Journal Articles
Permanent URI for this collectionhttps://mro.massey.ac.nz/handle/10179/7915
Browse
2 results
Search Results
Item Euthanasia of dogs and cats by veterinarians in New Zealand: protocols, procedures and experiences.(Taylor and Francis Group, 2023-04-25) Gates MC; Kells NJ; Kongara K; Littlewood KEAIMS: To collect data on protocols used by New Zealand veterinarians to perform euthanasia of dogs and cats, and to explore opinions towards the training they received in euthanasia during veterinary school. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was administered to all veterinarians registered with the Veterinary Council of New Zealand. The survey asked respondents about their practices' policies for euthanasia; protocols for performing euthanasia of dogs and cats; opinions towards euthanasia training received in veterinary school; and subsequent experiences with euthanasia in practice. Descriptive statistics were provided for all quantitative study variables and thematic analysis was performed on the free-text comments. RESULTS: The survey was completed by 361/1,448 (24.9%) veterinarians in companion or mixed animal practice. The mean numbers of dogs and cats euthanised each month were 7.2 (median 5; min 0; max 60) and 7.9 (median 5; min 0; max 60), respectively. Fewer than half of respondents reported that their clinic had a standard protocol for euthanising dogs (147/361; 40.7%) or cats (157/361; 43.5%). For euthanasia of dogs, 119/361 (32.9%) always used sedation while 71/361 (19.7%) indicated that they would not use sedation. For euthanasia of cats, 170/361 (47.1%) always used sedation while 53/361 (14.7%) indicated that they would not use sedation. Placement of IV catheters, methods for patient restraint, preferences towards the presence of owners during euthanasia, services provided with euthanasia, and discussions with owners were also highly variable and handled case-by-case depending on the client, patient, and clinical scenario. When asked about the euthanasia training received at veterinary school, it was generally ranked as below satisfactory, with approximately one-third of respondents indicating that they received no training in dealing with emotional clients (113/361; 31.3%), sedation protocols for euthanasia (107/361; 29.6%), or managing compassion fatigue (132/361; 36.6%). Most respondents (268/361; 74.2%) received no formal training in euthanasia after graduation and learned from experience or discussions with colleagues. Providing animals and owners with a good experience during the euthanasia process was highlighted as important for managing compassion fatigue. CONCLUSIONS: Euthanasia is a common procedure in companion animal practice and there is considerable variation in how veterinarians approach both the technical and non-technical elements. Training provided during veterinary school was generally considered below satisfactory, particularly regarding managing compassion fatigue and clients' emotional needs. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Providing veterinarians with additional training on adapting their euthanasia protocols to different clinical scenarios may improve the experience for patients, owners and veterinary staff.Item Review: The Five Domains model and promoting positive welfare in pigs(Elsevier B.V. on behalf of The Animal Consortium, 2022-06-16) Kells NJPublic concern for the welfare of farm animals has increased over recent years. Meeting public demands for higher animal welfare products requires robust animal welfare assessment tools that enable the user to identify areas of potential welfare compromise and enhancement. The Five Domains model is a structured, systematic, and comprehensive framework for assessing welfare risks and enhancement in sentient animals. Since its inception in 1994, the model has undergone regular updates to incorporate advances in animal welfare understanding and scientific knowledge. The model consists of five areas, or domains, that focus attention on specific factors or conditions that may impact on an animal's welfare. These include four physical/functional domains: nutrition, physical environment, health, and behavioural interactions, and a fifth mental or affective state domain. The first three domains draw attention to welfare-significant internal physical/functional states within the animal, whereas the fourth deals with welfare-relevant features of the animal's external physical and social environment. Initially named "Behaviour" Domain 4 was renamed "Behavioural Interactions" in the 2020 iteration of the model and was expanded to include three categories: interactions with the environment, interactions with other animals and interactions with humans. These explicitly focus attention on environmental and social circumstances that may influence the animal's ability to exercise agency, an important determinant of welfare. Once factors in Domains 1-4 have been considered, the likely consequences, in terms of the animal's subjective experiences, are assigned to Domain 5 (affective state). The integrated outcome of all negative and positive mental experiences accumulated in Domain 5 represents the animal's current welfare state. Because the model specifically draws attention to conditions that may positively influence welfare, it provides a useful framework for identifying opportunities to promote positive welfare in intensively farmed animals. When negative affective experiences are minimised, providing animals with the opportunity to engage in species-specific rewarding behaviours may shift them into an overall positive welfare state. In domestic pigs, providing opportunities for foraging, play, and nest building, along with improving the quality of pig-human interactions, has the potential to promote positive welfare.