1
|
Tschoner T, Mueller KR, Zablotski Y, Feist M. Pain Assessment in Cattle by Use of Numerical Rating and Visual Analogue Scales-A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Animals (Basel) 2024; 14:351. [PMID: 38275811 PMCID: PMC10812761 DOI: 10.3390/ani14020351] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/28/2023] [Revised: 01/15/2024] [Accepted: 01/16/2024] [Indexed: 01/27/2024] Open
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Theresa Tschoner
- Clinic for Ruminants with Ambulatory and Herd Health Services at the Centre for Clinical Veterinary Medicine, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität Munich, Sonnenstrasse 16, 85764 Oberschleißheim, Germany; (Y.Z.); (M.F.)
| | - Kristina R. Mueller
- School of Veterinary Science, Massey University, Private Bag 11 222, Palmerston North 4474, New Zealand;
| | - Yury Zablotski
- Clinic for Ruminants with Ambulatory and Herd Health Services at the Centre for Clinical Veterinary Medicine, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität Munich, Sonnenstrasse 16, 85764 Oberschleißheim, Germany; (Y.Z.); (M.F.)
| | - Melanie Feist
- Clinic for Ruminants with Ambulatory and Herd Health Services at the Centre for Clinical Veterinary Medicine, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität Munich, Sonnenstrasse 16, 85764 Oberschleißheim, Germany; (Y.Z.); (M.F.)
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Abstract
Most dairy calves are housed individually in early ontogeny but social housing has positive effects on calf welfare including an advantage of social buffering, i.e., when negative effects of stress are mitigated through social support of conspecific. The effects of social buffering has not yet been examined in relation to disbudding; a painful husbandry procedure commonly performed on young dairy calves. The objective of this study was to investigate the effect of pair versus individual housing on calves’ behavioral reaction to disbudding. In total 52 female calves were randomly allocated either to individual (n = 16) or pair housing (n = 36, 18 focal). Calves were hot-iron disbudded with a local anesthetic and their spontaneous behavior in home pens was recorded for 24 h pre- and post-disbudding. Eating forage, ruminating, resting, exploration, play, self-grooming, and pain-related behaviors were quantified during eight 20 min intervals during the 24 h periods pre- as well as post-disbudding. In pair-housed (PAIR) calves social resting, active and passive allo-grooming were additionally recorded. The differences between individually housed (INDI, n = 10) and PAIR calves (n = 12) were tested by general linear models. The changes in pre- and post-disbudding behaviors in all calves as well as in social behaviors of PAIR calves were tested by paired t-test. We found that head shaking (t = − 3.46, P = 0.0024), head rubbing (t = 4.96, P < 0.0001) and self-grooming (t = 2.11, P = 0.04) increased in all calves after disbudding. Eating forage increased only in PAIR calves (t = 2.50, P = 0.030) which also resulted in a difference between treatments with PAIR calves fed more often than INDI calves (F1,18 = 12.96, P = 0.002). Differences in eating forage may be an indication of improved ability of PAIR calves to recover from disbudding. No other significant differences were detected between treatment groups which might have been caused by our limited sample. Our results provide the first evidence that housing treatment affects calves’ reactions to disbudding, with possible indication of social buffering.
Collapse
|
3
|
Health and Welfare Survey of 30 Dairy Goat Farms in the Midwestern United States. Animals (Basel) 2021; 11:ani11072007. [PMID: 34359135 PMCID: PMC8300403 DOI: 10.3390/ani11072007] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/12/2021] [Revised: 06/25/2021] [Accepted: 07/01/2021] [Indexed: 01/11/2023] Open
Abstract
Simple Summary There appears to be a rapid expansion of dairy goat farming in the United States and the information available to producers on health, welfare, and production applicable to those in the Midwestern US is limited. This study intended to survey 30 dairy goat farms in the Midwestern US to provide insight into husbandry practices pertaining to health, welfare, and production, and to identify areas of future research. Pain relief for disbudding and castration, education and training programs, early kid management, and hoof trimming were identified as potential areas of future research. This study provided insight into the husbandry practices carried out on 30 dairy goat farms in the Midwestern US and areas of research to improve health and welfare. Abstract Dairy goat production in the Midwestern United States is increasing at a rapid rate and information on dairy goat husbandry practices applicable for producers in this region is limited. The objective of this study was to survey 30 dairy goat farms in the Midwestern US to provide insight into husbandry practices pertaining to health, welfare, and production, and to identify areas of future research. A questionnaire was developed and comprised 163 questions that were organized into categories including information on the producer (e.g., farming experience), staff, and goats (e.g., herd size, breed), housing, feeding and nutrition, milking practices and production, kid management, husbandry practices (e.g., disbudding, castration, hoof trimming), and health. Areas of future research that can improve goat health, production and welfare include pain relief for husbandry practices such as disbudding and castration, early kid management during birth to prevent illness/disease or mortality (e.g., warm and dry areas for kid rearing), eradication programs for common contagious diseases, training programs and education for claw trimming, disbudding, and udder health. In conclusion, this study provided insight into the husbandry practices carried out on 30 dairy goat farms in the Midwestern US and areas of research to improve health and welfare.
Collapse
|
4
|
Marquette GA, McGee M, Fisher AD, Stanger K, Argüello A, Earley B. Horn bud size of dairy-bred and suckler-bred calves at time of disbudding. Ir Vet J 2021; 74:17. [PMID: 34134759 PMCID: PMC8210392 DOI: 10.1186/s13620-021-00196-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/11/2021] [Accepted: 06/03/2021] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Hot-iron disbudding is a common management procedure to prevent horn growth in calves. The study objective was to examine effect of age, breed and sex on horn bud size of dairy-bred and suckler-bred calves at time of disbudding. RESULTS The left and right horn bud size (diameter and height in mm) of 279 calves, including dairy-bred Holstein-Friesian (Male (M) = 88) and 191 suckler-bred (86 Charolais, CH; (M = 39, Female (F) = 47), 67 Limousin, LM; (M = 32, F = 35) and 38 Simmental, SI; (M = 22, F = 16) sired)) was measured using a digital calliper at time of disbudding. Calves were retrospectively assigned to two age categories at time of disbudding: 1), 14 to 28 days (d) old and 2), 29 to 60 d old. Holstein-Friesian M calves had a greater horn bud diameter (16.97 v.14.45 mm) and height (7.79 v. 5.00 mm) compared to suckler-bred M calves (P < 0.01), with no difference (P > 0.05) among the suckler-bred calves. Suckler-bred M calves had a greater horn bud diameter (14.46 vs 13.29 mm) and height (5.01 vs 3.88 mm) compared to suckler-bred F calves (P < 0.05). The slopes of the lines of best fit show that horn bud diameter and height increased with age (P < 0.05) for HF, SI male and CH female calves while there was no relationship with age (P > 0.05) for CH and LM male calves, or for SI and LM female calves. Linear regression of age with diameter and with height for each breed and sex showed high variability in the data as indicated by R-squared values ranging from 0.003-0.41 indicating that in the case of the diameter and the height, the weight of the fitting effect was poor. CONCLUSIONS Calf age is not a good predictor of horn bud size and recommendations for the disbudding of calves should be based on horn bud size and not on age. The implications of these findings are that calves should be disbudded while horn development is still at the bud stage and when the bud is large enough to be easily palpable/visible, but not so large that disbudding could lead to severe tissue trauma.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Gabriela A Marquette
- Teagasc, Animal & Grassland Research and Innovation Centre, Grange, Dunsany, Co. Meath, C15 PW93, Ireland.,Faculty of Veterinary and Agricultural Sciences, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Mark McGee
- Teagasc, Animal & Grassland Research and Innovation Centre, Grange, Dunsany, Co. Meath, C15 PW93, Ireland
| | - Andrew D Fisher
- Faculty of Veterinary and Agricultural Sciences, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Kelly Stanger
- Faculty of Veterinary and Agricultural Sciences, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Anastasio Argüello
- Teagasc, Animal & Grassland Research and Innovation Centre, Grange, Dunsany, Co. Meath, C15 PW93, Ireland
| | - Bernadette Earley
- Teagasc, Animal & Grassland Research and Innovation Centre, Grange, Dunsany, Co. Meath, C15 PW93, Ireland.
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Steagall PV, Bustamante H, Johnson CB, Turner PV. Pain Management in Farm Animals: Focus on Cattle, Sheep and Pigs. Animals (Basel) 2021; 11:1483. [PMID: 34063847 PMCID: PMC8223984 DOI: 10.3390/ani11061483] [Citation(s) in RCA: 20] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/28/2021] [Revised: 05/18/2021] [Accepted: 05/19/2021] [Indexed: 12/14/2022] Open
Abstract
Pain causes behavioral, autonomic, and neuroendocrine changes and is a common cause of animal welfare compromise in farm animals. Current societal and ethical concerns demand better agricultural practices and improved welfare for food animals. These guidelines focus on cattle, sheep, and pigs, and present the implications of pain in terms of animal welfare and ethical perspectives, and its challenges and misconceptions. We provide an overview of pain management including assessment and treatment applied to the most common husbandry procedures, and recommendations to improve animal welfare in these species. A cost-benefit analysis of pain mitigation is discussed for food animals as well as the use of pain scoring systems for pain assessment in these species. Several recommendations are provided related to husbandry practices that could mitigate pain and improve farm animal welfare. This includes pain assessment as one of the indicators of animal welfare, the use of artificial intelligence for automated methods and research, and the need for better/appropriate legislation, regulations, and recommendations for pain relief during routine and husbandry procedures.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Paulo V. Steagall
- Department of Clinical Sciences, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Université de Montréal, 3200 Rue Sicotte, Saint-Hyacinthe, QC J2S 2M2, Canada
| | - Hedie Bustamante
- Veterinary Clinical Sciences Institute, Faculty of Veterinary Sciences, Universidad Austral de Chile, Independencia 631, Valdivia 5110566, Chile;
| | - Craig B. Johnson
- Animal Welfare Science and Bioethics Centre, School of Veterinary Science, Tāwharau Ora, Massey University, Palmerston North 4472, New Zealand;
| | - Patricia V. Turner
- Global Animal Welfare and Training, Charles River, Wilmington, MA 01887, USA;
- Department of Pathobiology, University of Guelph, Guelph, ON N1G 2W1, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Hayer JJ, Nysar D, Heinemann C, Leubner CD, Steinhoff-Wagner J. Implementation of management recommendations in unweaned dairy calves in western Germany and associated challenges. J Dairy Sci 2021; 104:7039-7055. [PMID: 33715854 DOI: 10.3168/jds.2020-19829] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/26/2020] [Accepted: 01/29/2021] [Indexed: 11/19/2022]
Abstract
To improve the welfare of livestock, it is important to assess management practices on farms and to identify areas where current scientific recommendations are rarely implemented. Differences in the implementation of recommendations might be explained by the individual farm as well as the characteristics of survey respondents and their attitude toward animal welfare. Hence, the aim of this study was to assess dairy calf management practices, compare them with current scientific recommendations, and to explore factors that influence implementation of the recommended management practices. A 1.5-h interview was performed with stockpersons on 42 dairy farms (mean herd size ± SD = 149.9 ± 16.6 cows) distributed across western Germany in 2018 to 2019. We observed that the management of unweaned calves varied greatly from farm to farm in aspects such as milk-feeding protocols; timing of grouping and disbudding; and access to water, roughage, and concentrate. Major deviations from management recommendations were (1) cleaning calving pen only by removal of bedding without a following disinfection before restocking on 23.8% farms, cleaning of teat buckets without detergents and disinfection (23.8 and 11.9% of farms, respectively), and failure to disinfect navels (29.3% of farms); (2) separating calf and dam after only 5 to 8 h postpartum for calving at night in 97.6% farms and unchecked colostrum quality by 23.8% of survey respondents; (3) feeding waste milk by 72.4% of the farms surveyed; and (4) removing supernumerary teats and disbudding without local anesthesia (90 and 80% farms surveyed, respectively). The number of implemented recommendations on the farms surveyed correlated with who was responsible for calf rearing, and whether prioritizing animal welfare was considered important by the respondents. This study indicated that limitations of individual housing systems, time management, the stockperson's knowledge, and the stockperson's ability to relate to animals posed challenges in implementation of the recommendations. Further research on challenges in calf management and how to overcome them would be helpful to improve calves' welfare in current husbandry systems.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jason J Hayer
- Institute of Animal Science, University of Bonn, 53115 Bonn, Germany
| | - Dorit Nysar
- Institute of Animal Science, University of Bonn, 53115 Bonn, Germany
| | - Céline Heinemann
- Institute of Animal Science, University of Bonn, 53115 Bonn, Germany
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
7
|
Ede T, von Keyserlingk MAG, Weary DM. Conditioned place aversion of caustic paste and hot-iron disbudding in dairy calves. J Dairy Sci 2020; 103:11653-11658. [PMID: 33069402 DOI: 10.3168/jds.2020-18299] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/31/2020] [Accepted: 08/04/2020] [Indexed: 11/19/2022]
Abstract
Cauterization by hot iron and application of caustic paste are 2 common methods of disbudding calves. In this study, we compared the affective experience of these 2 procedures on young dairy calves using conditioned place aversion. Male dairy calves (n = 14; 7 ± 2 d old) were disbudded by both thermal and chemical methods (1 horn bud at a time, 48 h apart). Calves received treatments in pens made visually distinct with either red squares or blue triangles on the walls. Calves were restricted to these treatment pens for 6 h following disbudding. For all treatments, calves received a sedative (xylazine, 0.2 mg/kg), local anesthetic (lidocaine, 5 mL), and analgesic (meloxicam, 0.5 mg/kg). Calves were then tested for conditioned place aversion at 48, 72, and 96 h after their last treatment. During tests, calves were placed in a neutral pen connected to both treatment pens where they had previously been disbudded. Time spent in each treatment pen was recorded until calves chose to lie down for 1 min (latency to lie down: 31.0 ± 8.6 min). During the first test (48 h after last disbudding), calves spent more time in the pen associated with hot-iron disbudding compared with what would be expected by chance (intercept: 73.5%, 95% CI: 56.5, 90.5) and fewer calves lay down in the caustic paste pen than in the hot-iron pen (3 vs. 10 lying events). No evidence of preference for the hot-iron pen was found in the following test sessions (72 and 96 h since last disbudding). These results suggest that calves initially remember caustic paste disbudding as a more negative experience than hot-iron disbudding, even with the use of sedation, local anesthesia, and analgesia.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Thomas Ede
- Animal Welfare Program, Faculty of Land and Food Systems, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada V6T 1Z4
| | - Marina A G von Keyserlingk
- Animal Welfare Program, Faculty of Land and Food Systems, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada V6T 1Z4
| | - Daniel M Weary
- Animal Welfare Program, Faculty of Land and Food Systems, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada V6T 1Z4.
| |
Collapse
|