28 research outputs found

    Skype and Pbwiki

    No full text

    Broadening the Veterinary Consultation: Dog Owners Want to Talk about More than Physical Health

    No full text
    Few veterinary professionals use formal quality of life (QOL) assessment tools despite their recommendation from veterinary governing bodies to enable holistic welfare assessments and target welfare improvement strategies. Perceived barriers include resistance from owners, and this study aimed to elucidate understanding of dog owner engagement with conversations and tools relating to QOL. An online survey that investigated owner experience, comfort, and opinions about vet-client discussions on topics connected to canine health and well-being, including QOL, was completed by 410 owners. Almost all owners (95.8%) were reportedly comfortable discussing QOL, yet only 32% reported their vets had addressed it. A high proportion of owners (70.8%) expressed interest in assessment tools, but only 4.4% had experienced one, none of which were QOL tools per se. Semi-structured interviews of a sub-set of four owners provided a more in-depth examination of their experience of a health and well-being assessment tool. Thematic analysis generated three themes: ‘Use of assessment tools supports client-vet relationship and empowers owners’, ‘Owners want to talk about holistic dog care’, and ‘Owner feelings on the wider application of assessment tools’. Overall, our findings suggest that owners want to broaden the veterinary consultation conversation to discuss QOL and are interested in using tools, and therefore veterinary perceptions of owner-related barriers to tool application appear unfounded. Indeed, tool uptake appears to improve the vet-client relationship and boost owner confidence

    Broadening the veterinary consultation: dog owners want to talk about more than physical health

    No full text
    Few veterinary professionals use formal quality of life (QOL) assessment tools despite their recommendation from veterinary governing bodies to enable holistic welfare assessments and target welfare improvement strategies. Perceived barriers include resistance from owners, and this study aimed to elucidate understanding of dog owner engagement with conversations and tools relating to QOL. An online survey that investigated owner experience, comfort, and opinions about vet-client discussions on topics connected to canine health and well-being, including QOL, was completed by 410 owners. Almost all owners (95.8%) were reportedly comfortable discussing QOL, yet only 32% reported their vets had addressed it. A high proportion of owners (70.8%) expressed interest in assessment tools, but only 4.4% had experienced one, none of which were QOL tools per se. Semi-structured interviews of a sub-set of four owners provided a more in-depth examination of their experience of a health and well-being assessment tool. Thematic analysis generated three themes: 'Use of assessment tools supports client-vet relationship and empowers owners', 'Owners want to talk about holistic dog care', and 'Owner feelings on the wider application of assessment tools'. Overall, our findings suggest that owners want to broaden the veterinary consultation conversation to discuss QOL and are interested in using tools, and therefore veterinary perceptions of owner-related barriers to tool application appear unfounded. Indeed, tool uptake appears to improve the vet-client relationship and boost owner confidence.</p

    Awareness and use of canine quality of life assessment tools in UK veterinary practice

    No full text
    The use of formal canine quality of life (QOL) assessment tools in veterinary practice has been recommended. An online survey investigated awareness, use and barriers to use of these tools in the UK. An anonymous 24-question survey was advertised through veterinary groups and social media. Ninety veterinary surgeons and twenty veterinary nurses responded. Thirty-two respondents (29.1%) were aware of the existence of formal canine QOL assessment tools. Of the three tools listed, current use was less than four per cent. No statistically significant influence of respondent age, role (veterinary surgeon or nurse) or possession of additional qualifications was found on the awareness of QOL tools (p &gt; 0.05). Over half of respondents (55.5%) would ‘certainly’ or ‘probably’ be willing to use a QOL assessment tool. The main barrier to use was lack of time. Other barriers included a perceived resistance from owners. Although current use and awareness of canine QOL assessment tools in UK veterinary practice is low, veterinary professionals appear willing to use the tools within their daily practice. This discrepancy implies that QOL assessment tools are not well disseminated to veterinary surgeons and nurses in practice and that various barriers inhibit their use.</p

    The current state of welfare, housing and husbandry of the English pet rabbit population

    No full text
    BACKGROUND: The welfare of pet rabbits is an area of growing interest in Europe and the UK. This study analyses questionnaire results from a diverse population of 1254 rabbit owners from three different geographical areas in England with the aim of providing an accurate representation of how pet rabbits are currently housed and cared for and key aspects of their health and welfare. RESULTS: Rabbits were kept in a variety of different housing types, the most common being a traditional hutch/cage (59%). Although the majority had additional exercise areas, access was often unpredictable, or ill-timed, which may compromise welfare. Only 41.9% of owners kept their rabbit with conspecifics, limiting their ability to engage in social behaviour. Of those rabbits housed with a companion, although many were reported to be amicable and to engage in positive interactions, over a quarter were reported to fight at least occasionally (25.3%), whilst 22.7% guarded resources and 27.1% avoided one another. Whilst low levels of some of these behaviours may be a normal part of social interaction, the relatively high levels reported here suggest that not all cohabiting pairs of rabbits are compatible, which is potentially a significant welfare issue. Although the vast majority of owners fed hay for over 10% this was less than daily. Pelleted foods were very popular (71.4% at least daily) compared to commercial muesli mixes (32.6%). As in previous studies, dental problems were commonly reported (12.2% of rabbits); however, so were eye problems (12.9%), digestive problems (11.5%) and parasites (11.3%). A large proportion of rabbits (58%) were thought to be fearful of loud noises, and 61% were not reported as calm when handled by their owner, which may be a significant concern for this species. CONCLUSION: This study has confirmed and expanded on previous findings: many pet rabbits were found to be in good health, had compatible companions and were provided with enriched living areas. However, it also found numerous welfare issues that affect large numbers of pet rabbits. We suggest further studies are required exploring the accuracy of owner reports (which possibly under-report many problems) and prioritising the issues raised here
    corecore