Equine influenza vaccination in the UK: Current practices may leave horses with suboptimal immunity

BACKGROUND: Vaccination is integral to preventive healthcare. Despite numerous guidelines on equine vaccination, evidence of current vaccination practices is lacking. OBJECTIVES: To describe current vaccination practices advised by vets treating horses in the United Kingdom (UK) and compare practices with manufacturer datasheets and current guidelines. STUDY DESIGN: Cross‐sectional survey. METHODS: An online questionnaire was distributed using email addresses acquired through professional registration listings and social media, targeting vets who treat horses in the UK. The questionnaire collected demographic data and information regarding vaccination practices and vaccine hesitancy. Descriptive statistical analysis was performed. RESULTS: Questionnaires were completed by 304 UK vets working with horses used for leisure (97.4%, n = 296/304), competition (86.2%, n = 262/304), stud‐work (47.7%, n = 145/304) and racing (40.5%, n = 123/304). Variation was identified in vaccine protocols for competition and noncompetition horses. Fifty‐seven per cent (n = 170/298) of respondents reported variation in advised ‘booster’ frequency; most commonly (n = 118) advising a 6‐monthly vaccination in competition horses and annual vaccination in noncompetition horses. Most common vaccination guidelines volunteered were British Horseracing Authority (68.8%, n = 172/250) and Federation Equestre Internationale (66.4%, n = 166/250). Most vaccination practices were not consistent with datasheet guidance. Only 7.7% (n = 23/300) of respondents complied with datasheet timeframes between the second and third vaccination. Adverse events following vaccination in the previous year were encountered by 66% (n = 199/304) of respondents, representing 2760 adverse events; but only 526 (19.1%) cases were reported to the Veterinary Medicines Directorate. Most common reactions were transient, including stiffness (931), localised swelling (835), lethargy (559) and pyrexia (355). 86.4% respondents reported vaccine hesitancy from horse owners, most commonly due to perception of over‐vaccination, cost and concern regarding adverse events. MAIN LIMITATIONS: Potential selection, respondent and recall bias. The recent Equine Influenza (EI) and Equine Herpes Virus (EHV) outbreaks in the UK may have altered responses. CONCLUSIONS: Current equine vaccination practices, although complying with competition rules, are mostly noncompliant with datasheet guidelines, potentially risking suboptimal immunity.