The four priority welfare challenges

How equestrians conceptualise horse welfare: Does it facilitate or hinder change?

More than ever the welfare of horses in equestrian sport is in the spotlight. In response to this scrutiny, one peak body, the Federation Equestre Internationale (FEI) has created an Equine Ethics and Wellbeing Commission to protect their sport's longevity. However, for welfare-based strategies to be successful, the conceptualisation of horse welfare must align across various stakeholders, including the general public. The value-laden nature of welfare makes agreement on its definition, even among scientists, difficult. Given little is known about how equestrians conceptualise horse welfare, we interviewed 19 Australian amateur equestrians using a semi-structured format. Systems thinking and the Five Domains Model provided the theoretical framework and informed our methods. Using reflexive thematic analysis, three themes were identified: (1) good horse welfare is tangible; (2) owners misinterpret unwanted horse behaviour; and (3) equestrians publicly minimise horse welfare issues but are privately concerned. Our results highlight participants' conceptualisations of horse welfare do not align with the Five Domains Model; participants' ideal of prioritising horse welfare does not align with their practice; and there is inconsistency between what participants share publicly and what they think privately about horse welfare. These findings can inform the development of programmes to improve ridden horse welfare throughout the horse industry. As a starting point, programmes that provide a safe space for equestrians to explore their private horse welfare concerns, and programmes that build a partnership mindset to facilitate knowledge exchange between all stakeholders are needed.

Synopsis of the pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, applications, and safety of firocoxib in horses

According to in vitro and in vivo investigations, firocoxib (FX), a second-generation coxib, is a highly selective COX-2 inhibitor in horses. With a COX-1/COX-2 IC₅₀ ratio of 643 in horses, FX spares the COX-1 inhibitory effects. It is approved for the treatment of musculoskeletal problems and lameness in horses and dogs with osteoarthritis (OA). For the treatment of OA in horses, both an injectable formulation for IV administration at a dose of 0.09 mg/kg for five days and an oral paste formulation at a dose of 0.1 mg/kg for 14 days are licensed. Numerous analytical methods were reported in the literature to quantify FX in biological fluids, using HPLC and LC-MS. FX presents remarkable pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics compared to other coxibs. It has an oral bioavailability of 80% or higher and is effectively absorbed by horses. Its volume of distribution is around 2 L/kg, and it is slowly eliminated. Due to the long elimination half-life (around 2 days), which allows a once daily dosing, a single 0.3 mg/kg loading dose has been recommended. This enables the establishment of steady-state drug concentrations within 24 h, making it appropriate for acute treatment as well. Its IC₈₀ is equal to 103 ng/mL in whole blood and, with an EC₅₀ of 27 ng/mL, it has the highest affinity for its receptor compared to the other commonly administered NSAIDs in horses.

How to Perform a Nutritional Assessment in a First-Line/General Practice

Inappropriate nutrition is a priority welfare challenge. Nutritional mistakes are common and can lead to adverse events, such as poor growth and performance, colic, laminitis, and obesity. A detailed nutritional assessment involving evaluating the equine patient, current diet/ration, and management is essential in creating an effective nutritional plan. Goal(s) should be established and used to inform the plan. Management or resource barriers should be considered. Effective communication and a team-based approach versus an authoritarian one are likely to enhance the success of the nutritional plan. Developing a plan should be an interactive process, adjusting as needed after intentional monitoring.

Optimising the Efficacy of Equine Welfare Communications: Do Equine Stakeholders Differ in Their Information-Seeking Behaviour and Communication Preferences?

Information on the management of animals within domestic environments is freely available to animal owners and caregivers either online, or in paper form by request. However, awareness is growing within the animal welfare sector that simply providing written guidelines or educational material is not enough to affect a positive change in owners in relation to animal welfare. In the quest to improve equine welfare, understanding the way that owners and other stakeholders seek information and their communication preferences is key to effective dissemination of up to date equine welfare information and research findings. Three UK equine stakeholder groups-horse owners, livery yard owners, and equine veterinarians-were surveyed online to find out where they sought equine information. Their awareness of equine welfare Codes of Practice, how they respond when they are asked to give advice to horse owners and their communication preferences were included within the survey. All three stakeholder groups tended to seek information from people rather than from organisations, or digital and printed resources. Veterinarians were the most used information source across all three stakeholder groups This highlighted the importance of ensuring that equine veterinarians have access to up to date, evidence-based equine welfare information. While the majority of participants were aware of the equine welfare Code of Practice, fewer had actually read it, this was true particularly amongst horse owners. The primary reasons for this were the features of the Code as well as the issuing organisation. The stakeholders expressed a preference for information to be communicated in a neutral or positive way rather than focusing on negative aspects. Our findings suggest that industry professionals, particularly veterinarians, have an important role to play in knowledge transfer and the dissemination of research findings to horse owners. The efficacy of equine welfare communication could be improved if the information delivery preferences of equine stakeholders are were taken into consideration.