Clinicians’ attitudes to pain and the use of analgesia in cattle

Pain Assessment in Cattle by Use of Numerical Rating and Visual Analogue Scales-A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Subjective pain assessment in cattle is contingent upon the observer's experience and attitude. Studies of pain assessment in cattle by veterinarians and farmers using different pain scales have been published. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to describe and compare the pain scores given by veterinarians and producers for different procedures and conditions using either a NRS or VAS. The literature search was conducted with PubMed (MEDLINE) and Agricola, using defined search terms (e.g., peer-reviewed). A total of 842 articles were identified. After screening of duplicates, abstracts, and full texts, a total of 16 articles were included in this systematic review. Different pain scales were used for the included studies (NRS 0-10 for eight studies, NRS 1-10 for six studies, NRS 1-10 and VAS 0-10 for one study, and VAS 0-1 for one study). Most studies (n = 11) originated from the European Union. Mean values for pain scores differed significantly between studies included in the meta-analysis for both NRS 0-10 and 1-10. The findings of this study indicated that comparison of pain scoring used in different studies is difficult due to use of different pain scales and varying nomenclature, and that many variables (such as age and gender) influence pain scoring.

Management of acutely injured cattle by on farm emergency slaughter: Survey of veterinarian views

Background

Fitness to transport is a key provision in animal welfare regulations in the European Union, and for the management of acutely injured cattle. Whilst treatment may be appropriate for some injuries, three common production outcomes for acutely injured cattle are; on farm emergency slaughter (OFES), casualty slaughter (CS) or euthanasia. The aims of this study were to evaluate the perceptions of veterinarians, working in Ireland, on the use of OFES for the management of acutely injured cattle and to evaluate the influence of capacity, willingness and opportunity on their ability to operate OFES.

Methodology

Two online surveys of veterinarians working in Ireland, Private Veterinary Practitioners (PVPs) and Official Veterinarians (OVs), were conducted through QualtricsXM over a 7-week period between April and June of 2021. Quantitative and qualitative questions were developed and analyzed using the tripartite framework of capacity, willingness, and opportunity to collect relevant data about the management of acutely injured cattle and the provision of OFES in Ireland by veterinarians.

Results

43 OVs and 85 PVPs participated in the survey. OVs regulated on average 4.2 abattoirs, of which 21.6% accepted OFES. Participants reported 343 and 377 OFES and CS, respectively, in 2020. 62.4% PVPs had not certified cattle for OFES, or CS. Limb fracture accounted for 79% OFES, 34.5% CS and 47.9% euthanized acutely injured cattle. 63.3% OVs and 44% PVPs were not aware of abattoirs providing OFES within 100 km of their workplace. Lack of availability of OFES negatively associated with PVP knowledge of the procedure. Regulations and guidelines were the most common source of information on OFES for PVPs.

Conclusion

Increasing the availability of OFES may help to improve the management of acutely injured cattle, especially those with limb fractures that are unfit for transport.

Exploring the attitudes of Bavarian farmers towards pain in cattle and how they differ from the attitudes of bovine veterinarians

BACKGROUND

Assessment of pain in cattle depends on the observer's experience and evaluation. Only a few studies compare veterinarians' and farmers' attitudes towards pain in cattle.

METHODS

A questionnaire was sent to 1097 cattle practitioners and 3750 farmers. Return rate was 26.2% for veterinarians and 15.4% for farmers, respectively. Respondents were asked to score the painfulness of procedures and diseases in cattle on a numerical rating scale from 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst pain imaginable), to give their opinion about the use of analgesics during and after procedures, and to agree or disagree with given statements.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences between pain scores awarded by veterinarians and farmers, but significant differences in parameters both groups relied on for pain assessment. Farmers were less willing than veterinarians to use analgesia during and after procedures. There was no significant difference in the amount of money veterinarians thought farmers would spent on analgesia and farmers' actual statements.

CONCLUSION

The results of this study indicate that farmers and veterinarians assess pain severity similarly, but recognise pain differently and disagree in their opinion regarding the use of analgesics. The communication between both groups needs to be improved to ensure proper pain management.

Attitudes of Bavarian bovine veterinarians towards pain and pain management in cattle

BACKGROUND

Pain recognition in cattle is difficult, but the control and treatment of pain are essential for animal welfare. Pain evaluation depends on the observer's experience and opinion, resulting in different approaches towards pain and the use of analgesics.

METHODS

A questionnaire to assess the attitudes of veterinarians towards pain and pain management in cattle was sent to 1097 bovine practitioners in Bavaria. Out of 287 returned questionnaires, 274 could be analysed.

RESULTS

Claw amputation, extirpation of the eye bulb and caesarean section were considered to be the most painful procedures in adult cattle, and castration, umbilical surgery and laparotomy in calves. Orthopaedic diseases like bone fractures or arthritis were estimated to be the most painful conditions in both cattle and calves, and ileus and meningitis in calves. Female veterinarians scored pain higher than their male colleagues. Even though 75.5 per cent of veterinarians stated that they used analgesics adequately, pain management during surgery was low, especially for castration and dehorning in calves.

CONCLUSION

Bavarian bovine veterinarians differ in their opinions about pain in cattle and the results of this study indicate that there a mismatch between their use of analgesics and the pain scores they awarded.