ACVB-AVSAB 2014 Symposium proceedings Final

Transcription

Schedule of Events
Friday, July 25, 2014 • Denver, Colorado
Today’s AV Support is Sponsor is Animal Health Technologies
7:30 am
Registration and Coffee
8:15 am
Welcome and Introduction
Session 1: Shelter Behavior, Pheromones (2 hours CE) — Sponsored by CEVA
Time
Presenter
Topic
Page
8:30 am
Amy Marder, DVM
Food-related aggression in shelter dogs: A comparison of behavior
identified by a behavior evaluation in the shelter and owner reports
after adoption
2
8:50 am
Lisa Gunter
Effects of Dog Breed Labeling on Potential Adopter Perceptions and
Shelter Length of Stay
9
9:10 am
Melissa Bain, DVM, DACVB
Association between early socialization and adult behaviors of dogs
11
9:30 am
Manuel Mengoli, DVM, MSc,
PhD
Preliminary results regarding semiochemical-induced emotional
balance: could Equine Appeasing Pheromones help to modulate
internal affectivity before a mental effort?
14
9:50 am
Allessandro Cozzi, DVM
Optimize the management of inappropriate scratching behavior at
home: the importance of texture to scratch in presence of Feline
Interdigital Semiochemical
16
10:10 am
Theresa DePorter, DVM,
DACVB
Evaluation of the efficacy of a new pheromone product versus placebo
in the management of feline aggression in multi-cat households
17
10:30 am
BREAK
Session 2: Diet and Behavior (1 hour CE Credit) — Sponsored by CEVA
Time
Presenter
Topic
Page
11:00 am
Gary Landsberg, DVM,
DACVB
Anxiety-reducing effectiveness of a therapeutic calming diet using a
model of fear and anxiety in cats
19
11:20 am
Amy Pike, DVM and
Debra Horwitz, DVM, DACVB
An open label prospective study of the use of L-Theanine (Anxitane®)
in storm sensitive client owned dogs.
21
11:40 am
Gary Landsberg, DVM,
DACVB
Effectiveness of a Diet Supplemented With Fish Hydrolysate in
Reducing Anxiety in the Beagle Dog
22
12:00 pm
Sagi Denenberg, DVM,
DACVB and Steve Dale
AVSAB Position Statement Announcement
12:00–
1:15 pm
LUNCH
Sponsored by CEVA
Session 3: Human animal bond, Anxiety, Clinical Management of Disease, (3 hours CE)
Time
Presenter
1:15 pm
Krystina Cunningham
Topic
Association between owner personality profile and companion pet
preference and behavior
(continued next page)
Page
24
1:35 pm
Whitney Engler and
Melissa Bain, DVM, DACVB
2:10 pm
VBS AVSAB Veterinary Student Research Award
The effect of different types of classical music at a veterinary
hospital on the behavior of pets and owner satisfaction
Award Winner sponsored by Virbac
27
Bill Milgram, PhD
Anxiety-reducing effectiveness of Calmz™ Anxiety Relief System
in Beagle dogs in a modified thunderstorm model
29
2:30 pm
Patrick Pageat, DVM
Engraftment of senile dogs with olfactory stem cells:
preliminary results for a promising treatment.
31
2:50 pm
Margaret Gruen, DVM,
DACVB
Clinical trial application of a clinical phenomenon: deterioration
following withdrawal of active medication for the treatment of
chronic pain in cats with degenerative joint disease
33
3:10 pm
Jill Orlando, DVM
3:45 pm
BREAK
VBS R.K. Anderson Resident Research Award Winner
The use of oral trazodone for sedation in cats
Resident Award Winner sponsored by Virbac
35
Sponsored by Vetoquinol
Session 4: PET: Personal Experience Tips, Clinical Applications (1 hour CE Credit)
Time
Presenter
Topic
4:15 pm
Elizabeth Feltes, DVM
Demon Cat to Lap Cat in 10 Sessions—with Video to prove it!
36
4:30 pm
Kenneth Martin, DVM,
DACVB and Debbie Martin,
RVT/VTS-Behavior
The Reactive Dog: Addressing leash reactivity
37
4:45 pm
Colleen Koch, DVM
Stop the Suffering—Setting Clients and Patients up for Success
40
5:00 pm
Lorna Reichl, DVM
Unexpected behavioral changes in the behavior patient?: Time to
review current medications and evaluate for possible drug-drug
interactions
46
5:15 pm
Germain Rivard, DVM
Dog Bite Prevention App
52
5:30 pm
HIT Q&A
5:45 pm
Closing Remarks
The Veterinary Behavior Symposium is the annual continuing education
program of the American College of Veterinary Behaviorists (ACVB)
and the American Veterinary Society of Animal Behavior (AVSAB)
Page
2014 Symposium Sponsors
Platinum Sponsor
Gold Sponsors
Silver Sponsors
Campbell Pet Products
Royal Canin
Virbac
Bronze Sponsors
goodnewsforpets.com
Hill’s Pet Nutrition
Karen Pryor Academy for Animal
Training and Behavior
Kong Company
KONG Veterinary Products
Smart Animal Training Products
Veterinary Information Network
Paper Presentations
1
Food-Related Aggression In Shelter Dogs:
A Comparison Of Behavior Identified by a
Behavior Evaluation in the Shelter and
Owner Reports After Adoption
A.R. Marder*, A Shabelansky, G.J. Patronek, S. Dowling-Guyer,
S. Segurson D’Arpino
Center for Shelter Dogs at the Animal Rescue League of
Boston, Massachusetts, USA
*Corresponding author: [email protected]
Abstract
This retrospective cohort study assessed the relationship between food-related
aggression identified by a canine behavior evaluation (BE) and owner-reported
food-related aggression after adoption in 97 dogs. The Match-Up II Shelter Dog
Rehoming Program was administered before adoption and was used to classify
dogs as either food aggressive (FA+) or not food aggressive (FA-). Adoptive owners
were subsequently surveyed to assess the presence of FA after adoption, the
owners’ perception of FA and their satisfaction with the dog as a pet. 20 (20.6%)
of the dogs were deemed FA+ on the BE and 11/20 (55%) were later reported to
be FA+ by their adopters. Out of the 77 dogs that were FA- on the BE 17 (22%)
were reported to be FA+ by their adopters and 60/77 were FA-. Most adopters did
not consider FA to be a challenge to keeping the dog as a pet. In conclusion, the
observation of FA+ on a BE was associated with FA after adoption; however an
almost equal number did not show food aggression after adoption. The absence of
FA on the BE was associated with the absence of FA after adoption. The detection
of FA on a BE should be interpreted with caution.
Introduction
Aggression to people over food-related items is a commonly reported behavior in
dogs by both owners and those who treat dogs for behavior problems (Beaver,1993,
Guy et al., 2001, Leuscher and Reisner, 2008). This may involve the dog showing
teeth, growling, snapping, lunging or biting when either the dog or a food
item near the dog is approached or touched by a person. In shelters, dogs are
often identified as FA+ by use of a formal behavior evaluation, where the dog is
2
presented with either a bowl of food or delicious chew item, such as a rawhide, and
then using a rubber hand on a stick, the dog is interfered with while eating.
Labeling a dog as FA+ often has negative consequences for shelter dogs. Shelters
may either require very restrictive conditions in the adoptive home (e.g. no
children), which may delay or prevent adoption, or at the most extreme, consider
the dogs unadoptable, resulting in euthanasia. A recent on-line survey (MohanGibbons et al.,2012) completed by 77 shelters nation-wide indicated that
aggression over food or non-food items was the most common reason given for
considering dogs unadoptable. 51% of the shelters surveyed said that they made no
attempt at all to place the dogs for adoption.
The objectives of the present study were to determine the relationship of both the
presence or absence of FA identified by a BE (Match-Up II Shelter Dog Rehoming
Program) in the shelter and the presence or absence of food aggression in the new
home after adoption. Adopter’s perception of food aggression was also gauged.
Materials and methods
Records of 376 dogs adopted from the Animal Rescue League of Boston between
January 2009 and November 2010 were reviewed. To be eligible for inclusion, dog
had to (1) have complete records of both the food and chew item sub-tests from
Match-Up II (2) be over 4 months of age on the day of the BE (3) have resided in the
shelter after being admitted (4) be in their new adoption home for at least 3 months.
Between March and April 2011 adopters were contacted by a professional
survey company either by e-mail or telephone. The questionnaire completed by
adopters contained four sections: dog demographic information, dog behavior
related to food, adopters’ perception of FA, and FA management techniques. The
questionnaire included two scenarios: the dog’s behavior while eating a meal and
the dog’s behavior while eating delicious food items such as rawhides, bones, and
table scraps. In both scenarios respondents indicated the frequency of specific
behaviors (growl or show teeth, snap, and bite) using a 5-point scale (never, rarely,
sometimes, frequently, always). Respondents that never approached their dogs
while they were eating were excluded from the study.
In the section about adopter’s perception of FA, all adopters were asked if they
3
considered their dog to be FA or if they didn’t they were asked to answer the
questions as if there dog was FA. The respondents were asked how challenging
FA was to them on a 5-point scale (Not a challenge to a great challenge). Adopters
were also asked how likely they were to adopt the same dog again, using a 5-point
scale from very unlikely to very likely.
The Match-Up II Shelter Dog Rehoming Program BE is available at
MatchUpIIonline.centerforshelterdogs.org. . Subtest 8, parts 1 and 2 evaluate the
dog’s behavior over dog food and a pig’s ear when a person using a rubber hand
disturbs the dog while eating. Dogs that refused to eat or chew were eliminated
from the study.
None of the dogs received behavior modification programs for food aggression
while in the shelter. All adopters were counseled by the behavior staff at adoption.
Adopters were instructed not to touch the dog or food while eating or sleeping,
feed only dry food, pick up the food bowl after eating, not give delicious chews and
trade the dog with a food treat if the dog had a stolen item.
159/376 (43%) completed the survey either by email or telephone. There was no
significant difference in answers between the two methods or in response rates
between the dogs that were FA+ or FA-. 57 (36%) of the dogs were excluded
because they did not meet the inclusion criteria. The final sample was 97 dogs.
Descriptive statistics were generated and data were analyzed using IBM
SPSS Statistics. Categorical variables such as FA were summarized using 2x2
contingency tables and the Pearson’s Chi-square test was used to identify whether
being FA+ or FA- on the behavior evaluation in the shelter was significantly
associated with FA+ or FA- behavior in the home after adoption. Positive and
negative predictive values were also calculated. The perceived challenge of having a
FA+ dog was measured using the 5-point scale and was the likelihood to adopt the
same dog again. The Mann-Whitney U test was used to evaluate these variables. A
P-value of <0.05 was considered significant.
Results
Of the 97 dogs, 47 were females, 50 were males. All were neutered prior to
adoption. There was no significant difference between males and females in the
4
incidence of food aggression either on the BE or after adoption. The majority of
the dogs were mixed breeds.
20/97 (21%) of the dogs were identified as FA+ over food or chew item or both on
the BE. 10 (50%) of the dogs bit the rubber hand on the BE, 3 (15%) snapped and
7 (35%) growled or showed teeth only. 28/97 (29%) adopted dogs showed FA+
behavior at home either over a meal, over delicious items or both.
According to the Pearson’s Chi-square test, there was significant association between
FA behavior on the BE and FA behavior reported in the home after adoption. (See
Table 1). More than half (11/20=55%) identified as FA+ on the BE showed this
behavior after adoption, compared to 9/20 (45%) that did not. Out of the 77 dogs that
did not show FA on the BE 60/77 (78%) did not show FA after adoption, while 17/77
(22%) did. The positive predictive value (PPV) was 55% and the negative predictive
value (NPV) was 78%. The the PPV was weaker than the NPV.
Almost all (26/28=93%) of the dogs classified as FA+ after adoption exhibited the
FA behaviors rarely, with only 2/28 (7%) dogs described as being FA+ frequently
or always (See Table 2). Moreover most of the dogs (23/28=82%) that were FA+
exhibited the milder forms (growling, showing teeth) and only 5/28 (18%) were
reported as exhibiting more severe reactions such as snap or bite.
There was a marked disparity between dogs’ actual behavior and adopter’s
perception of that behavior. Of the 97 adopters, 93 (96%) did not consider their dog
to be FA+ and four were unsure. Even the adopters who had observed their dogs
exhibiting aggressive behaviors did not consider their dogs to be FA+. Since all of
the adopters did not consider their dog to be FA+ or were unsure, they were asked
the hypothetical question, “If your dog was food aggressive, how challenging would
this problem be for you?” 27/97 (28%) rated potential food aggression as “Not a
challenge at all” and only 5/97 (5%) indicated the FA+ would be “a great challenge”.
13/97 (13%) owners were unsure. The adopters of dogs who actually observed
aggressive behaviors rated the potential problem of FA as less challenging than the
adopters who did not observe aggressive behaviors. Most adopters, no matter if their
dog exhibited aggressive behaviors or not, indicated that they would be very likely
to adopt the same dog again. (59/69=86% of dogs that did not display aggression,
5
25/28=89% of those that did). Since almost all of the respondents did not consider
their dog to be FA+, they did not qualify for the questions on management.
Discussion
This study demonstrates several important findings with respect to FA behavior
exhibited by dogs while in a shelter and after adoption. There was a statistically
significant association between detection of FA behavior in the shelter using a
standardized BE and FA being reported after adoption in the new home. However,
the positive predictive value (55%) of this association was weak and equally
important was that almost the same number of dogs did not show food aggression
after adoption. On the other hand, the negative predictive value (78%) under the
conditions of this study was strong. This suggests that the absence of FA behavior
on the evaluation in the shelter may be more informative than the presence of FA.
Another important finding is that contrary to what people working in animal
shelters may be inclined to assume, adopters did not consider FA to be a significant
problem, even when objectively scored behaviors consistent with FA were reported
by these same owners. Not only did the majority of adopters of dogs that did
display aggressive behaviors did not consider their dog to be food aggressive, they
also did not FA as a major challenge to keeping the dog as a pet.
Although the presence of food aggression on a BE should be noted, it should also
be interpreted with caution, because many dogs will not continue to exhibit this
behavior in the home after adoption. Furthermore, when they do, the behaviors
are usually not severe and are rarely displayed and owners do not generally
perceive FA to be a significant problem. Most importantly, each dog should
be considered as an individual and all behavioral and owner-related factors
considered when making adoption decisions.
References
Beaver, B.V., 1993. Profiles of dogs presentedfor aggression. J.Am.Anim.Hosp.
Assoc.29,564-569.
Center for Shelter Dogs, 2013. Match-Up II Shelter Dog Rehoming Program.
Match-Upiionline.centerforshelterdogs.org.
6
Guy, N.C., Leuscher, A.U., Dohoo, S.E., 2001 Demographic and aggressive
characteristics of dogs in a general veterinary caseload. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci.
74, 15-28.
Leuscher, A.U., Reisner, I.R., 2008. Canine aggression toward familiar people: A
new look at an old problem. In: Horwitz, D.F., Landsberg, G.M. (Eds), Veterinary
Clinics of North America, Small Animal Pracitce, Practical Applications and
New Perspectives in Veterinary Behavior, vol.38,pp. 1107-1130.
Mohan-Gibbons, H., Weiss, E., Slater, M., 2012. Preliminary investigation of food
guarding behavior in shelter dogs in the United States. Animals 2, 331-346.
Keywords
Food aggression, shelter dog, behavior evaluation, temperament test
Table 1
Relationship between FA+ behavior on a standardized dog behavior evaluation
and FA+ behavior reported by owners in the home after adoption
FA+ after adoption†
FA- after adoption
Total
Behavior
evaluation
result
n
(%)
n
(%)
n
(%)
FA+ in
shelter*
11
(55)
9
(45)
20
(100)
FA- in
shelter
17
(22)
60
(78)
77
(100)
Total
28
69
97
*FA+ in shelter was defined as growling, showing teeth, snapping, lunging or biting over meal or
commercial chew item, during standardized behavior evaluation.
†FA+ at home was defined as any owner report of dog growling, showing teeth, snapping or biting
over meal or delicious food items.
7
Table 2
Frequency of all dogs exhibiting different types of FA behavior over meals and
delicious food items, as reported by owners in the home after adoption.
Number of dogs exhibiting FA behaviors
Behavior
Growls and/or
shows teeth
Snaps and/or
Lunges
Bites
Over meals
Over delicious
food items
Frequency
N (%)
N (%)
Never
73 (82)
70 (79)
Rarely
11 (12)
13 (15)
Sometimes
5 (6)
4 (5)
Frequently
0
1 (1)
Always
0
1 (1)
Never
87 (98)
87 (98)
Rarely
1 (1)
1 (1)
Sometimes
1 (1)
1 (1)
Frequently
0
0
Always
0
0
Never
89 (100)
86 (97)
Rarely
0
2 (2)
Sometimes
0
1 (1)
Frequently
0
0
Always
0
0
89
89
Total
8
Pictures and Labels:
Influences of Attractiveness and
Length of Stay for Pit-Bull-Type Dogs
LM Gunter*, CDL Wynne
Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ
Abstract
Previous research has indicated that certain breeds of dogs stay longer in shelters
than other breeds (Brown, Davidson, & Zuefle, 2013; Clevenger & Kass, 2003;
Protopopova et al., 2012) however the exact nature of how breed perception
and assignment influences adopters’ decisions remains unclear. Dog breed
identification practices in animal shelters often rely upon staff determination
based on phenotype (Hoffman, Harrison, Wolff, & Westgarth, 2014). However
discrepancies have been found between breed identification assessed by welfare
agencies and DNA analysis (Voith, Ingram, Mitsouras, & Irizarry, 2009; Voith
et al., 2013). Specifically, breed assignment of pit-bull-type dogs was inconsistent
across staff and an unreliable means of identification: many dogs labeled as pit
bulls lacked such DNA breed signatures (Olson et al., 2011).
In Experiment 1, participants’ perceptions of behavioral and adoptability
characteristics of a pit-bull-type dog were compared with a Labrador Retriever and
Border Collie. In Experiment 2, we compared lengths of stay and attractiveness for
dogs that were labeled as pit-bull-type breeds and dogs that were phenotypically
similar but were labeled as another breed (“lookalikes”).
We found that the pit-bull-type dog was perceived more negatively than the
other dog breeds. Shelter length of stay of pit-bull-type dogs was longer than
that of lookalikes, but perceived attractiveness was the same. Given the inherent
complexity of breed assignment based on morphology with mixed breed dogs, our
findings suggest that incorrect assignment could affect outcomes of pit-bull-type
dogs in animal shelters and influence adopter preference in ways unaccounted for
in previous studies.
9
References
Brown WP, Davidson JP, Zuefle ME, 2013. Effects of phenotypic characteristics on
the length of stay of dogs at two no kill animal shelters. Journal of Applied Animal
Welfare Science 16:2-18.
Clevenger J, Kass PH, 2003. Determinants of adoption and euthanasia of shelter
dogs spayed or neutered in the University of California veterinary student surgery
program compared to other shelter dogs. Journal of Veterinary Medical Education
30:372-378.
Hoffman CL, Harrison N, Wolff L, Westgarth C, 2014. Is that a pit bull? A
cross-country comparison of perceptions of shelter workers regarding breed
identification. Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science: 1-18.
Olson KR, Levy JK, Norby B, Broadhurst JE, Jacks S, Reeves RC, Zimmerman MS,
2011. Pit bull-type dog identification in animal shelters. Paper presented at Fourth
Annual Maddie’s Shelter Medicine Conference: Orlando, Florida.
Protopopova A, Gilmour AJ, Weiss RH, Shen JY, Wynne CDL, 2012. The effects
of social training and other factors on adoption success of shelter dogs. Applied
Animal Behaviour Science 142:61-68.
Voith V, Ingram E, Mitsouras K, Irizarry K, 2009. Comparison of adoption agency
breed identification and DNA breed identification of dogs. Journal of Applied
Animal Welfare Science 12:253-262.
Voith VL, Trevejo R, Dowling-Guyer S, Chadik C, Marder A, Johnson V, Irizarry
K, 2013. Comparison of visual and DNA-based breed identification of dog and
inter-observer reliability. American Journal of Sociological Research 3:17-29.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank Kira Stackhouse for her photography contribution
and the administration and staff at the Arizona Animal Welfare League for their
ongoing support of our research.
Keywords
Dog, breed, perception, pit bull, animal shelter
10
Association Between Early Socialization
and Adult Behaviors of Dogs
MJ Bain*, TL Araya, GC Robbins, S Shaikher
University of California School of Veterinary Medicine,
Davis, California, USA
Introduction
Our hypotheses was: dogs exposed to greater numbers of people and dogs during
socialization period would display less fear and aggression later.
Materials and Methods
Owners of dogs between 1-3 years of age that had been obtained as puppies were
solicited for an Internet-based survey. Questions were asked of recollections of the
number of people and dogs to which the dog was exposed by the time the dog was
4–5 months of age. Questions from a validated survey (CBARQ®) were asked to
determine the current behavior of the dog, in addition to demographic, training,
and veterinary information.
Results
Dogs had a higher Stranger-directed fear score if they were exposed to less than
four non-household people by 4-5 months in the following categories: men;
women; and children between 12–18 years. Dogs that were exposed to < 4 nonhousehold dogs had a higher Dog-directed aggression/fear score. Whether the
veterinarian was reported to have given behaviorally appropriate or inappropriate
advice was correlated to whether or not the dog attended puppy socialization
classes. Dogs achieved higher Trainability scores if they attended a puppy
socialization class or if they were sexually intact. However, dogs that attended
puppy socialization classes did not have significantly different scores in behavioral
categories compared to puppies that did not attend.
Discussion
Early exposure to non-household men, women, and older children was correlated
with a lower fear of people. The information can be utilized by veterinarians and
other animal care workers to help prevent problem behaviors.
11
Selected References
Appleby DL, Bradshaw JW, Casey RA. Relationship between aggressive and
avoidance behaviour by dogs and their experience in the first six months of life.
Vet Rec 2002;150(14):434-438.
Clarke RS, Heron W, Featherstonhaugh ML, et al. Individual differences in
dogs: Preliminary report on the effects of early experience. Can J of Psychol
1951;5(4):150-156.
Duxbury MM, Jackson JA, Line SW, et al. Evaluation of association between
retention in the home and attendance at puppy socialization classes. J of the Am
Vet Med Assoc 2003;223(1):61-66.
Fox MW, Stelzner D. Effects of early experience on development of inter and
intraspecies social relationships in the dog. Anim Behav 1967;15(2-3):377-386.
Gazzano A, Mariti C, Notari L, et al. Effects of early gentling and early
environment on emotional development of puppies. Appl Anim Behav Sci
2008;110(3-4):294-304.
Godbout M, Palestrini C, Beuchamp G, et al. Puppy behavior at a veterinary
clinic: A pilot study. J Vet Beh 2007;2(4):126-135.
Korbelik J, Rand JS, Morton JM. Comparison of early socialization practices used
for litters of small-scale registered dog breeders and nonregistered dog breeders. J
Am Vet Med Assoc 2011;239(8):1090-1097.
Miller DD, Staats SR, Partlo C, et al. Factors associated with the decision to
surrender a pet to an animal shelter. J of the Am Vet Med Assoc 1996;209(4):738-742.
New JC, Salman MD, Scarlett JM, et al. Moving: Characteristics of dogs and cats
and those relinquishing them to 12 U.S. animal shelters. J of Appl Anim Welf Sci
1999;2(2):83-96.
New JJ, Salamn MD, King M, et al., Characteristics of shelter-relinquished animals
and their owners compared with animals and their owners in U.S. pet-owning
households. J of Appl Anim Welf Sci 2000;3(3):179-201.
Patronek GJ, Dodman NH. Attitudes, procedures, and delivery of behavioral
services by veterinarians in small animal practice. J of the Am Vet Med Assoc
1999;215(11):1606-1611.
Patronek GJ, Glickman LT, Beck AM, et al. Risk factors for relinquishment of dogs
to an animal shelter. J of the Am Vet Med Assoc 1996;209(3):572-81.
Pfaffenberger CJ, Scott JP, Fuller JL, et al. Guide Dogs for the Blind: Their
selection, development and training. New York: Elsevier Scientific Publishing
Company, 1976.
12
Salman M, Hutchison J, Ruch-Gallie R, et al. Behavioral reasons for
relinquishment of dogs and cats to 12 shelters. J of Appl Anim Welf Sci
2000;3(2):93-106.
Salman MD, New JG, Scarlett JM, et al. Human and animal factors related to
relinquishment of dogs and cats in 12 selected animal shelters in the United States.
J of Appl Anim Welf Sci 1998;1(3):207-226.
Segurson SA, Serpell JA, Hart BL. Evaluation of a behavioral assessment
questionnaire for use in the characterization of behavioral problems of dogs
relinquished to animal shelters. J of the Am Vet Med Assoc 2005;227(11):1755-1761.
Seksel K, Mazurski EJ, Taylor A. Puppy socialisation programs: short and long
term behavioural effects. Appl Anim Behav Sci 1999;62(4):335-349.
Seksel K. Preventing behavior problems in puppies and kittens. Vet Clin N Am
2008;38(5):971-982.
Stepita ME, Bain MJ, Kass PH. Frequency of CPV infection in vaccinated puppies
that attended puppy socialization classes. J Am Anim Hosp Assoc. 2013;49(2):95100.
Keywords
dog; behavior; socialization; aggression; fear
13
Preliminary Results Regarding
Semiochemical-Induced Emotional Balance:
Could Equine Appeasing Pheromones
Help To Modulate Internal Affectivity
Before A Mental Effort
M. Mengolia*, P. Pageata, P. Monnereta, C. Lafont-Lecuellea,
L. Bougrata, A. Cozzia
a
IRSEA Research Institute in Semiochemistry
and Applied Ethology, Saint Saturnin les Apt, 84490, France
* Corresponding author: [email protected]
Abstract
Previous studies about Equine Appeasing Pheromone (EAP) have demonstrated
its modulation on the emotional-related response during a mental effort.
The aim of this research was to study possible physiological changes associated
with the effect of EAP on equine emotional affectivity before a cognitive test.
38 horses were involved in this trial (a randomized two parallel groups: verum VS
placebo with repeated measures and blinded procedure) and were recorded for cardiac
parameters (heart rate - HR and heart rate variability - HRV) during a baseline (A), a
waiting period (B) and during a cognitive test (C). EAP was applied before B.
All horses showed increased HR in A and C, with expected decreased values in B
(lower social interaction and less environmental stimulation): significant differences
in HR were found between A and B and between B and C regarding time effect
(df=2; F=4.57; p=0.014; mixed repeated measures ANOVA model). Even the
time*treatment interaction was not significant, only EAP group, starting with higher
HR during A, showed an important decrease during B. A significant difference
regarding rMSSD was found, related to the time*treatment interaction (df=2; F=3.97;
p=0.023; ANOVA), concerning increased HRV between A and B, for the EAP group.
Any statistical difference had been found regarding the LF/HF ratio.
EAP group, with initial higher emotional activation would be able to reduce its
internal activation in a test’s preparatory phase.
14
This preliminary research described the interest in using semiochemicals in order
to prepare the cognitive-emotional state of the horse before a mental effort.
Keywords
Horse, Equine Appeasing Pheromones, Learning, Cardiac Parameters
15
Optimize the Management of Inappropriate
Scratching Behavior at Home:
The Importance of Texture to Scratch in
Presence of Feline Interdigital Semiochemical
M. Degoisa, P. Pageatb, P. Monneretb, C. Lafont-Lecuelleb,
E. Codecasab, V. Petitrenaudb, A. Cozzib*
a
University of Liège, Biologie des Organismes et Ecologie,
Allée du 6 Août, 11 4000, Belgium
b
IRSEA Research Institute in Semiochemistry and Applied Ethology,
Saint Saturnin les Apt, 84490, France
Abstract
Scratching is a behavior that is part of the cat’s ethogram. Through this behavior,
the cat sends olfactory and visual messages. Expression of this behavior in an
unsuitable area, such as on a sofa or other furniture, degrades the relationship
between the cat and his owner. The Feline Interdigital Semiochemical (FIS) is
a synthetic analogue of the scratching pheromone which makes it possible to
redirect this behavior toward a given target. The aim of this study was to assess
the cat’s preference for a particular scratching post texture, associating it with
FIS. The experimental plan corresponds to a randomized complete block design
without repetition, with a factorial structure and blinded procedure. Twelve cats
were included in the study and put in the presence of four treatments (cardboard
scratching post or rope scratching post with FIS or a placebo). The duration and
frequency of scratching and the frequency of rubbing were analyzed for each
treatment in a standardized test. A significant preference for the FIS (ANOVA;
df=1; F=13.55; p=0.001) and a significant preference for the cardboard texture
(ANOVA; df=1; F=4.67; p=0.037) were observed according to the duration
of scratching (the interaction was not significant). The results showed how
environmental enrichment using a suitable texture of scratching post and
pheromonatherapy are interesting tools in cat’s clinical ethology in relation to the
management of inappropriate scratching behavior at home.
Keywords
Cat, Feline Interdigital Semiochemical, Scratching, Scratching post texture
16
Evaluation of the Efficacy of a
New Pheromone Product Versus Placebo
in the Management of Feline Aggression
in Multi-Cat Households
T. L. DePortera, A. Lopezb, E. Ollivierc
a
Oakland Veterinary Referral Services, Behavioral Medicine,
Bloomfield Hills, MI USA;
b,c
Ceva Santé Animale Libourne, France
*Corresponding author : [email protected]
Introduction
Aggression and social tension amongst housemate cats is common and puts cats at
risk for injury or relinquishment (Salman, 2000).
In this pilot study, a new pheromone product by Ceva Santé Animale was
evaluated for efficacy to reduce aggression between housemate cats by randomized
double-blind placebo-controlled trial in 45 multi-cat households [Pheromone
(n=20), placebo (n=25)] that reported aggression for at least 2 weeks (range 17-3,931
days, average=822 days). Each household included 2-5 cats. Volunteers attended a
group meeting on Day -7 (D-7) and the veterinary behaviorist described behaviors
to be monitored for 7 weeks using the Oakland Feline Social Interaction Scale
(OFSIS) which assessed the frequency and intensity of 12 aggressive interactions
(e.g. bite, swat, stare, block, hiss or scream). Participants were provided directions
for safely handling aggressive events. Punishment techniques were discouraged.
Plug-in diffusers with new pheromone product or placebo were utilized from D0
to D28. Participants completed daily diary of aggressive events and weekly OFSIS.
Results
The OFSIS scores (possible 0 to 360) were similar at baseline (mean±SE pheromone,
105.1±11.1 vs placebo, 109.6±8.5 at D-7 and 83.4±10.4 vs 83.5±8.3 at D0). The
pheromone group showed a lower mean OFSIS score than placebo at D7 (47.8±6.3vs
61.8±7.7), D14 (30.8±4.9 vs 48.0±8.3), D21 (21.8±3.9 vs 40.7±7.4), D28 (33.2±9.7 vs
47.0±9.7) which continued post treatment D35 (32.5±8.0 vs 55.0±10.5) and D42
(31.2±8.1 vs 59.0±9.0). [Repeated measures ANOVA F(1, 43) = 4.34, p=0.0431].
17
Discussion
This study suggests this new pheromone is a promising treatment for the
management of aggression between housemate cats.
Acknowledgements
The authors thank the volunteers who participated in this study. This research was
funded by Ceva Santé Animale (Libourne, France)
References
Salman MD, Hutchison J, Ruch-Gallie R, Kogan L, New JC, Kass PH, & Scarlett
JM, 2000. Behavioral Reasons for Relinquishment of Dogs and Cats to 12
Shelters. Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science 3(2) 93-106. doi:10.1207/
S15327604JAWS0302_2
Keywords
Aggression, cat, pheromone
18
Anxiety-Reducing Effectiveness
of a Therapeutic Calming Diet
Using a Model of Fear and Anxiety In Cats
G.M. Landsberg, C. de Rivera, I. Mougeot, S. Kelly,
D. Drewczynski, N.W. Milgram
North Toronto Veterinary Behaviour Specialty Clinic,
Thornhill, ON, Canada
Introduction
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of a diet supplemented with
l-tryptophan and alpha-casozepine, a milk hydrolysate, on cats identified as
fearful.
Cats that were fearful of humans during home room assessment were significantly
more inactive in both open field and human interaction tests compared to nonfearful cats. Furthermore we demonstrated that diazepam counteracts behavioral
suppression and increases activity. (Milgram et al 2013) Based on baseline testing,
24 fearful cats were divided into two equivalent groups that were fed either testa or
control dietb for 4 weeks. At weeks 2 and 4, subjects were reassessed on both open
field and human interaction tests. Data was analyzed using repeated measures
ANOVA and the Fisher exact test for direct post hoc group comparisons.
Results
On open field, for distance travelled, control animals showed a statistically
significant decrease in activity at 2 weeks (p=0.023) and a marginally significant
decrease at 4 weeks (p=0.052). By contrast, the subjects on test diet increased
their movement, but differences were not statistically significant. For inactivity
duration, the control group showed a statistically significant increase at 2 weeks
(p=0.042) and marginally significant difference at 4 weeks (p=0.052). By contrast
the group fed test diet showed a statistically significant decrease at 2 weeks
(p=0.0397) and marginally significant decrease at 4 weeks (p=0.0675). There were
no group differences in the human interaction test.
19
Discussion
These results demonstrate that a diet supplemented with l-tryptophan and alphacasozepine was effective in reducing anxiety in fearful cats.
Acknowledgement
This study was funded by Royal Canin SAS under contract to CanCog
Technologies.
References
Milgram NW, de Rivera C, Landsberg GM. 2013. Development of a model to
assess anxiety in cats. In Mills D et al, (eds). Proceedings of the 9th International
Veterinary Behaviour Meeting, Lisbon, 2013, PSI Animal, 46-47
Keywords
Cat, anxiety, fear, milk hydrolysate, l-tryptophan
a
Royal Canin Veterinary Diet CALM Feline, Guelph, ON, Canada.
Nestle Purina Cat Chow Indoor formula, Saint Louis, MO, USA
b
20
An Open Label Prospective Study
of the Use ff L-Theanine (Anxitane®)
in Storm Sensitive Client Owned Dogs
A.L. Pike*,D.F. Horwitz
Veterinary Behavior Consultations, Missouri, USA
Abstract
This study evaluated the use of L-theanine in client owned dogs with a history
of thunderstorm sensitivity. Dogs were recruited from general practices, were
between one and eight years of age, in good health based on physical examination
and laboratory analysis, and not currently being treated for any chronic medical or
behavioral disorder.
Owners completed an initial questionnaire and one for each storm experienced
while administering L-theanine twice daily at the labeled dosage. A total of five
storms were evaluated on the test article. Questionnaires evaluated 11 individual
behavior manifestations of storm responses and storm severity utilizing a
0-5 Likert scale. Owners also evaluated time to return to a baseline normal
behavioral state when the storm ended. Each case received a standard protocol
of environmental and behavioral management to follow. No other behavior
modification was prescribed.
18 dogs completed the trial and were available for statistical analysis. Statistically
significant results were noted in global anxiety scores from baseline to exit evaluation
and in the time to return to baseline state from baseline storm to last storm evaluated.
Treatment success was achieved for the behaviors of drooling (83.33%), following
people (75%), panting (76.47%), pacing (78.57%), and hiding (78.57%).
This study suggests that L-theanine is an effective treatment for storm sensitivity,
decreasing the severity of the dog’s overall response, time for the dog to return to
baseline after storms end, and diminishing the specific manifestations of drooling,
following people, pacing, panting, and hiding.
Keywords
L-theanine; dog; storm sensitivity; Anxitane
21
Assessment of Noise Induced Anxiety in Dogs:
Modification by a Novel Fish Hydrolysate
Supplemented Diet
G.M. Landsberg*, I. Mougeot, D. Drewczynski, S. Kelly, N.W. Milgram
North Toronto Veterinary Behaviour Specialty Clinic,
Thornhill, ON, Canada
Introduction
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of a test dieta
supplemented with fish hydrolysateb as a source of anxiolytic peptides, in reducing
the anxiety response of Beagle dogs to noise.
The study used a parallel group design with one control and two treatment
groups. Forty Beagles were initially given a baseline thunderstorm test for noiseinduced anxiety. (Araujo et al 2013) Baseline data was used in assigning control
and test diets to three groups with equivalent baseline. Each dog was randomly
placed on test diet supplemented with compound at 0.8074% DM or 0.3901 %
DM or unsupplemented. Three protocols were used to assess response to the test
procedure: (1) objective quantification of behavioral activity, (2) global, positive
and negative anxiety observations, and (3) serum cortisol levels. The data were
initially analyzed with repeated ANOVA measures. The Fisher test was used to
analyze post-hoc comparisons.
Results
The low dose test diet group showed progressive increases in inactivity over
repeated testing, while the controls performed similar to baseline; the high
dose group was intermediary. The analysis of serum cortisol values revealed a
significant decrease over baseline in both treatment groups for test 1 (p=0.008 low
dose; p=0.0004 high dose) and for test 2 (p=.001 low dose; p<.0001 high dose). By
contrast, the controls showed no significant differences.
Discussion
This study indicates that the fish-hydrolysate compound has anxiolytic properties
22
in Beagle dogs, which are manifested by decreased hyperactivity and a reduced
cortisol response to stress.
Acknowledgements
This study was funded by Royal Canin under contract to CanCog Technologies.
References
Araujo JA, de Rivera C, Landsberg GM, Adams PE, Milgram NW. 2013.
Development and validation of a novel laboratory model of sound-induced fear
and anxiety in Beagle dogs. J Vet Behav 8, 204-212
Keywords
Dog, anxiety, fish hydrolysate, thunderstorm test, cortisol
a
Royal Canine Canine Health Nutrition Medium Adult, Guelph, ON, Canada
Gabocean 3D PTP55, Diana Petfood Vit2Be, France
b
23
Association Between Owner Personality Profile
And Companion Pet Preference And Behavior
K.K. Cunningham*
UC Davis School of Veterinary Medicine, California, USA
Abstract
Potential correlations between owner’s personality and both the type and breed of
companion pet owned were analyzed, and the association between a standardized
human personality profile and a validated canine behavioral profile was analyzed.
Introduction
The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator® (MBTI®) is a test that addresses personality
profiles. The assessment assists users in gaining a better understanding of
their behavior and preferences by using 16 personalities. Similarly, the Canine
Behavioral Assessment and Research Questionnaire (C-BARQ®) was designed
for canine owners and veterinarians to assess canine behavioral tendencies via a
standardized and validated survey.
A cross-sectional study of 286 dog owners through a questionnaire consisting
of items eliciting information on owner’s MBTI® result, owner demographic,
pet demographic, personal bias, and their dog’s personality and behavioral
profile using the (C-BARQ®) was done. Nonparametric statistical analyses were
performed on collected data.
Results
Respondents from the MBTI® feeling dimension are more likely to self-identify as
a “cat person”; women are more likely to self-identify as a “cat person”; “cat people”
are more likely to own cats; “cat people” are no more or less likely to own a dog; “cat
people” are more likely to have multiple cats; no significant correlation was found
between a dog owner’s MBTI® and their dog’s personality or behavioral profile.
Discussion
Findings suggest that while personality traits of owners may influence self-identity,
additional factors may influence actual pet ownership. Findings also suggest that
24
an owner’s personality does not have a significant influence on canine personality
and behavior.
References
American Kennel Club (2013). Retrieved January 29, 2013, from http://www.akc.
org/breeds/index.cfm.
Barnard, S., Siracusa, C., Reisner, I., Valsecchi, P. and Serpell, J.A. (2012). Validity
of model devices used to assess canine temperament in behavioral tests. Applied
Animal Behaviour Science. 138, 79-87.
Beck, A.M., Katcher, A.H. (2003). Future directions in human-animal bond
research. American Behavioral Scientist. 47(1), 79-93.
Goddard, M.E. and Beilharz, R.G. (1986) Early prediction of adult behavior in
potential guide dogs. Applied Animal Behaviour Science. 15(3), 247-260.
Gosling, S.D. and Bonnenburg, A.V. (1998). An integrative approach to personality
research in anthrozoology: ratings of six species of pets and their owners.
Anthrozoös. 11(3), 148-156.
Gosling, S.D, Carson, J.S., and Potter, J. (2010). Personalities of self-identified “dog
people” and “cat people”. Anthrozoös. 23, 213-222.
Daly, B and Morton, L.L. (2006). An investigation of human-animal interactions
and empathy as related to pet preference, ownership, attachment, and attitudes in
children. Anthrozoös. 12(2), 113-127.
Hsu, Y. and Serpell, J.A. (2003). Development and validation of a questionnaire
measuring behavior and temperament traits in pet dogs. Journal of the American
Veterinary Medical Association. 223, 1293-1300.
Kubinyi, E., Turcsan, B., and Miklosi, A. (2009). Dog and owner demographic
characteristics and dog personality association. Behavioural Processes. 81, 392-401.
Perrine, R.M. and Osbourne H.L. (1998). Personality characteristics of dog and cat
persons. Anthrozoös. 11(1), 33-40.
Saito, A. and Shinozuka, K. (2013). Vocal recognition of owners by domestic cats
(Felis catus). Animal Cognition. 16, 685-690.
Serpell, J.A. (2003). C-BARQ Canine Behavioral Assessment & Research
Questionnaire. Retrieved January 19, 2013, from http://vetapps.vet.upenn.edu/
cbarq.
Stillwell, N.A, Wallick, M.M., Thal, S.E. and Burleson, J.A. (2009). Myers-Briggs
Type and Medical Specialty Choice: A New Look at an Old Question. Teaching
and Learning in Medicine: An International Journal. 12(1), 14-20.
25
Stricker, L.J. and Ross, J. (1962). A Description and evaluation of the Myers-Briggs
type indicator. (Research Bulletin No. 62-6) Princeton: Educational Testing
Service.
Svartberg, K. and Forkman, B. (2002). Personality traits in the domestic dog
(Canis familiaris). Applied Animal Behaviour Science 79, 133-155.
Keywords
Dog, cat, personality profile, MBTI
26
The Effect of Different Types
of Classical Music at a Veterinary Hospital
on the Behavior of Pets and Owner Satisfaction
WJ Engler*, MJ Bain
University of California School of Veterinary Medicine,
Davis, CA, USA
*Corresponding author: [email protected], [email protected]
Introduction
Music’s anti-anxiety and relaxation effects have been well established in humans
in medical settings, and recent research suggests positive effects in animals. The
aim of this study was to determine whether two types of classical music could
decrease veterinary patients’ stress or increase owner satisfaction.
A veterinary patient and owner were randomly selected to be exposed to one of three
conditions: modified classical compositions; the same songs in their original form;
or no music as a control while in the exam room. Owners completed a standardized
survey regarding the pet’s demographic information, behavior, and the owner’s
satisfaction with the visit. Clinicians completed a separate standardized survey
regarding the pet’s behavior, and whether the animal was muzzled. Total monetary
charges, procedures, diagnoses, and physiological measurements were gathered postappointment from computerized medical record.
Results
Cats exposed to the modified music compared to classical music had a
significantly lower rating of aggression from clinicians. Dogs exposed to either
type of classical music compared to control, had nearly significant lower clinician
reported aggression ratings. Client rated dog anxiety level demonstrated a
significantly greater increase for the control group compared to dogs exposed
to music. Clients exposed to music compared to control had significantly higher
satisfaction ratings for their time spent during the visit.
Discussion
Playing classical music in a veterinary exam room is a simple and cost effect way
27
to help reduce pets’ stress and increase owner satisfaction. It warrants further
study to evaluate the effectiveness of the modified music.
References
Holm L, Fitzmaurice L, 2008. Emergency Department Waiting Room Stress:
Can Music or Aromatherapy Improve Anxiety Scores? Pediatric Emergency Care,
24(12): 836-838.
Kogan LR, Schoenfeld-Tacher R, Simon AA, 2012. Behavioral effects of auditory
stimulation on kenneled dogs. Journal of Veterinary Behavior: Clinical Applications
and Research, 7(5): 268-275.
Wells DL, 2009. Sensory stimulation as environmental enrichment for captive
animals: A review. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 118(1–2): 1-11.
Wells, DL, Graham L, Hepper PG, 2002. The influence of auditory stimulation on
the behaviour of dogs housed in a rescue shelter. Animal Welfare, 11(4): 385-393.
Keywords
Anxiety; behavior; cat; dog; music; veterinary
28
Anxiety-Reducing Effectiveness Of Calmz™
Anxiety Relief System In Beagle Dogs
In A Modified Thunderstorm Model
N.W. Milgram*, G.M. Landsberg, B.Snow
CanCog Technologies, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Introduction
The Calmz Anxiety Relief System is a novel device that delivers a combination of
tonal and vibrational therapy that upon activation, is intended to reduce anxiety.
The present study used a modified Thunderstorm Model of Anxiety (See Araujo et
al 2013) to assess the anxiolytic effectiveness of the therapeutic device.
24 beagle dogs were selected from a larger sample of 28 to participate in the study,
based on the dog’s anxiolytic response to the taped presentation of the sound of
thunder. A baseline 6-minute test was used to allocate 12 subjects to the control
and 12 to the treatment groups with both groups showing equivalent anxiety
responses to the presentation of thunder. After allocation, and an adaption
session, both groups were tested on three successive days. On the first two test
days, the dogs were tested for their response to thunder. The third day served to
assess conditioned anxiety and the thunder track was not delivered. Anxiety was
assessed using both an activity tracking system and an observational protocol
in which level of anxiety was ranked by a trained observer on three different
measures of anxiety: a global measure, a measure of negative anxiety and a
measure of positive anxiety.
Results
Significant improvements were seen on the observational measures of anxiety.
Subjects receiving the device activation showed a reduced global anxiety response
manifested by a significant interaction between treatment and presence of thunder
(repeated measures analysis of variance, p=0.04). Similar results were seen on the
second test day, but the results did not achieve statistical significance. We further
observed that the extent of reduction was greater for negative anxiety measure,
characterized by behavioral inactivation and autonomic behaviors than it was
on the positive measure, characterized by hyperactivity and escape behaviors.
29
No significant effects of device activation were observed on any of the objective
behavioral measures. However, this result is difficult to interpret because of the
high proportion of animals that responded to thunder by showing hyperactivity.
In previous studies, the more typical response was found to be reduced activity.
Discussion
We conclude that the results provide evidence of effectiveness in reducing anxiety
induced by the presence of noise, as exemplified by delivery of taped presentation
of thunder. Furthermore, while improvements were observed in all measures, the
therapy appears to be more effective in reducing “negative” anxiety, characterized
by behavioral inactivation and activation of behaviors associated with autonomic
nervous system, than it is in reducing “positive” anxiety associated with
hyperactivity and escape behavior.
References
Araujo, JA, de Rivera, C, Landsberg, GM, Milgram, NW, 2013. Development
and validation of a novel laboratory model of sound-induced fear and anxiety in
Beagle Dogs. J Vet Behav 8, 204-212
Keywords
Dogs, Anxiety, Thunderstorm Model, Calmz Anxiety Relief System
30
Engraftment Of Senile Dogs
With Olfactory Stem Cells: Preliminary
Results For A Promising Treatment
P. Pageat1*, A. Veron1, D. Royer2, C. Frosini1,
P. Asproni1, M. Mengoli1, A. Cozzi1
1
IRSEA, France ; 2 Pommery Veterinary Hospital, France
Abstract
Aging-related disorders are very commonly observed in dogs, and may lead to
anticipated euthanasia. Different medical, dietetic or nutraceutical treatments have
been proposed, which provide some improvement. Unfortunately, as reported in
the treatment of human senile psychiatric conditions, the treatments are not as
effective as expected. In vet medicine, the observance for such lifelong treatments,
in a population of patients which is commonly affected by other conditions, is a
major challenge, usually resulting in discontinued treatments. A possible strategy
may be to use autologous stem cells in the purpose of restoring the damaged areas
of the brain. Such stem cells exist in the basal layer of the olfactory mucous, a quite
easily accessible tissue. Previous research, with the engraftment of experimentally
brain damaged mice, with heterologous olfactory stem cells (of human origin)
has proven that such cell succeed in restoring the brain functionality and do
not induce secondary tumors. Since those cells have the capacity to migrate
spontaneously to tissues emitting cytokines, we may hypothesize that the injection
in the cerebrospinal cephalic cistern, may be an acceptable option.
For this preliminary step of the research, two senile dachshunds (16 and
17.5year-old), one spayed female and one male, were included after allowance
by the ethical committee and agreement by the owners. The female dog, which
medical condition was rendering poorly probable to participate in the whole
project, was just included to assess the possibility to cultivate canine olfactory
stem cells obtained from senile dog. The dog was anesthetized and intubated,
and we obtained 2 biopsies from her olfactory mucous, measuring 1mm in
diameter. The tissues were placed in culture liquid at +4°C and transported to
the lab for dilacerations of the mucous layer and placed in culture bottles for 6
weeks. The success, assessed by observation of the growth of the stem cells, made
31
possible to repeat it with the male Dachshund. Before biopsy, we processed a
complete medical, neurological and behavioral examination (including the use
of the ARCAD score, and video). After 8 weeks in culture, it was possible to get
24 million stem cells, which have been injected in the cerebrospinal cephalic
cistern. In that purpose, the dog was anesthetized, before receiving the injection.
Seven weeks later, we observed a significant improvement in the capability to pay
attention, in the exploration behavior and in the cognitive capabilities during
simple tests.
32
Clinical Trial Application of a Clinical
Phenomenon: Deterioration Following
Withdrawal of Active Medication for the
Treatment of Chronic Pain in Cats with
Degenerative Joint Disease
Gruen ME, Thomson A, Simpson W, Griffith E, Lascelles BDX*
North Carolina State University College of Veterinary Medicine,
Raleigh NC USA
Introduction
Detection of clinically relevant pain relief in cats with degenerative joint disease
(DJD) has been complicated by a lack of validated outcome measures and a
profound placebo-by-proxy effect.
The objective of this study was to evaluate a novel approach for detection of pain
relief in cats with DJD using owner-completed clinical metrology instruments
(CMIs) that measure various pain and mobility related behaviors.
The study was a prospective, double-masked, placebo-controlled, randomized
clinical study. Sixty-six client owned cats were recruited. Cats were 6-21 years of
age, with owner-observed mobility impairment and overlapping radiographic
evidence of DJD and pain on palpation in at least two joints. Enrolled cats
underwent a two-week baseline period, three-week double masked treatment
period with placebo or low-dose meloxicam, and three-week masked washout
period where placebo was administered. Outcome measures were evaluated at
Days 0, 15, 36 and 57.
Results
Fifty-eight cats were included in the analysis, 29 in each group (meloxicam and
placebo). Cats in both groups significantly improved following the treatment
period (Day 36) on the owner-completed CMIs (p<0.0001 for both); there was no
difference between the groups for degree of improvement. Following the masked
washout period, more cats that had received meloxicam during the treatment
33
period showed a greater decrease in both CMI scores (p=0.048, p=0.021) than
cats that had received placebo, indicating that owners noticed the absence of the
active medication. Cats receiving meloxicam had higher activity (p<0.0001) than
the placebo group during the treatment period and showed a significant decrease
in activity during washout (p=0.019) such that there was no difference in activity
between groups during the washout period (p=0.938).
Discussion
Worsening clinical signs following withdrawal of medication is often discussed as
a clinical phenomenon, but to date, has not been included in clinical trial design.
This phenomenon may be especially relevant for drugs used to treat chronic or
progressive diseases, or those where behavior is monitored for response. Using
both a client-specific and a general CMI that both measure various behaviors, we
have shown that owners of cats with DJD can detect recurrence of clinical signs
following withdrawal of active medication. We suggest that this study design may
be a novel and useful way to mitigate the placebo-by-proxy effect and detect the
efficacy of pain-relieving medications.
Acknowledgements
Study funding and AT salary support were received from a grant from Boehringer
Ingelheim (553396); MG was supported by NIH T32 (OD011130).
Reference
Gruen ME, Griffith E, Thomson A, Simpson W, Lascelles BDX (2014). Detection
of clinically relevant pain relief in cats with degenerative joint disease associated
pain. J Vet Int Med 28*2): 346-350.
Keywords
Cat, pain, degenerative joint disease, placebo effect
34
The Use of Oral Trazodone
for Sedation In Cats
J. M. Orlando, B. C. Case, A. E. Thomson,
E. Griffin and B. L. Sherman*
Department of Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, North
Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC
Abstract
Resistance to transportation and stressful veterinary visits have been named as
major causes for the decrease in feline veterinary care. Very few options exist for
oral premedication to reduce cats’ anxiety prior to veterinary visits. The purpose
of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of oral trazodone for use as
a single dose agent for sedation in cats. Six purpose bred laboratory cats were
given single randomized doses of trazodone 100 mg and placebo. The cats were
monitored throughout the course of the study for adverse effects. Pre- and poststudy laboratory values and physical exams were compared for changes. During
the 4 hour period post treatment, sedation was measured via accelerometers
and video observations scored by an observer masked to treatment. Cats were
examined 90 minutes after treatment and their behavioral responses scored by
the same masked observer. No adverse effects or changes in physical exam or
laboratory values were detected. Results of the accelerometer data and video
observations showed a significant reduction in activity after administration of
trazodone 100 mg compared to placebo. Behavioral response to examination
scores were not significantly different between cats receiving trazodone and
placebo. In conclusion, trazodone was well-tolerated. Compared to placebo,
trazodone caused sedation in cats as measured by reduction in activity. However,
it did not change the cats’ behavior during examination. The results suggest that
while trazodone may not affect cat behavior during examination, it may be useful
for sedating cats for transportation to veterinary visits.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to acknowledge Drs. Lola Hudson and Margaret Gruen for
their assistance with this project.
Keywords
Anxiety, examination, feline, fractious, sedative, stress
35
Demon Cat To Lap Cat In 10 Sessions—
With Video To Prove It!
*E. Feltes
The Behavior Clinic; Olmsted Falls, Ohio USA
[email protected]
As veterinarians, we all have those unmanageable cats that visit for blood testing
and other procedures. We know that there can be a toll taken on the health and
welfare of these difficult felines due to the problems getting health care to them as
well. Additionally, lots of products are on the market to aide in the management of
their behavior in these settings. Our clinic uses clicker training and often manages
to do blood draws within 10 behavior modification sessions or less. We also use
these techniques weekly in a shelter setting. Video will be shown demonstrating
difficult cats being trained for procedures. The primary tools utilized are a marker,
food and towels. Canine patients are most commonly thought of as ‘trainable for
procedures.’ It is this presentations goal to show how our feline patients should be
thought of in this light as well!
36
The Reactive Dog:
Addressing Leash Reactivity
K.M. Martin*, D.A.Martin
TEAM Education in Animal Behavior, Texas, USA
The reactive dog may be unable to focus on the handler in novel or unfamiliar
environments, lose control with the sight or sounds of other dogs, and may lunge
or pull when on leash in the presence of people, animals (cats, squirrels, birds, etc.),
or other stimuli (cars, bikes, buses, planes, etc.). In this lecture, reactivity is the
term used to describe pulling, lunging, growling, barking, snapping, and biting.
Reactivity is a general and nonspecific term that may encompass motivations of
anxiety, fear, arousal, excitement, conflict, and frustration. The focus of this lecture
is not the diagnosis and treatment of canine aggression, rather to provide attendees
with practical insight into how reactivity on leash can be modified. Topics covered
will briefly include safety, controlling the learning environment, and the application
of response substitution (operant counter conditioning) on walks. The main
emphasis will be on teaching the cues look, watch, and touch. Using a marker for
operant conditioning and reinforcement with food, one can change the classically
conditioned emotional responses to various stimuli.
Safety
Although the goal is to keep the dog below its level for reactivity, for the safety of
the owner, pet, and others, these recommendations should only be made if it is
deemed that the owner is capable of keeping their pet under their control while
implementing these exercises. Pending the case, additional safety precautions
might include, a head collar, double leash system, basket muzzle, and citronella
spray deterrent (as a deterrent to off leash dogs).
Training Tools
The following training tools will be needed: Clicker, high value reinforcers (ideally
small easily consumed treats), treat bag, 4 to 6 foot leash, well fitted buckle collar
or harness, and sturdy athletic shoes for the trainer/owner. Other supplies may
also be necessary as noted in the safety section.
The Training Process
37
There are training exercises utilizing desensitization and counter-conditioning
(operant and classical) with a controlled stimulus which can be very valuable as
part of a treatment plan for addressing reactivity to stimuli on walks. However,
this presentation will focus on how to incorporate training into less controlled
situations, such as the everyday walk. When dogs show over-reactivity or hypervigilance to stimuli, the following is a general example of the first exercises we
have owners implement in their everyday routine.
First, the stimuli become associated with earning really good stuff. The focus is on
classical counter conditioning but it also includes marking of operant behavior. A
marker or clicker is used to help pinpoint the exact moment the dog earns the treat.
In order to avoid the clicker becoming associated only with aversive stimuli, clicker
training should be used in a variety of contexts before using it around triggers. On
these walks the owner is instructed to focus on clicking/treating two things: offered
“check ins” with the owner or noticing stimuli in the environment. They are also to
maintain a substantial distance from stimuli. The goal at this point is not to get close
to stimuli but instead have brief exposure to stimuli from a distance that does not
elicit a display from the dog. Brief exposure and then move on.
For example, a dog that has a history of barking and pulling on leash towards
unfamiliar people and/or dogs on walks when the stimulus is a half block away,
we would start with marking/clicking the first instance the dog notices a stimulus.
The owner is walking the dog and notices her dog’s ears perk forward and he fixes
his gaze in the direction of a person getting out of a car about a block away. The
owner should click that instant and then give a high value treat. Treats may be
given every 1-2 seconds or continuously as the dog navigates past the stimulus.
Alternately, the owner may elect to change direction to avoid further escalation of
the behavior (this will dependent on the individual dog). Since the dog will already
be conditioned to the clicker, it should be expected that upon hearing the click,
the dog will orient towards the owner for the reinforcer. If the dog is unable to
reorient after hearing the click, that is information to the owner that the dog is too
distracted by the stimulus. The owner will need to redirect the dog and get further
away from the stimulus.
Ultimately, if the owner is consistent with marking and rewarding for the sight of all
stimuli, two things will start to happen; one the dog will begin to anticipate earning
a click and treat for the presence or sound of a stimulus and will likely begin to
38
anticipate. An owner will often report this happens when they are late on clicking
the presence of a stimulus and the dog turns and looks at them like, hey where is my
click? The second side effect is that the dog will start to look for triggers not because
he is needs to be vigilant, but because it has become a game; the motivation of the
behavior has changed. This will also be evident in the body language of the dog.
At the same time that owners are working on marking and reinforcing the sight
of stimuli, they will also work on teaching three cues; “Look”, “Watch”, and
“Touch.” These cues will be taught in a non-distracting environment initially and
should not be associated with the presence of triggers during the initial training.
They are a pair of opposite behaviors (“Look” and “Watch”) and a target behavior
(“Touch”). “Look” will be used to mean look at something away from the owner/
handler, “Watch” will mean look at the handler, and “Touch” cues the dog to
touch its nose to the handlers hand/palm. A directional cue (finger point) might
also be added with Look in order to indicate what direction the dog is to look.
These behaviors can all be taught with clicker training using capturing and/or
shaping. Once on cue, the owner will use the cues in a variety of contexts within
the house and yard, with inanimate objects such as a toy or chair, and when
possible with neutral or positive stimuli (ie a person or animal the dog lives with
and has a good relationship). Once the dog has learned these 3 cues and the dog
has started to associate stimuli with earning a click/treat, the owner may now start
to incorporate some of these cues during walks. They will ping pong back and
forth between, look, watch, and touch (and other known cues) in the presence of
previous stimuli for undesirable behavior. The touch cue can be given as the owner
pivots to change direction or to redirect the dog while walking past a stimulus.
Owners should practice these cues throughout the walk without stimuli present.
Offered or uncued looks and watches in the presence of a trigger should still be
reinforced but eventually they will be on a variable ratio of reinforcement.
A great resource for working on arousal and distractions utilizing some of the
techniques as outlined here is Leslie McDevitt’s book, Control Unleashed.
Summary
Although not a comprehensive plan for working on leash reactivity issues, these
foundations concepts and skills lay the groundwork for further work involving
closer encounters.
39
Stop The Suffering—Setting Clients
And Patients Up For Success
C. Koch*
Lincoln Land Animal Clinic, Ltd,
Animal Behavior Services, Illinois, USA
Abstract
Many clients seeking our help are overwhelmed by their pet’s current behavior.
In today’s society everyone is looking for that quick fix. Unfortunately, behavior
modification takes time. Sometimes the pet does not have much “time,” if the
problem isn’t fixed the animal may be relinquished or euthanized.
This personal experience and tips will explain different strategies to help set the
solo practitioner up for success during the consult. These strategies include easy to
implement behavior modification tips that begin during the consult. A different
approach to starting medication so as to give the fastest possible results will be
described. Some easy to train techniques for giving medications without fear and
struggling will also be included.
Introduction
Often, by the time owners finally get around to talking to their veterinarian about
behavior problems they have already invested a lot of time, money and emotion
using other unsuccessful techniques for their troubled pets. These patients,
through no fault of their own, are often at great risk for relinquishment or
euthanasia if their behavior is not modified immediately, at least to some degree.
It is imperative for both the patient and the owner that we stop the suffering as
quickly as possible. Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRI) may take six to
eight weeks to reach therapeutic levels. Many patients, due to the already severely
damaged human-animal bond, may not have that long. With their current level of
anxiety, however, implementation of any behavior modification may be difficult
for both the owner and patient. Frustrations and anxiety will continue to rise for
all parties.
Methods
To stop the suffering, I use event medications as a bridge until the baseline
40
medication (SSRI or tricyclic antidepressants) reaches therapeutic levels.
Decreasing the anxiety allows behavior modification to be implemented and the
relationship between the owner and patient begin to heal. The choice of bridge
medication is determined by the animal’s primary presentation (noise phobia,
separation anxiety, confinement anxiety, aggression, fears and anxieties) and
targeted to the duration of the anxiolytic and length of exposure to the trigger.
Typical bridge medications would include trazodone (Gruen 2008), clonidine
(Ogata 2011), or alprazolam (Overall 2013). Trazodone has the longest duration of
action and is my drug of choice when owners are unable to comply with shorter
dosing intervals, or the patient has been diagnosed with a disease that requires
more anxiolysis such as separation or confinement anxiety, storm or noise
phobias in situations where the owners are not able to dose the patient frequently,
generalized anxiety, and multiple triggers for fear. Clonidine is chosen when
a shorter duration of action is all that is necessary. It is also most useful when
the triggers are specific and known so that the medication can be dosed prior
to exposure. Alprazolam or other benzodiazepines are prescribed cautiously as
a bridge medication. If the patient has a history of fear, conflict or aggression,
there is always a concern when using a benzodiazepine for the disinhibition of
aggression, the short duration of action, as well as the potential for human abuse.
The benzodiazepines can however, be very helpful for separation and confinement
anxiety and noise phobias.
Regardless of which bridge medication is used, the dose is adjusted until the
anxiety is controlled. The bridge medication is given alone for one week to
monitor for side effects and the patient’s anxiety level.
The baseline medication, typically fluoxetine, is added approximately one week
later. Once the baseline medication has reached therapeutic levels (6-8 weeks)
or behavior modification has progressed sufficiently that the bridge medication
might no longer be needed, the bridge medication can be systematically decreased,
while the baseline medication is maintained at the therapeutic dose. The bridge
medication can then be kept available to be used strictly as an event medication if
needed. By initiating medication at separate times, in this manner, you also have
the opportunity to identify which medication may be causing any side effects that
develop. You are then able to more quickly and accurately make any medication or
dosage changes that may be necessary.
41
It is imperative to also instruct owners on how to identify their pet’s signs of
anxiety. If owners understand and recognize when their pets are showing low level
signs of anxiety, the response to medication and behavior modification can be
more accurately assessed. Owners are asked to rate their pet’s overall anxiety on a
daily basis, and specific signs of anxiety that their pet exhibited during the consult
or on a video are clearly pointed out. The success of avoidance and behavior
modification is assessed by the owner, noting on a daily basis that the patients’
display of anxiety is either increased, decreased, or unchanged.
After observing the pet’s behavior in the consult room for a very short period
of time, initiation of behavior modification can begin. If the pet, has unruly
behaviors (jumping, counter surfing, or excessive attention seeking) behavior
modification is implemented immediately by setting the patient up for success.
Toys and food puzzles are placed on the floor, counters are cleared of any potential
lures and high value food treats are placed in pockets, treat pouches or bowls and
placed where they are easily accessed by all humans present but not the patient. It
is also helpful to keep a handful of really high value treats available to toss on the
floor so as to encourage the dog to put its nose to the floor prior to getting close
enough to jump up on the owner or counter top. Setting the room up for success
allows the patient to avoid punishment from the owner, as well as demonstrating
positive methods of capturing and reinforcement of desired behaviors. Once
everyone is seated and the commotion settles down, the pet is observed. Once a
baseline of behavior has been established, then capturing or shaping behaviors
that might be used as tools for the client are also initiated. Typical behaviors
that are captured or shaped include: lying on a mat, sitting at a slight distance
from people prior to interactions, keeping four feet on the floor for greeting, and
moving away from triggers.
Once the pet is working for food, it is simple to transfer the skill to the owner
by explaining when to toss treats to the pet. Then the owner begins to reinforce
the pet for appropriate behaviors. The veterinarian continues to model capturing
appropriate behavior by reinforcing the owners when they are successful in
catching the dog in the desired position.
Setting the patient up for success by consistent reinforcement of calm behavior
helps the patient understand the concept of offering behavior and being
reinforced. Transferring the skill to the owner is simple as they have already
42
witnessed a change in their pet’s behavior. Continued coaching of the client
throughout the appointment enables them to realize behavior modification can be
simple and they can reinforce behaviors while they are doing other things.
Generally during appointments patients will react to some trigger, such as dogs
barking outside of the room or people passing by. Counter conditioning the
pet by tossing treats during these events, demonstrates how the pet’s emotional
response can change in a short period of time. Coaching the client allows them
to experience successful behavior modification, and realize how easily it can be
integrated into all aspects of daily life.
Medicating the Patient
Finally, teaching the animal to take medication willingly so as to not further damage
or stress the owner-pet relationship, is equally important. Desensitizing and counter
conditioning to the use of a “pill popper” can be readily accomplished in both dogs
and cats. The recommended method does not involve direct contact with the pet,
and can be performed using protected contact for very fearful or aggressive patients.
Step by step instructions for the procedure are included below. A PDF version as well
as video are available at the website www.lincolnlandac.com.
Teaching Your Pet To Love Taking Medication
Our goal is to improve the pet’s perception of the “pill popper.” If it always predicts
food, its presence will start to mean good things are happening, not bad things. It
is important to meal feed the pet while implementing this procedure. If the pet has
free access to food, it is difficult to use it to reinforce good behavior or to help the
pet make a positive association with unpleasant things.
1. Acquire a “pill popper”.
2. Determine the soft food* items that your pet loves. This might include chicken,
beef, salmon, tuna, spray cheese, cream cheese, liver paste, or peanut butter to
name a few. The food should be so good that your pet will stop what they are
doing and run to you.
3. Hold the “pill popper” up so that your pet can see it prior to:
a. Preparing its meal.
b. Opening a bag of treats.
c. The “pill popper” should acquire the effectiveness of Pavlov’s bell. The pet
sees it, you give your pet their food.
d.When the pet starts running toward you every time you pick up the “pill
popper” it is time to move on to the next step.
43
4. Place food* on the outside of the “pill popper”. Place the “pill popper” in the
bowl or on a plate and walk away. Repeat** until your pet is eagerly eating
the food off of the “pill popper.” Put the “pill popper” away when the training
session is complete.
a. Gradually remain closer and closer to your pet while it eats off of the “pill
popper”.
i. You can even put smaller portions of food on the “pill popper” and reload
it several times, so that your approach indicates more food on the “pill
popper”.
5. Place delicious food on the outside of the “pill popper” and continue to hold
the “pill popper” in your hand. Does your pet enthusiastically grab at it or back
away? If they grab at the pill popper proceed to the next step. If they do not,
please continue to practice step 4a. In all of the following steps and anytime
you use the “pill popper”, you will place canned or delicious food on the
outside.***
6. Place a small pill sized piece of semi moist food (greenies pill pockets, cream
cheese, braunschweiger, tuna paste- whatever your pet loves) in the pill
chamber of the “pill popper”, and food* on the outside. It should not take long
for your pet to grab the pill popper in their mouth. Repeat. Continue playing
this game.
7. Intermittently add a piece of kibble in the middle of the semi moist food. You
do not need to jam the popper in the back of your pet’s mouth, as most pets
are so excited about the prospect of the delicious food that they grab on to the
“pill popper” themselves and will not let go! If this is not the response you are
getting then please go back to step 4.
8. Once your pet is reliably taking the kibble with the “pill popper,” then add the
medication.
When medicating your pet, it is important to continue to “play the game.”
1. Load your popper with a “fake pill” (the semi moist food) and give that first.
2. Next give the medication wrapped in the semi moist food.
3. Finally repeat step one. We want to condition your pet to think things always
come in threes. If they have had a bad experience (inadvertently bite down on a
pill) the goal is to “dilute” that experience with a good experience.
**Repeat each session 3 times. Continue to repeat throughout the day or at meal/
treat times. Repeat each step for as many days as it takes for your pet to come
44
running to you when you have the pill popper. There should be no hesitation,
nervousness or apprehension. The goal is for your pet to love the “pill popper” so
that medicating your pet is easy!
***While some medications are supposed to be taken on an empty stomach, I do
not know of very many people who take medication without at least a little water.
Most people are not taking their medicine by ramming a finger down the back of
their mouth when they take pills. Why do we expect our pets to take pills dry? In
the long term, it is better that our patients continue to take the medication, than
have them not take it at all.
Discussion
Following these simple guidelines the patient’s anxiety is reduced, the owner
experiences some immediate success, which may help motivate them to continue
behavior modification at home. The relationship between the pet and owner is
likely to improve immediately as the owner sees the pets’ behavior change, and the
suffering will be stopped for both the owner and the patient.
References
Gruen ME, Sherman BL, 2008. Use of trazodone as an adjunctive agent in the
treatment of canine anxiety disorders: 56 cases (1995–2007). Journal of the
American Veterinary Medical Association, 233(12):1902-1907.
Ogata N, Dodman NH, 2011. The use of clonidine in the treatment of fear-based
behavior problems in dogs: an open trial. Journal of Veterinary Behavior: Clinical
Applications and Research, 6(2):130-137.
Overall, KL, 2013. Manual of clinical behavioral medicine for dogs and cats.
Mosby-Year Book, Inc, St Louis, MO, pp 476, 507
Keywords
Anxiety, behavior modification, dog, medication
45
Unexpected Behavioral Changes in the
Behavior Patient: Time to Review
Current Medications and Evaluate for
Possible Drug-Drug Interactions
L.J.Reichl*
Midwest Veterinary Behavior Services, LLC, Minnesota, USA
*Corresponding author:[email protected]
Abstract
I will present a case of unexpected behavioral changes in a previously behaviorally
stable feline patient. Review of current medications with the client in this example
revealed an additional medication recently prescribed by another provider that
interfered with absorption of the psychotropic medication. I will discuss the
importance of frequent patient medication review and the use of credible medical
on-line databases (Epocrates, Medscape, and Micromedex) to check for possible
drug-drug interactions (DDI).
Introduction
Prescribed treatments for behavioral problems in companion animals may
include environmental and inter-relational management, behavior modification
and psychotropic medication. As with humans, animals’ behavioral problems
may require a combination of psychotropic medications for optimal results
(Horowitz et al. 2009, Landsberg et al. 2013, Overall 2013). Also, the animal may
have comorbid medical conditions for which they may receive non-psychotropic
medications.
Psychotropic medications are becoming as commonplace in veterinary medicine
as they are in human medicine. If our goal, as veterinarians, is to do the least harm
and to treat our patients the best way we can, we need to consider the effects of
combining psychotropic medications or adding a single psychotropic medication
to other prescription, herbal, or over-the-counter medications. (English et al.
2012, Sloan 2009; Smith et al. 2008). Early identification of possible psychotropic
drug interactions before they occur is safer for the patient, better for our clients,
and less stressful for us--emotionally and legally. Neuropsychopharmacology is
a rapidly growing discipline and we can expect more challenges with the advent
46
of newer antidepressants (Spina et al. 2012; Stahl 2013) available to the veterinary
community on an off-label basis for behavior patients. In the future, predicting
how our patients will respond and what side effects we might expect for the
individual patient to a single agent or polypharmacy may become easier with
pharmacogenetic tests of metabolic and CNS polymorphisms (Mealey, 2006;
Martinez et al. 2013, Uhr et al. 2007). Until then, we need to use the information
available from a variety of sources in the human and veterinary medical fields.
Case example
Oliver, a 3 yo NM DSH cat, diagnosed with play-predatory aggression directed at
housemate cat, Maggie (9yo SF), and owners. Stable and socially appropriate while
on a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (sertraline) for 19 months. Suddenly, over
a 2-week period, Oliver became more and more aggressive “as if he were not on the
sertraline at all” and stalking Maggie and “demanding attention” from the owners.
Oliver was seen by primary care provider three weeks prior for chronic,
intermittent tenesmus and, most recently, frank blood on his stool intermittently
over a few days. They had been treating him for mild to moderate constipation
for 1-2 months (i.e. stool every 3rd day with tenesmus and stool was not always in
litter box), by supplementing dry food with canned food (twice daily) plus canned
pumpkin and psyllium. The cats had access to water fountain in addition to fresh
bowls of water. He had shown some improvement—defecating every other day.
The primary care provider added twice daily lactulose.
Two weeks later when the client contacted me with her concerns of Oliver’s
“sudden” behavior change, I confirmed with the her that the lactulose was given
at the same time as the morning sertraline dose. I suspected the lactulose was
preventing absorption of the sertraline and the re-emerging behavioral symptoms
were due to elimination of sertraline--1/2 life presumed to be similar to humans,
parent compound 26 hrs and metabolite N-desmethylsertraline, 62-104 hrs
(Crowell-Davis 2006)—over the first week after initiating lactulose therapy.
I recommended to continue the lactulose treatment because toileting was normal
but to separate the timing of lactulose and sertraline administrations as follows:
give sertraline first thing in morning and, then, lactulose at least an hour after
sertraline. Result: Improved behavior within the first week and back to previously
acceptable cat behavior by end of second week. [Arguably, constipation, as a
47
possible side effect of sertraline, may have improved because sertraline was not
being absorbed i.e. not as a direct result of lactulose therapy.]
I thought the problem in the case presented here was fairly easy for me to deduce
given my knowledge of physiology, or so I convinced myself, despite finding no
definitive published information of this drug interaction/warning in Plumb’s
Veterinary Drug Handbook: Mobile (2008), Epocrates, Medscape or Micromedix
online medical electronic applications, or veterinary references (Landsberg 2013;
Overall 2013; Crowell Davis 2006). Search of Ovid Medline, Pubmed, and Google
Scholar using keywords: lactulose, psychotropics and drug interactions, singly
and in combination, did not reveal any specific information pertinent to this
case. Months after my experience with Oliver’s case, as I prepared my abstract
for submission for this symposium, I found a single published case report of a
57-year-old woman whose use of Actilax (i.e. lactulose) presumably interfered
with absorption of another medication to reduce a tremor caused by antipsychotic
agents she was taking (Altree & Galletly 2013).
Discussion
When presented with sudden behavior changes in previously behaviorally stable
patient, I suggest asking yourself and the client the following:
“What has changed?” (e.g. environment, health, medications)
“When did these changes occur?” (e.g. any coincidental with behavior changes or
proceeding or in the recent past)
(Questions of how, where, and who may also be appropriate case by case.)
Specifically regarding all medications including prescription, OTC and herbal:
• Dose (what is the client giving)?
• Timing of administration (when is the client giving it)?
• Is the animal consuming the medication?
• Regurgitation, vomiting, diarrhea?
• Any other health changes that might effect medication effect?
Medications commonly prescribed in primary care that may cause adverse DDI:
• NSAIDS
• Antifungals
• Appetite stimulants, anti-emetics, laxatives
48
• MAOIs
• Flea, tick and heartworm medication
If you have decided that the behavioral changes are medication-related then
consider researching the following in more detail:
• Absorption of each drug
• Distribution of each drug
• Metabolism of each drug
• Elimination of each drug
• Drug interactions with other medications—prescription and over-the-counter,
herbal (oral and topical--affinity for cytochrome receptors and affects on
metabolism, competition for protein binding, competition for neuroreceptors
or neurotransportors, attenuation or enhancement of neurotransmitter effects
• Dietary effects on drug absorption and metabolism
Resources I have found useful:
• Veterinary Psychopharmacology: Horowitz et al. 2005; Crowell-Davis 2006;
Landsberg et al. 2013; Overall 2013; Schwartz 2005, Stahl 2011; Stahl 2013
• Drug dosages (the above books and the following recent journal publications):
Perrin et al. 2014; Simpson et al. 2003
• Veterinary Pharmacology: Riviere et al. 2013
• Drug inserts
• Computer and on-line applications: Epocrates, Medline Plus; Medscape,
Micromedix (Perkins et al. 2006; Sloan 2009)
• Human and veterinary pharmacists.
• Diplomats of ACVB.
• NIH: U.S. National Library of Medicine http://www.nlm.nih.gov/services/drug.
html http://druginfo.nlm.nih.gov/drugportal/jsp/drugportal/professionals.jsp
• Psychosomatics from Academy of Psychosomatic Medicine RSS notifications
(e.g. Armstrong et al. 2003)
49
References
Altree TJ Galletly, C, 2013. Laxative use and altered drug absorption. Australian
and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry 47:686.
Armstrong SC, Cozza KL, Sandson NB 2003, Med-Psych drug-drug interactions
update: six patterns of drug-drug interactions. Psychosomatics 44:255-258.
Crowell-Davis SL, 2006. Veterinary Psychopharmacology. Blackwell Publishing,
Ames, AI, pp. 98-99.
English BA, Dortch M, Ereshefsky L, Jhee S, 2012. Clinically significant
psychotropic drug-drug interactions in the primary care setting. Current
Psychiatry Reports 14:376-390.
Horowitz DF Mills DS (eds), 2009. BSAVA Manual of Canine an Feline Behavioural
Medicine 2nd Edition. British Small Animal Veterinary Association, Gloucester,
UK.
Landsberg G, Hunthausen W, Ackerman L, 2013. Behavior Problems of the Dog &
Cat. Saunders Elsevier, Philadelphia, PA.
Martinez MN, Antonovic L, Court M, Dacosto M, Fink-Gremmels J, et al. 2013.
Challenges in exploring the cytochrome P450 system as a source of variation in
canine drug pharmacokinetics. Drug Metabolism Reviews 45:218-230.
Mealey KL, 2006. Pharmacogentics. Veterinary Clinics Small Animal: Practice
36:961-973.
Overall KL, 2013. Manual of Clinical Behavioral Medicine for Dogs and Cats.
Elsevier Mosby, St. Louis, MO.
Perkins NA, Murphy JE, Malone DC, Armstrong EP, 2006. Performance of
drug-drug interaction software for personal digital assistants. The Annals of
Pharmocotherapy 40:850-855.
Perrin C, Seksel K, Landsberg GM. 2014. Appendix: Drug dosage chart.
Veterinary Clinics Small Animal, 44:629-632.
Plumb DC, 2012: Plumb’s Veterinary Drug Handbook: Mobile. Wiley-Blackwell,
Hoboken, New Jersey. ISBN-13: 978-0813821726
Riviere JE, Papich MG, eds., 2013. Veterinary Pharmacology and Therapeutics.
Blackwell Publishing, Ames, IA.
Schwartz S, 2005. Psychoactive Herbs in Veterinary Behavior Medicine. Blackwell
Publishing, Ames, IA.
Simpson BS Papich MG, 2003. Pharmacologic management in veterinary
behavioral medicine. Veterinary Clinics Small Animal 33:365-404.
50
Sloan D, 2009. Drug-drug interactions with the use of psychotropic medications.
Supplement to CNS Spectrums 14(8):1-8.
Smith FA, Wittmann CW, Stern, TA, 2008. Medical complications of psychiatric
treatment. Critical Care Clinics 24:635-656.
Spina E, Trifiro G, Caraci F, 2012. Clinically significant drug interactions with
newer antidepressants. CNS Drugs 26:39-67.
Stahl S, 2011. Stahl’s Essential Psychopharmacology: the prescriber’s guide.
Cambridge University Press, New York, NY.
Stahl S, 2013. Stahl’s Essential Psychopharmacology. Cambridge University Press,
New York, NY.
Uhr M, Tontsch A, Namendorf C, Ripke S, Lucae S, Ising M, 2007. Polymorphisms
in the drug transporter gene ABCB1 predict antidepressant treatment response in
depression. Neuron 57:203-209.
Keywords
Behavior; companion animals; drug absorption; drug interaction; lactulose; online drug databases; psychopharmacology; psychotropic
51
Dog Bite Prevention Strategy App
G. Rivard*
Animal Connected, Inc., Québec, Canada
Abstract
Can you or your child prevent dog bites? Do you want to know how to warn
people about dog bites and what to teach them about dog bite prevention strategy?
To prevent dog bites, we consider three important factors: any dog can bite; a dog’s
risk of biting increases with its anxiety level; and it is difficult for most humans
to assess a dog’s anxiety level and the risk of biting. In fact, anxious dogs might
look sleepy, playful, sad, depressed, assertive, or confident to their owners. Thus,
it is important to interpret a dog’s body language correctly. We created a mobile
application called Dog Bite Prevention Strategy. It helps people assess the anxiety
level and the associated risk of biting of a virtual dog based on its body language.
The user is shown 14 dog postures, which details 27 body features with movements
and sounds. Learning how-to interpret an anxious dog body language might save
you or your child from becoming a dog bite victim. Also, it might improve dogs
welfare, training, and behavior modification programs.
Introduction
There are 83.3 million dogs in 72.9 million (62%) U.S. households (APPA, 20132014). According to their owners, they are ‘good’ dogs and will not bite. However,
the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reports an average of 4.5 million
dog bites per year, almost half of victims are children younger than 12 years old
(CDC, 2012). Children under five, adults 65 and older, and postal workers were
more likely to be hospitalized after a bite (III, 2013). Dogs bite people who live
with, care for, use, or are afraid of dogs during everyday activities and mostly
while interacting with familiar dogs (AVMA, 2014). Any dog can bite or display
aggression so that dogs should not be subjected to inappropriate interactions with
unpredictable and threatening humans including and most importantly children
(Martin KM, Martin D, 2011).
Dogs show their anxiety level and warn of their biting intentions by their body
language. They do so to increase the distance from the person or another animal
and avoid the possibility of injury from fighting, with the exception of extremely
52
anxious dogs as discussed below (Neilson JC, 2014). Anxiety level can vary from
being relatively relaxed, anxious, very anxious, or extremely anxious to the
point of biting. Dogs are relaxed and happy when they feel safe and can predict
a positive outcome from the situation, mostly during a cue-response-reward
interaction such as a well executed ‘sit’ command. Anxious dogs can escalate
toward aggression and biting when they play; are threatened, fearful, or in conflict
as well as defending their personal space or guarding a valued resource. For their
owners, an anxious dog might look sleepy, playful, sad, depressed, assertive, or
confident. However, the anxious dog will bite if the situation persists or the dog
cannot escape. Therefore, being able to interpret a dog’s body language would
allow the assessment of anxiety level with its associated risk of biting so that an
immediate action can be taken.
Because it is so difficult for most people to recognize a dog’s anxiety level and the
risk of biting, we propose a fun and easily available mobile application called Dog
Bite Prevention Strategy (App). The App has a free anxiety test teaching people
how-to read canine body language; interpret a dog’s posture; and assess a virtual
dog’s anxiety level associated with its risk of biting. By interpreting the body
language of a dog carefully, one can recognize relaxed, anxious, fearful, being in
conflict, and resource-guarding behaviors. If the human is not able to read those
body language signals or if the signals happen too fast, human-dog interactions
often result in biting. The ability to read the body language of a dog is critical to
being able to assess the level of anxiety and its associated risk of biting; to predict
the dog’s behavior; and to decide how-to-react. In this App, the first step is to
assess the anxiety level related to the risk of biting of a virtual dog exhibiting 14
postures with movements and sounds. Postures help in understanding what dogs
are communicating and what their next move might be.
Dogs communicate their intentions using a complex body language consisting
of body postures, facial expressions, movements, and vocalizations (Neilson JC,
2014). Dogs’ emotional state can be determined by observation of their postures
(Houpt KA, 2011). In the anxiety test of the ‘Dog Bite Prevention Strategy’ mobile
application, we manipulate 27 body features to mimic a dog’s body language
and create a posture. Postures are made of variations of body, ears, eyes, mouth,
and tail positions with movements and sounds described in Table 1 (Houpt KA,
2011; Neilson JC, 2014; Overall KL, 2013; Yin S, 2009, 2010). We have created
53
14 dog postures to represent four levels of anxiety, which correlate to the risk of
biting (Table 2). At the opening of the App, a virtual dog named Bud, greets the
user. Tapping on the speech bubble uncovers the following text. “Hi! My name is
Bud. I’m a very good dog but sometimes I bite. The more anxious I am, the more
likely I am to bite. Be aware of my body language and have fun!” Then, tapping
on the ‘Anxiety Test’ button provides three choices of anxiety test: Beginner,
Novice, and Expert levels consisting of five (5), eight (8), and 14 random postures,
respectively. After completing the beginner’s minimum score of 750 points, one
can unlock the novice level, which unlocks the expert level after scoring 1,200
points minimum. The anxiety test starts with the appearance of a posture and
the question ‘How is Bud?.’ The answer, based on the anxiety level and the risk of
biting, can be found on the right side of the screen. The choices are ‘Not Likely to
Bite’, ‘Might Bite’, ‘About to Bite’, and ‘Biting’ written in corresponding colorful
buttons and activated when the user taps on one of them. These answers relate to
the four levels of anxiety characterized by the postures. During the ‘Anxiety Test’,
the user is tested with a random sequence of up to 14 postures. When successful,
a score of 150 points is registered in a dog bone and tabulated to give a final score
after completion of the anxiety test. The more correct answers you make, the more
dog bones Bud gets (AVMA, 2008). If not successful, a feedback window appears
with the correct answer appearing on a colorful bar followed by the name of the
posture and a short description of Bud’s intent. Descriptive pointers to posturespecific body, ears, eyes, mouth, and tail features surround the posture in the
feedback window (Table 1). After closing the feedback window, a new posture
appears and the anxiety test continue. We encourage users to play the anxiety test
game and earn bones for Bud.
54
Table 1:
Postures (n=14) characterized with corresponding body features.
Posture
Name
Body
Ears
Eyes
Mouth
Tail
1. Calm: Sit
Attentive and
relaxed
Pointing
forward and
floppy
Looking
attentive
Open with
tongue
showing
Might be
wagging
2. Calm: Stand
Attentive and
relaxed
Pointing
forward and
floppy
Looking
attentive
Open with
tongue
showing
Might be
wagging
3. Calm: Down
Attentive and
relaxed
Pointing
forward and
floppy
Looking
attentive
Open with
tongue
showing
Might be
wagging
4. Playful
Bowing and
leaping
Pointing
forward
Looking
attentive
Open with
tongue
showing
Up and
wagging
5. Aroused
Attentive
Pointing
forward
Looking
attentive
Closed
Level and
wagging
6. Appeasing
Low with head
turning away
To the side
and flat
Looking away
and showing
white sclera
Closed with
lips lifted and
may lip/nose
licking
Low and might
be wagging
7. Submissive
Low with
whole body
turning away
To the side
and flat
Looking away
and showing
white sclera
Closed with
lips lifted
Low and might
be wagging
8. Anxious
Tense and
crouched
Backward and
flat
Looking away
and showing
white sclera
Half-closed
and may
yawn/lick
Between legs
and stiff
9. Creeping
Tense and
crouched low
Backward and
flat
Looking away
and showing
white sclera
Closed and
tense
Between legs
and stiff
10. Cowering
Tense and
crouched
down
Backward and
flat
Half-closed
looking
‘sleepy’
Closed and
tense
Between legs
and stiff
11. Fearful
Tense and
crouched
sideways
Backward and
flat
Looking away
and showing
white sclera
Closed with
lips lifted
Between legs
and stiff
12. Defensive
Aggressive
Tense and
crouched
sideways
Backward and
flat
Looking away
and showing
white sclera
Open showing
teeth, growling
Between legs
and stiff
13. Offensive
Aggressive
Tense with a
rigid stance
Pointing
forward
Staring at
victim
Open showing
all teeth,
growling
Level and stiff
14. Attacking
Tense, rigid,
and lunging
Pointing
forward
Staring at
victim
Open showing
all teeth,
growling
Up and stiff
55
Table 2:
Four levels of anxiety characterized by postures related to the risk of dog bites.
Anxiety
Level
Risk of
Biting
Posture Name
Significance
1. Calm: Sit
2. Calm: Stand
3. Calm: Down
Bud is not worried!
Bud is not worried!
Bud is not worried!
NonAnxious
Not Likely
to Bite
Green
4. Playful
5. Aroused
6. Appeasing
7. Submissive
Bud wants to play but might bite!
Bud is ready to play or bite!
Bud is appeasing but might bite!
Bud gives way but might bite!
Anxious
Might Bite
Yellow
8. Anxious
9. Creeping
10. Cowering
11. Fearful
Bud is wary and about to bite!
Bud is avoiding you and about to bite!
Bud retreats in fear and about to bite!
Bud is afraid and about to bite!
Very
Anxious
About to Bite
Orange
12. Defensive
Aggressive
13. Offensive
Aggressive
14. Attacking
Bud defends itself and will bite!
Extremely
Anxious
Biting
Red
Bud is guarding and will bite!
Color
Bud attacks to bite!
Results and Discussion
Because of the large number of dogs in the U.S., exposure to dogs during the
course of daily life is inevitable. When exposed to dogs, many people assume
that they will not get bitten for any reason. Either they believe all dogs are ‘good’
dogs, love dogs, know about dogs, are ‘pack’ leader, or can show the dog who is
the boss. However, in 2012, dog bite claims in U.S. amounted $489.7 millions with
an average cost per claim of $29,752 (III, 2013). The Insurance industry estimates
more than $1 billion paid in dog bite costs each year (AVMA, 2001). Dog bite
victims seem unable to read dogs’ body language and assess dogs’ anxiety level
with its risk of biting.
The anxiety test can help people prevent dog bites. In fact, it helps people learn
how to interpret dogs’ body language, which relates to the dog anxiety level
and the risk of biting. In general, dogs’ body language and movements can be
interpreted as follows (Landsberg G, Hunthausen W, Ackerman, 2013; Neilson JC,
2014; Overall KL, 2013).
—Calm and ‘happy’ body movements and a tail wagging mean the dog is seeking
56
human attention (see Calm postures).
—Movements of avoidance with a lowering of the body and head turning away
means that the dog wants to avoid the situation; not look at (i.e., averted gaze
with white sclera appearing in the corner of the eye); go away; hide; or look as
little as possible. This means anxiety, deferential solicitation, and fear (see Playful,
Aroused, Appeasing, Submissive, Anxious, Creeping, Cowering, and Fearful
postures).
—Aggressive movements show that the dog wants to engage; stares at the victim
with direct gaze; prepares its body to attack by shifting of the body weight while
securing a good grip on the ground; and looks as big as possible. Aggressive
movements are threat postures and preparation for lunging and biting (see
Defensive Aggressive, Offensive Aggressive, and Attacking postures).
These postures are responses to an escalation of anxiety level caused by a
perceived threat only and are not expressions of a ‘submissive’ or ‘dominant’ state.
The choice of ‘flight, freeze, or fight’ strategy (whether to escalate to a bite or not)
will depend on the circumstances (time, target, interactions, previous experience)
and on the severity of any underlying physical disease (pain frequently converts a
‘flight’ response to ‘fight’ (AVMA, 2008; Horwitz DF and Mills DS, 2009; Neilson
JC, 2014).
The App allows the safe rehearsal of anxiety and bite risk assessments with a
virtual dog before being exposed to real dogs. Then, going through a following
module called ‘How to React’, the player can learn how-to interact appropriately
with anxious dogs and what to do in different real life situations (AVMA, 2008).
This also might benefit a dog’s welfare, training, and behavior modification
programs. For instance, misunderstandings and punishment responses to
appeasement and fearful behaviors often result in the dog moving up the ladder
of aggression rapidly and biting the handler, thus earning even more punishments
or being relinquished (Horwitz DF and Mills DS, 2009). More studies need to be
done to further the development of mobile applications.
Acknowledgements
The author acknowledges Dr. Katherine Houpt, Mathieu Tremblay, Alexandre
Leclerc, David Gagnon, Luçie Rivard and greatly appreciates their help and support.
57
References
APPA (American Pet Products Association) 2013-2014. National Pet Owners
Survey. http://www.americanpetproducts.org/
CDC (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) 2012. Dog Bites at http://www.
cdc.gov/homeandrecreationalsafety/dog-bites/index.html
III (Institute Insurance Information) 2013. Dog Bite Liability at http://www.iii.org/
issues_updates/dog-bite-liability.html
AVMA (American Veterinary Medical Association) 2014, Dog Bite Facts at https://
www.avma.org/public/pages/Dog-Bite-Prevention.aspx
Martin KM, Martin D, 2011. Puppy Start Right Foundation Training for the
Companion Dog. Karen Pryor Clickertraining Sunshine Books, Inc., Waltham,
MA, pp. 84-86.
Neilson JC, 2014. Can’t We Just Talk? In: American College of Veterinary
Behaviorists, Hortwitz DF and Ciribassi J (eds) Decoding your Dog pp 1-15.
Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, New York, NY.
Houpt KA, 2011. Domestic Animal Behavior for Veterinarians & Animal Scientists
Fifth edition. Wiley-Blackwell, Ames, IA, pp. 12-14.
Overall KL, 2013. Manual of Clinical Behavioral Medicine for Dogs and Cats.
Elsevier Mosby, St. Louis, MO, pp. 131-156.
Yin S, 2009. Low Stress Handling, Restraint and Behavior Modification of Dogs &
Cats. CattleDog Publishing, Davis, CA, pp. 38-44.
Yin S, 2010. Dog-Dog Social Skills and Learning to Understand and Read “Dog.”
In: Russell-Revesz H (ed) How To Behave So Your Dog Behaves Second edition pp
18-23 and 30-37.
AVMA (American Veterinary Medical Association), 2008. Living safely with your
dog The Blue Dog Parent Guide and CD. The Blue Dog Trust, Schaumburg, IL, pp.
8-46.
AVMA (American Veterinary Medical Association) Task Force on Canine
Aggression and Human-Canine Interactions, 2001. A community approach to dog
bite prevention. JAVMA 218: 1732-1749.
Landsberg G, Hunthausen W, Ackerman, 2013. Behavior Problems of the Dog and
Cat Third edition. Saunders Elsevier, Philadelphia, PA, pp. 18-20.
58
Horwitz DF, Mills DS, 2009. BSAVA Manual of Canine and Feline Behavioural
Medicine Second edition. British Small Animal Veterinary Association, Quedgeley,
Gloucester, England, pp.13-16, 173.
Keywords
Dog; Bite; Prevention; Risk of Biting; Body Language; Posture; Anxiety;
Aggression
59

ACVB-AVSAB 2014 Symposium proceedings Final

Transcription

Similar documents

Winter 2014 Newsletter

Nothing to do - Rabbit Welfare Association

x vendor parkin g

Costa Blanca News. - hospital veterinario JG

Lesson Plan: Dogs

Puttln`On Th - Greenwich Public Schools

Media Kit - Redstone Media Group

pdf of project descriptive panel

Wiltshire View - One Man and His Gundogs

Children`s TV 1