Stress in client-owned dogs related to clinical exam location: a randomised crossover trial

Owner-assisted recovery and early discharge after surgical treatment in dogs with brachycephalic obstructive airway syndrome

OBJECTIVES

This study aims to describe a perioperative protocol for dogs recovered from anaesthesia with the owners and discharged from the hospital on the same day after surgical management of brachycephalic obstructive airway syndrome and to determine whether implementation of this protocol was associated with reduced incidence of complications compared with standard anaesthesia recovery and 24 hours hospitalisation.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Medical records of dogs that underwent brachycephalic obstructive airway surgery over two consecutive years (June 2017 to May 2019) were reviewed retrospectively. Signalment, clinical signs, diagnostic findings, surgical procedures and postoperative respiratory complications were recorded. Data were compared using the chi-squared or Fisher's exact tests.

RESULTS

Sixty-three dogs met the inclusion criteria for the study. Forty-two dogs underwent owner-assisted recovery and 21 dogs standard recovery. No statistical difference was found between groups in age, breed, gender, severity of respiratory or gastrointestinal clinical signs and surgical techniques employed. The incidence of postoperative complications was higher in dogs that received standard recovery (28%) compared to dogs recovered with the owners (2%). None of the dogs recovered with the owners and discharged the same day required veterinary assistance after discharge from the hospital.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

Corrective surgery for brachycephalic obstructive airway syndrome was associated with lower postoperative respiratory complications when dogs were discharged on the same day after recovery with the owners. Owner-assisted recovery and early discharge are possible and safe and may decrease the incidence of postoperative complications. However, other unmeasured factors may have contributed to the lower complication rate in dogs recovered with the owners during the course of this study.

Defining a "Good Death": Exploring Veterinarians' Perceptions of Companion Animal Euthanasia

This study was designed to determine how veterinarians define a good euthanasia experience. This information is used to generate a working definition of companion animal euthanasia that aligns with animal welfare standards and pet owners' expectations. An electronic survey distributed via veterinary-related social media (Facebook, Instagram) and listservs were completed by 249 veterinarians who perform feline and/or canine euthanasia. Our results suggest that very few veterinarians feel their veterinary school training adequately prepared them for euthanasia. When veterinarians were asked to rank a list of physiologic conditions and anatomical traits in order of euthanasia-related concerns, respiratory distress was ranked the highest, while the most concerning physical changes were reported to be indications or impressions of seizures or pain. The most commonly reported euthanasia injection technique performed by participants was intravenous administration of pentobarbital sodium (97%), and most veterinarians preferred having owners present (57%) or having no preference (38%) during euthanasia. Results suggest that veterinarians want a pain-free, anxiety-free experience for the patient, appreciate the use of sedatives before euthanasia, and feel that when available and appropriate, home euthanasia offers several benefits. This understanding of the numerous aspects involved in a good euthanasia experience can help inform the creation of an updated definition of companion animal euthanasia that strives to prioritize the welfare of the patient as well as the needs and expectations of the pet owner.

Euthanasia of Dogs by Australian Veterinarians: A Survey of Current Practices

Euthanasia techniques utilised by veterinarians impact the welfare of many dogs in their final moments. Despite euthanasia guidelines, little is known about euthanasia techniques used in practice. We administered an online survey of Australian veterinarians who had euthanised at least one dog in the previous 12 months. We found that 668 (96.8%) had euthanised a dog in the previous 12 months, almost all using intravenous pentobarbitone sodium (n = 651, 99.7%). For non-emergency euthanasia (n = 653), the majority (n = 442, 67.7%) administered a premedication or sedation prior to euthanasia versus less than half for emergency euthanasia (n = 286, 46.4%). Practices and views about euthanasia varied. Female veterinarians and veterinarians located in metropolitan regions were more likely to administer a premedication or sedation prior to non-emergency euthanasia (p < 0.05). Veterinarians in private mixed animal practices were less likely to administer a premedication or sedation prior to a non-emergency euthanasia (p < 0.05). For non-emergency and emergency euthanasia, veterinarians who worked in "other" practice types were more likely to administer a premedication or sedation than private companion animal practices (p < 0.05). The possible reasons for differences in euthanasia practices are explored, and scope for refinement is identified.

Effects of Changing Veterinary Handling Techniques on Canine Behaviour and Physiology Part 1: Physiological Measurements

Signs of distress in dogs are often normalized during routine veterinary care, creating an animal welfare concern. We sought to test whether targeted interventions during veterinary visits affect physiological indicators of stress in dogs. Some 28 dogs were examined within four visits across 8 weeks. All dogs received the same care during the first visit and were then randomized into control and intervention groups for visits 2-4. In the intervention group, 14 dogs underwent procedures designed to reduce stress and to enlist their collaboration during examination. The 14 dogs in the control group received routine care. At each visit, heart rate (HR), serum cortisol (CORT), neutrophil lymphocyte ratio (NLR), and creatine kinase (CK) were measured. A composite stress index based on the summed standardized scores for these markers was constructed. No differences in HR, NLR, and CK parameters between groups were found, and both groups had a decrease in CORT by visit four. However, the intervention group showed a greater overall decrease in CORT between the first and fourth visit than the control group (p < 0.04). The composite stress index differed between the first and fourth visits for the intervention group, but not for the control group (Intervention p = 0.03; Control p= 0.288). There was a tendency for the composite stress index to worsen at visit four vs. visit one for the control group. The findings suggest that dogs that participated in adaptive, collaborative exams and procedures designed to minimize fear had a greater reduction in stress over time compared to those receiving standard care.

Low and No-Contact Euthanasia: Associated Ethical Challenges Experienced by Veterinary Team Members during the Early Months of the COVID-19 Pandemic

Simple Summary

During the COVID-19 pandemic, many veterinary practices have been required to move to a low or no-contact consultation model to minimise the risk of SARS-CoV-2. Utilising data from a global survey, we explored the experiences of veterinary team members performing low and no-contact euthanasia during the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic. We found that low and no-contact euthanasia were encountered as common and/or stressful ethical challenges in the pandemic. In order to minimise the potential negative impacts of low and no-contact euthanasia on veterinary team members, clients and animal patients, there is a need for a toolkit of protocols to assist veterinary team members in provision of low-contact euthanasia, and avoidance of no-contact euthanasia wherever possible.

Abstract

Background: During the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, many veterinary practices around the world have shifted to a low or no-contact consultation model to ensure the safety of their team members and clients, and comply with public health orders, while continuing to provide veterinary care. Methods: We performed reflexive thematic analysis on a subset of data collected using a mixed-methods survey of veterinary team members globally. Results: There were 540 valid responses available for analysis. Low and no-contact euthanasia we raised as a common and/or stressful ethical challenge for 22.8% of respondents. We identified five key themes: no-contact euthanasia as a unique ethical challenge; balancing veterinary team safety with the emotional needs of clients; low and no-contact protocols may cause or exacerbate fear, anxiety and distress in veterinary patients; physical distancing was more challenging during euthanasia consultations; and biosecurity measures complicated communication around euthanasia and end-of-life decision making. Recommendations: In light of concerns highlighted by respondents, we recommend the development of a toolkit of protocols that will assist veterinary team members in performing low-contact euthanasia in a range of circumstances, in alignment with their values and professional ethical codes. Professional bodies may be involved in developing, updating and disseminating this information, and ensuring a continuous supply chain of PPE.

A Review on Mitigating Fear and Aggression in Dogs and Cats in a Veterinary Setting

Simple Summary

The majority of dogs and cats are fearful during veterinary visits, and some individuals may show aggression as a result. We review ways to avoid negative experiences and promote positive emotions in animals visiting the veterinarian. Whenever an animal is in the practice, the veterinary team should endeavour to make the visit as pleasant as possible, by using non-threatening body language and by creating positive associations. High-value food (unless an animal needs to be fasted) or toys should be used generously throughout the visit. In the interaction with the animals, low-stress handling methods, brief pauses and adjusting the procedure based on the animal’s body language help them to feel secure. Distractions can be used to minimise perceived pain such as from injections. If a known painful area needs to be treated, pain killers are advised. For animals that are very fearful, several medication options are available that can be given prior to the veterinary visit to help them with their fears. With reward-based training, animals can learn to accept veterinary procedures. A stress-free veterinary visit benefits all involved parties—the animals, their owners, as well as the veterinary team.

Abstract

A high proportion of dogs and cats are fearful during veterinary visits, which in some cases may escalate into aggression. Here, we discuss factors that contribute to negative emotions in a veterinary setting and how these can be addressed. We briefly summarise the available evidence for the interventions discussed. The set-up of the waiting area (e.g., spatial dividers; elevated places for cat carriers), tailoring the examination and the treatment to the individual, considerate handling (minimal restraint when possible, avoiding leaning over or cornering animals) and offering high-value food or toys throughout the visit can promote security and, ideally, positive associations. Desensitisation and counterconditioning are highly recommended, both to prevent and address existing negative emotions. Short-term pain from injections can be minimised by using tactile and cognitive distractions and topical analgesics, which are also indicated for painful procedures such as ear cleanings. Recommendations for handling fearful animals to minimise aggressive responses are discussed. However, anxiolytics or sedation should be used whenever there is a risk of traumatising an animal or for safety reasons. Stress-reducing measures can decrease fear and stress in patients and consequently their owners, thus strengthening the relationship with the clients as well as increasing the professional satisfaction of veterinary staff.