⁶
  Paloski LH, Ferreira EA, Costa DB, De Oliveira CR, Moret-Tatay C, Irigaray TQ. Cognitive performance of individuals with animal hoarding. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2020;18:40.
• ⁵⁷
  Cunha GR, Martins CM, Pellizzaro M, Pettan-Brewer C, Biondo AW. Sociodemographic, income and envionmental characteristics of individuals displaying animal and object hoarding behavior in a major city in South Brazil: a cross-sectional study. Vet World. 2021;14:3111-8.
• ⁵⁸
  Wilkinson J, Schoultz M, King HM, Neave N, Bailey C. Animal hoarding cases in England: implications for public health services. Front Public Health. 2022;10:899378.
• ⁵⁹
  Lockwood R. Cruelty towards cats: changing perspectives. In: Salem DJ, Rowan AN, editors. The state of animals III. Washington, DC: Humane Society Press; 2005. p. 15-26.
• ⁶⁰
  Edsell-Vetter J, Patronek G. Hoarding of animals. In: Bratioris C, Sorrentino Schmalisch C, Steketee G, editors. The hoarding handbook: a guide for human service professionals. New York: Oxford University Press; 2011. p. 109-24.
• ⁶¹
  Chen W, McDonald S, Wearne T, Grisham J. Investigating associations between hoarding symptoms and affective and cognitive empathy. Br J Clin Psychol. 2021;60:177-93.
• ⁶²
  Roane DM, Landers A, Sherrat J, Wilson GS. Hoarding in the elderly: a critical review of the recent literature. Int Psychogeriatr. 2017;29:1077-84.
• ⁶³
  Arluke A, Patronek G, Lockwood R, Cardona A. Animal hoarding. In: Maher J, Pierpoint H, Beirne P, editors. The palgrave international handbook of animal abuse studies. London: Palgrave McMillan; 2017. p. 107-29.
• ⁶⁴
  Jacobson LS, Ellis JJ, Janke KJ, Giacinti JA, Robertson JV. Behavior and adoptability of hoarded cats admitted to an animal shelter. J Feline Med Surg. 2022;24:e232-43.
• ⁶⁵
  Thompson C, Cruz LF, Mataix-Cols D, Onwumere J. A systematic review and quality assessment of psychological, pharmacological, and family-based interventions for hoarding disorder. Asian J Psychiatr. 2017;27:53-66.
• ⁶⁶
  Bodryzlova Y, Audet JS, Bergeron K, O’Connor K. Group cognitive-behavioral therapy for hoarding disorder: systematic review and meta-analysis. Health Soc Care Community. 2019;27:517-30.
• ⁶⁷
  David J, Crone C, Norberg M. A critical review of cognite behavioral therapy for hoarding disorder: how can we improve outcomes? Clin Psychol Psychother. 2022;29:469-88.

Publication Dates

• Publication in this collection
  28 Aug 2023
• Date of issue
  Jul-Aug 2023

History

• Received
  12 Dec 2022
• Accepted
  27 Apr 2023