Cargando…

Horse owners’ knowledge, and opinions on recognising colic in the horse

BACKGROUND: Colic is the most common emergency problem in the horse. An owner’s ability to recognise colic and seek assistance is a critical first step in determining case outcome. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to assess horse owners’ knowledge and opinions on recognising colic. STUDY DESIGN...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Bowden, A., Burford, J. H., Brennan, M. L., England, G. C. W., Freeman, S. L.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7027804/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31461570
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/evj.13173
_version_ 1783498908063760384
author Bowden, A.
Burford, J. H.
Brennan, M. L.
England, G. C. W.
Freeman, S. L.
author_facet Bowden, A.
Burford, J. H.
Brennan, M. L.
England, G. C. W.
Freeman, S. L.
author_sort Bowden, A.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Colic is the most common emergency problem in the horse. An owner’s ability to recognise colic and seek assistance is a critical first step in determining case outcome. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to assess horse owners’ knowledge and opinions on recognising colic. STUDY DESIGN: Cross‐sectional study. METHODS: An online questionnaire was distributed to horse owners with open and closed questions on their knowledge of normal clinical parameters in the horse, confidence and approach to recognising colic (including assessment through case scenarios), and their demographics. Descriptive and chi squared statistical analyses were performed. RESULTS: There were 1564 participants. Many respondents either did not know or provided incorrect estimates for their horse’s normal clinical parameters: only 45% (n = 693/1540) gave correct normal values for heart rate, 45% (n = 694/1541) for respiratory rate and 67% (n = 1028/1534) for rectal temperature. Knowledge of normal values was statistically associated with participants’ educational qualifications (P<0.01). Owners said if they suspected their horse had colic they would assess faecal output (76%; n = 1131/1486), gastrointestinal sounds (75%; n = 1113/1486), respiratory rate (65%; n = 967/1486) and heart rate (54%; n = 797/1486). There was a lack of consensus on whether to call a vet for behavioural signs of colic, unless the signs were severe or persistent. The majority of participants (61%) were confident that they could recognise most types of colic. In the case scenarios, 49% were confident deciding that a surgical case had colic, but 9% were confident deciding an impaction case had colic. MAIN LIMITATIONS: Most respondents were UK based; risk of self‐selection bias for owners with previous experience of colic. CONCLUSIONS: There was marked variation in horse owners’ recognition and responses to colic, and significant gaps in knowledge. This highlights the need for the development of accessible educational resources to support owners’ decision‐making.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7027804
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-70278042020-02-24 Horse owners’ knowledge, and opinions on recognising colic in the horse Bowden, A. Burford, J. H. Brennan, M. L. England, G. C. W. Freeman, S. L. Equine Vet J Surveys and Population Studies BACKGROUND: Colic is the most common emergency problem in the horse. An owner’s ability to recognise colic and seek assistance is a critical first step in determining case outcome. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to assess horse owners’ knowledge and opinions on recognising colic. STUDY DESIGN: Cross‐sectional study. METHODS: An online questionnaire was distributed to horse owners with open and closed questions on their knowledge of normal clinical parameters in the horse, confidence and approach to recognising colic (including assessment through case scenarios), and their demographics. Descriptive and chi squared statistical analyses were performed. RESULTS: There were 1564 participants. Many respondents either did not know or provided incorrect estimates for their horse’s normal clinical parameters: only 45% (n = 693/1540) gave correct normal values for heart rate, 45% (n = 694/1541) for respiratory rate and 67% (n = 1028/1534) for rectal temperature. Knowledge of normal values was statistically associated with participants’ educational qualifications (P<0.01). Owners said if they suspected their horse had colic they would assess faecal output (76%; n = 1131/1486), gastrointestinal sounds (75%; n = 1113/1486), respiratory rate (65%; n = 967/1486) and heart rate (54%; n = 797/1486). There was a lack of consensus on whether to call a vet for behavioural signs of colic, unless the signs were severe or persistent. The majority of participants (61%) were confident that they could recognise most types of colic. In the case scenarios, 49% were confident deciding that a surgical case had colic, but 9% were confident deciding an impaction case had colic. MAIN LIMITATIONS: Most respondents were UK based; risk of self‐selection bias for owners with previous experience of colic. CONCLUSIONS: There was marked variation in horse owners’ recognition and responses to colic, and significant gaps in knowledge. This highlights the need for the development of accessible educational resources to support owners’ decision‐making. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019-09-23 2020-03 /pmc/articles/PMC7027804/ /pubmed/31461570 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/evj.13173 Text en © 2019 The Authors. Equine Veterinary Journal published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of EVJ Ltd This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Surveys and Population Studies
Bowden, A.
Burford, J. H.
Brennan, M. L.
England, G. C. W.
Freeman, S. L.
Horse owners’ knowledge, and opinions on recognising colic in the horse
title Horse owners’ knowledge, and opinions on recognising colic in the horse
title_full Horse owners’ knowledge, and opinions on recognising colic in the horse
title_fullStr Horse owners’ knowledge, and opinions on recognising colic in the horse
title_full_unstemmed Horse owners’ knowledge, and opinions on recognising colic in the horse
title_short Horse owners’ knowledge, and opinions on recognising colic in the horse
title_sort horse owners’ knowledge, and opinions on recognising colic in the horse
topic Surveys and Population Studies
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7027804/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31461570
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/evj.13173
work_keys_str_mv AT bowdena horseownersknowledgeandopinionsonrecognisingcolicinthehorse
AT burfordjh horseownersknowledgeandopinionsonrecognisingcolicinthehorse
AT brennanml horseownersknowledgeandopinionsonrecognisingcolicinthehorse
AT englandgcw horseownersknowledgeandopinionsonrecognisingcolicinthehorse
AT freemansl horseownersknowledgeandopinionsonrecognisingcolicinthehorse