Veterinary RecordVolume 192, Issue 4 p. 174-175 Veterinary Ethics Promoting good ethical practice David Morton, Corresponding Author David Morton group chair [email protected] Search for more papers by this authorKate Allen, Kate Allen group secretary [email protected] Search for more papers by this authorBeth Jinks, Beth Jinks RCVS representativesSearch for more papers by this authorMike Herrtage, Mike Herrtage RCVS representativesSearch for more papers by this authorMichael Clark, Michael Clark University of Nottingham representativesSearch for more papers by this authorRichard Lea, Richard Lea University of Nottingham representativesSearch for more papers by this authorEddie Clutton, Eddie Clutton University of Edinburgh representativesSearch for more papers by this authorKiterie Faller, Kiterie Faller University of Edinburgh representativesSearch for more papers by this authorStephen Greenhalgh, Stephen Greenhalgh University of Edinburgh representativesSearch for more papers by this authorPeter Fordyce, Peter Fordyce University of Cambridge representativeSearch for more papers by this authorSarah Wolfensohn, Sarah Wolfensohn University of Surrey representativesSearch for more papers by this authorChris Stevens, Chris Stevens University of Surrey representativesSearch for more papers by this authorPamela Gillick, Pamela Gillick University College Dublin representativeSearch for more papers by this authorNicola Menzies-Gow, Nicola Menzies-Gow Royal Veterinary College representativeSearch for more papers by this authorDavid Killick, David Killick University of Liverpool representativeSearch for more papers by this authorJoanna Morris, Joanna Morris University of Glasgow representativeSearch for more papers by this authorDavid Martin, David Martin IVC Evidensia representativeSearch for more papers by this authorLuisa De Risio, Luisa De Risio Linnaeus representativeSearch for more papers by this authorJo Murrell, Jo Murrell CVS Group representativeSearch for more papers by this author David Morton, Corresponding Author David Morton group chair [email protected] Search for more papers by this authorKate Allen, Kate Allen group secretary [email protected] Search for more papers by this authorBeth Jinks, Beth Jinks RCVS representativesSearch for more papers by this authorMike Herrtage, Mike Herrtage RCVS representativesSearch for more papers by this authorMichael Clark, Michael Clark University of Nottingham representativesSearch for more papers by this authorRichard Lea, Richard Lea University of Nottingham representativesSearch for more papers by this authorEddie Clutton, Eddie Clutton University of Edinburgh representativesSearch for more papers by this authorKiterie Faller, Kiterie Faller University of Edinburgh representativesSearch for more papers by this authorStephen Greenhalgh, Stephen Greenhalgh University of Edinburgh representativesSearch for more papers by this authorPeter Fordyce, Peter Fordyce University of Cambridge representativeSearch for more papers by this authorSarah Wolfensohn, Sarah Wolfensohn University of Surrey representativesSearch for more papers by this authorChris Stevens, Chris Stevens University of Surrey representativesSearch for more papers by this authorPamela Gillick, Pamela Gillick University College Dublin representativeSearch for more papers by this authorNicola Menzies-Gow, Nicola Menzies-Gow Royal Veterinary College representativeSearch for more papers by this authorDavid Killick, David Killick University of Liverpool representativeSearch for more papers by this authorJoanna Morris, Joanna Morris University of Glasgow representativeSearch for more papers by this authorDavid Martin, David Martin IVC Evidensia representativeSearch for more papers by this authorLuisa De Risio, Luisa De Risio Linnaeus representativeSearch for more papers by this authorJo Murrell, Jo Murrell CVS Group representativeSearch for more papers by this author First published: 17 February 2023 https://doi.org/10.1002/vetr.2761Read the full textAboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL No abstract is available for this article. Volume192, Issue418/25 February 2023Pages 174-175 RelatedInformation

ObjectivesThe aim of this blinded, nested case-control study was to compare cats with and without early owner-reported mobility changes using subjective and objective outcome measures (owner-completed questionnaires, orthopaedic examination). MethodsA total of 57 cats with and without early owner-reported signs of impaired mobility were allocated to the case (n = 30) and control (n = 27) groups, respectively. Participating owners completed one inclusion and two pre-visit questionnaires (Feline Musculoskeletal Pain Index, VetMetrica). Cats were then visited in their own homes, where they underwent an orthopaedic examination, an assessment of their body condition score and temperament, and the placement of an accelerometer on their collar for 2 weeks. ResultsThere was no significant difference between groups for age category, breed, sex, temperament and body condition score. Case cats scored significantly lower for the Feline Musculoskeletal Pain Index (P = 0.003) and the VetMetrica domain of Comfort (P = 0.002), but not Vitality (P = 0.009) or Emotional Wellbeing (P = 0.018). Total pain (P <0.0001), crepitus (P = 0.002) and thickening (P = 0.003) scores were higher in case cats, as was the presence of bilateral disease (P = 0.005, odds ratio 14) and the number of bilaterally affected joints (P = 0.001). Conclusions and relevanceBoth the Feline Musculoskeletal Pain Index and orthopaedic examination were able to differentiate cats with early owner-reported signs of impaired mobility from healthy cats. VetMetrica Comfort domain scores indicated a compromised quality of life for cats with early owner-reported signs of impaired mobility compared with healthy cats. Being able to recognise signs of mobility impairment earlier would allow interventions aimed at slowing disease progression, thereby improving feline health and welfare.

Background : Premedication is an integral part of any anaesthetic protocol and the drugs chosen for premedication will determine the characteristics of the ensuing anaesthetic. Choosing appropriate premedicant drugs for the individual patient is vital to ensure a smooth and stress‐free anaesthetic. Normally, a balanced premedication protocol involving both a sedative and a hypnotic is advocated. This allows the two key aims of premedication – sedation and analgesia – to be met. Synergistic sedation between most sedatives and opioids also means that combining these drugs allows lower doses of each individual agent to be used. Aim of the article : This article discusses how it is important to know the clinical pharmacology of the different drugs used for premedication in order to make a rational decision about premedicant selection. One way to think about premedicant selection is based on the American Society of Anaesthesiologists (ASA) physical status classification system of the cat or dog, whereby the health status of the individual is used to inform about suitable premedication protocols.

Objectives The aim of this case-control study was to identify early-life risk factors associated with the occurrence of owner-reported mobility changes in 6-year-old cats by examining prospective data from a longitudinal cohort study of pet cats, the Bristol Cats study. Methods Data on potential risk factors were obtained from seven sequential questionnaires completed between the ages of 2–4 months and 5 years. Mobility-related questions from the study questionnaire distributed at the age of 6 years were used to calculate each cat’s mobility score. Cats with mobility scores of ⩾2 and 0 were allocated to the case and control groups, respectively, and the cat’s status was the outcome variable. Results Of the 799 cats included for analysis, 238 (29.8%) had owner-reported mobility changes. Binomial logistic regression using backwards elimination identified four risk factors for owner-reported mobility changes at 6 years of age: entire neuter status at 6 months of age (odds ratio [OR] 1.97; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.26–3.07), sustained trauma before 6 years of age (OR 1.85; 95% CI 1.30–2.60), outdoor access at 6 years of age (OR 1.67; 95% CI 0.96–2.90) and overweight/obese status at 6 years of age (OR 1.62; 95% CI 1.13–2.33). Conclusions and relevance Risk factor analysis demonstrated that obesity, outdoor access and a history of trauma may predispose cats to developing owner-reported mobility changes associated with degenerative joint disease, whereas neutering before 6 months of age appears to decrease that risk.

The use of spontaneous eye blink rate [EBR] as a non-invasive stress measure is well documented in humans and is gleaning research attention in animal studies. Thus, this study investigated the EBR patterns and changes associated with two known stressful conditions, crush-restraint and disbudding, in dairy calves. Fifty-four female Holstein dairy calves were studied. EBR patterns were assessed in two separate studies (n = 10 in first study; n = 25 in replicate study) four times daily for 4-5 days. Additionally, the EBR of 19 calves divided into two groups (disbudded group = 13; sham group = 6) was recorded following crush-restraint and disbudding (under anaesthesia)/sham-disbudding (without anaesthesia). EBR was consistent across days and times in the first study but in the replicate study, it varied across days. The disbudded group had lower EBR following crush-restraint but was comparable with the sham group following disbudding. Findings suggest that spontaneous blinking may potentially serve as an instant measure of stress in dairy calves based on the elevations associated with crush-restraint and disbudding. However, blink rates may vary across days, and this should be considered when utilizing this measure to assess stress.

gradient bottom PMS 1815C C13 M96 Y81 K54 on dark backgrounds on light backgrounds standard no gradients watermark stacked logo (for sharing only) standard no gradients watermark stacked logo (for sharing only) white WHITE C0 M0 Y0 K0

Background: The walking ability of many broilers is characterised by slight or definite defects categorised as gait scores (GS) 1 and 2. The present study aimed to examine potential relationships between GSs and indicators of body morphology, leg pathology, tibia strength and wooden breast in Ross 308 broilers assessed as GS <= 2. Methods: At 38 days of age, GS and live body weight of 179 birds was recorded. Each bird was examined post-mortem for signs of wooden breast, contact dermatitis and a range of leg pathologies. Weights of different body parts and tibia strength were quantified. Results: Within sex, GS increased with increasing live bodyweight (p = 0.020). There was a tendency for an effect of GS on prevalence of footpad dermatitis (p = 0.086) and dislocated femoral joint cartilage (p = 0.059) where both pathologies increased in frequency with increasing GS. Greater load was required to fracture tibia from GS2 than GS0 birds (p = 0.040). Conclusions: Within this relatively small data set, no strong relationships between GS = 2 and indicators of body morphology, leg pathology, tibia strength and wooden breast in Ross 308 broilers were found, except for the live terminal body weight. Further studies, involving larger data sets are required for full clarification.

The objectives of this study were to investigate the behaviour of hutch-housed dairy calves, develop an ethogram of general behaviour, and determine whether housing calves in different hutches, day, gender and time of day influenced the behaviour of dairy calves using the developed ethogram. Thirty-one apparently healthy Holstein Friesian calves (6 +/- 1 week old) were recruited for this study. The ethogram was developed by directly observing the behaviour of ten female dairy calves housed in two group hutches for five days. Based on these observations, behaviour was then organized into three categories. The first category (I) comprised of postures, attentiveness and social interactive behaviour; the second category (II) comprised of event behaviour which were recorded each time they occurred while the last category (III) comprised of movement and activity behaviour whose duration were recorded. The ethogram was used to record the behaviour of 16 calves (4 males; 12 females) housed in groups of four using direct and video observations for two consecutive days to ascertain if there are behavioural differences between dairy calves housed in different hutches; between days and gender. Furthermore, the ethogram was used to record the behaviour of an additional five dairy calves housed in a group hutch to determine the time of day effect. The behaviour of these five dairy calves were recorded hourly between the hours of 10:00 and 17:00 for two days using a combination of direct and video observations. Data were expressed as median frequency, duration or mean rank and significance was accepted at P <= 0.05. There were no significant differences in the behaviour of dairy calves housed in different hutches. Significant variations (P < 0.05) were observed in the response to observer, ear and mouth postures and ear flicking behaviour between the two days. Tongue position, ear flicking, tail wagging and walking behaviour were significantly higher (P < 0.05) in females than in males while body shaking and sniffing other calves were found to be significantly higher (P < 0.05) in males than in females. Time of day significantly (P < 0.05) influenced the location in the hutch, head, tail and standing posture; and the duration of standing, walking, and lying behaviour. While confirmation is needed, findings suggest the behaviour of dairy calves may be influenced by day, gender, and time of day and this should be considered when undertaking behavioural studies.

Impaired walking ability in terms of slight or definite defects is more common in broiler production than lameness that obviously hinders movement, but it has received limited scientific attention. This study aimed to compare behavior of conventional broilers with impaired walking ability (assessed as gait score (GS) 2) with those walking normally (GS0) and those with only a slight gait defect (GS1). Behavior in the home environment was registered, and an analgesic intervention to quantify changes in time budgets indicating pain relief was applied. The study included 192 Ross 308 broilers. On day 27 of age, the birds were distributed as evenly as possible into birds of GS0 and GS2 of each sex based on obtained gait score. Following this, each experimental bird was housed with 3 companion birds. On days 30 and 32 of age, the behavior in the home pens was recorded. All experimental birds were injected with the NSAID carprofen on one of the 2 d and saline on the other. The statistical analyses used the GS scored on the day of recording as explanatory factor. Compared to GS0 birds, GS2 birds tended to be more inactive (mean (CI): 4,193 (3,971–4416) vs. 4,005 (3,753–4,257) s; P = 0.074), spent more time sitting while feeding (306 (266–353) vs. 213 (180–251) s; P = 0.026), were less likely to perch (probability: 0.78 (0.69–0.85) vs. 0.91 (0.85–0.95); P = 0.012), and spent less time performing comfort behavior (749 (689–814) s vs. 875 (792–967) s; P = 0.043). Compared to GS1 birds, GS2 birds spent more time inactive (GS1: 4,022 (3,818–4225) s; P = 0.027), less time foraging (289 (253–329) vs. 347 (309–388) s; P = 0.047), and were less likely to perch (GS1: 0.90 (0.86–0.93); P = 0.001). For some of these behavioral variables, administration of carprofen led to behavioral changes across the GSs, which may suggest that the behavioral expression of the broilers was limited by pain. These findings are of relevance to animal welfare, but the underlying causes are still not fully clarified.

Veterinary anaesthesia may be facing new challenges during the COVID-19 pandemic, with the potential for shortages of cylinders of oxygen and some drugs in veterinary practice if resources are diverted to the NHS. This article prepares the veterinary surgeon in the event of such shortages, and discusses how to safely limit the use of oxygen in practice as well as the use of alfaxalone as an alternative induction and maintenance agent to propofol. Finally, the use of ephedrine to manage hypotension as an alternative to other vasopressors and inotropes that may be in short supply is described.

The aim of this study was to compare the postoperative analgesic requirements in dogs receiving a sciatic nerve block by either the lateral or transgluteal approach. The secondary aim was to determine if there was a difference in ease of performing the nerve block. Forty-two client-owned dogs were used in this study. Sciatic nerve block was performed by the transgluteal approach (group A), or the lateral approach (group B) combined with a psoas compartment block. All blocks were performed using a nerve stimulator and 0.1 ml/kg bupivacaine 0.5%, per block. The time taken to perform the sciatic nerve block, number of attempts, the current (mA), and intraoperative and postoperative opioid requirements were recorded. Overall, 52% of dogs required methadone intraoperatively, with no difference between groups (P=0.516). Postoperatively, 24% in group A and 12% in group B required methadone (P=0.314). There was no difference in the time taken to perform the sciatic nerve block, current or the number of attempts between groups. Both approaches to the sciatic nerve block conferred similar levels of analgesia and may be used as part of a multimodal analgesic protocol for dogs undergoing pelvic limb surgery.

Gait defects, assessed as gait score (GS), is a common welfare problem in broiler chicken production. The aim of this study was to examine whether birds with GS2 experience pain and poor locomotor ability compared to birds of lower GS. From day 0-27 of age, 600 Ross 308 birds were housed in simulated commercial conditions (stocking density 40 kg/m(2)). On day 27, all birds were gait scored and 192 birds (4 blocks of 48 birds) were selected as experimental birds based on gait score (GS0 or GS2). On day 28, a runway test with and without obstacles was performed to examine the locomotor ability of the birds. Approximately 3 h before testing, the experimental birds were injected with the NSAID carprofen (25 mg/kg s.c.) or saline (equivalent volume). A Conditioned Place Preference (CPP) test was conducted on day 38, after 4 days of conditioning to a chamber (70 x 70 cm; painted either green with vertical stripes or orange with horizontal stripes) after injection with carprofen or saline. The broilers were expected to show a preference for the place in which they experienced a positive emotional state as induced by the mitigation of pain by carprofen. In the runway test, GS0 birds reached the end of the runway with obstacles faster compared to GS2 birds (P = 0.04) and tended to be faster than GS1 birds (P = 0.08). No effect of carprofen was found on the behaviour in the runway and no effect of GS on the behaviour in the runway without obstacles. In the CPP test, there was no effect of GS or carprofen on chamber preference (P > 0.05). The results showed clear differences between birds of GS2 and lower GSs in terms of locomotor response in the runway, indicating that locomotor ability was compromised with increased GS. The results could not confirm whether these differences in locomotor ability are related to or due to increased pain with increased GS.

Objectives: To investigate analgesic efficacy of methadone compared to buprenorphine, within the QUAD protocol for anaesthesia in cats undergoing ovariohysterectomy.Methods: One hundred and twenty cats were recruited to an assessor-blinded, randomised, clinical trial.Cats received either methadone (5mg/m 2 ) or buprenorphine (180µg/m 2 ) combined with ketamine, midazolam and medetomidine intramuscularly.Anaesthesia was maintained with isoflurane in oxygen.Atipamezole was administered at extubation.Pain was assessed using the feline Composite Measure Pain Scale (CMPS-F), a dynamic interactive visual analogue scale (DIVAS) and mechanical nociceptive threshold (MNT).Sedation, pain, heart rate, and respiratory rate were measured prior to QUAD administration, before intubation, and 2, 4, 6 and 8 hours post QUAD administration.If indicated by the CMPS-F, rescue analgesia was provided with 0.5mg/kg of methadone administered intramuscularly.Meloxicam was administered after the last assessment.Differences in pain scores between groups were compared using a two way repeated measures ANOVA and requirement for rescue analgesia was compared using a Chi-squared test.Results: Cats administered methadone had lower CMPS-F scores over time (p=0.04).Eighteen cats out of 60 required rescue analgesia in the methadone group compared with 29 out of 60 in the buprenorphine group (p=0.028).All cats that received rescue analgesia required it within 6 hours post QUAD administration.There were no differences between groups in MNT or pain measured using the DIVAS.Conclusions and relevance: Methadone produced clinically superior post-operative analgesia for the first eight hours after neutering compared to buprenorphine when used within the QUAD protocol.

Evaluation of the response to externally applied physical stimuli, such as pressure, heat, or cold is termed quantitative sensory testing (QST). QST may be used to identify and quantify alterations (gain or loss) in function of the sensory systems which detect and mediate these phenomena in both man and animals, and potentially discriminate peripheral and central sensitisation. It has been postulated that evaluation of QST parameters may predict response to analgesics, ultimately increasing the individualisation of treatment for pain. However, while there do appear to be correlations between QST measures and responses to analgesics in man, there is currently insufficient evidence to recommend QST to direct clinical treatments. The use of psychophysical testing, such as QST, in non-verbal subjects presents additional challenges, and requires familiarity with species and individual responses. This narrative review describes the investigations into QST in clinical populations of dogs to date, and discusses the potential benefits and limitations of such testing.

OBJECTIVE:To provide an overview of pain and analgesia in rabbits with the aim of developing a more accurate understanding of these topics. To illustrate and discuss the areas that have advanced in recent years and those that still require further research.DATABASES USED:Three key subject resources were used: Web of Science, Medline and CAB Abstracts. Search terms were rabbits, lagomorphs, laboratory animals, pet, pain, surgical procedures, ovariohysterectomy, orchiectomy, castration, analgesia, opioids, and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. References from books and articles relevant to the topics were also included.CONCLUSIONS:Rabbit medicine has improved over the last 20 years, but the literature suggests that pain management in this species is still inadequate and veterinary professionals believe their knowledge of pain and analgesia in this species is limited. Assessment and quantification of pain in rabbits can be challenging in a clinical environment not only because, as a prey species, rabbits tend to hide signs of pain but also because there are no validated methods to assess pain, except the Rabbit Grimace Scale, which is based on only one rabbit breed. Current consensus is that perioperative multimodal analgesia is the best practice. However, it is not widely used in rabbits. In rabbits, analgesia protocols and dosages reported in the literature are often poorly researched and do not result in complete pain amelioration with the return of normal. The present literature on rabbit pain and analgesia presents gaps either due to unexplored areas or insufficient findings. Further research should focus on these areas with the aim of improving the welfare of rabbits within a veterinary clinic.

A 3-year-10-month-old female neutered Dachshund was presented for investigation of acute onset paraparesis. Magnetic resonance imaging showed an intervertebral disc extrusion, therefore a dorsal hemilaminectomy was performed. While under general anaesthesia, the patient became hypothermic (33.1 °C) and severely bradycardic, with a concurrent severe decrease in blood pressure. Initial management of the bradycardia included glycopyrrolate at a dose rate of 10 μg/kg, administered twice, however the patient was unresponsive to this. Active warming was initiated and the patient's body temperature slowly increased. A single dose of atropine was administered, following which the patient's bradycardia resolved. It is likely that once the patient's temperature increased, all the vasoactive substances were able to take effect. This suggests that the bradycardia was probably, in part, due to the hypothermia, although other factors may have contributed.

The topical carbonic anhydrase inhibitor (CAI), dorzolamide hydrochloride, is used to lower the intra-ocular pressure (IOP). Topical CAIs inhibit carbonic anhydrase (CA) isoenzymes II and IV found in the ciliary body. The production of aqueous humour relies on CA isoenzyme II catalysing the formation of bicarbonate, creating an osmotic gradient that draws water into the posterior chamber. Dorzolamide hydrochloride inhibits CA isoenzyme II, therefore, reducing IOP; aqueous humour production is reduced up to 40% in dogs ( Cawrse et al., 2001 Cawrse M.A. Ward D.A. Hendrix D.V. Effects of topical application of a 2% solution of dorzolamide on intraocular pressure and aqueous humor flow rate in clinically normal dogs. Am J Vet Res. 2001; 62: 859-863 Crossref PubMed Scopus (39) Google Scholar ).

Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are efficacious analgesics that contribute to preventive and multimodal analgesic techniques. They are widely used for routine surgeries in cats and dogs and there is some evidence that it is advantageous to give NSAIDs before the start of surgery, rather than in the postoperative period. Despite their efficacy, the side effects of NSAIDs should always be taken into consideration when deciding whether to administer them to a particular patient. The kidney is a particularly vulnerable organ during anaesthesia, due to the high prevalence of hypotension in anaesthetised patients; the administration of a NSAID preoperatively means that it is imperative to monitor and support blood pressure during anaesthesia to prevent renal compromise on recovery. This article summarises the mechanism of action of NSAIDs and provides guidance for practitioners on their use in the perioperative period.

OBJECTIVES:The aim of this study was to investigate the analgesic efficacy of methadone vs buprenorphine within the QUAD protocol for anaesthesia in cats undergoing ovariohysterectomy. METHODS:One hundred and twenty cats were recruited to an assessor-blinded, randomised clinical trial. Cats received either methadone (5  mg/m2) or buprenorphine (180 µg/m2) combined with ketamine, midazolam and medetomidine intramuscularly. Anaesthesia was maintained with isoflurane in oxygen. Atipamezole was administered at extubation. Pain was assessed using the feline Composite Measure Pain Scale (CMPS-F), a dynamic interactive visual analogue scale (DIVAS) and mechanical nociceptive threshold (MNT). Sedation, pain, heart rate and respiratory rate were measured prior to QUAD administration, before intubation, and 2, 4, 6 and 8 h post-QUAD administration. If indicated by the CMPS-F, rescue analgesia was provided with 0.5 mg/kg of methadone administered intramuscularly. Meloxicam was administered after the last assessment. Differences in pain scores between groups were compared using a two-way repeated-measures ANOVA and requirement for rescue analgesia was compared using a χ2 test. RESULTS:Cats administered methadone had lower CMPS-F scores over time (P = 0.04). Eighteen of 60 cats required rescue analgesia in the methadone group vs 29/60 in the buprenorphine group (P = 0.028). All cats that received rescue analgesia required it within 6 h post-QUAD administration. There were no differences between groups in MNT or pain measured using the DIVAS. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE:Methadone produced clinically superior postoperative analgesia for the first 8 h after neutering than buprenorphine when used within the QUAD protocol.