How pet owners choose antiparasitic treatments for their dogs: A discrete choice experiment.

BACKGROUND: External and internal parasites can cause significant pathology to pets, posing distress to their owners. Antiparasitic treatment is complex because there are many antiparasitic products and dog owners have a limited understanding of parasiticides. The aim of this study was to investigate the characteristics of antiparasitic treatments available at veterinary offices to help veterinarians understand what pet owners value when selecting parasiticides for their dogs. METHODS: Discrete choice experiment (DCE) methodology was used. A list of important treatment attributes was developed based on semi-structured interviews with six dog owners with a total of nine dogs and six veterinarians. The questionnaire including 12 choices between pairs of hypothetical products defined according to treatment attributes was developed. The questionnaire was administered to UK dog owners recruited through an internet panel. It was tested in a pilot study with 17 dog owners, and then was completed by 160 dog owners in the main study. RESULTS: The selected treatment attributes were price, spectrum of action, veterinarian recommendation, treatment schedule, mode of administration, and place of obtention. The main analysis showed the first four of these attributes significantly influenced the preferences of dog owners for antiparasitic treatments. The most important factor was spectrum of action; most owners expressed a preference for products treating multiple parasites. The influence of price was comparable to that of spectrum of action. Pet owners were more likely to choose a product recommended by their veterinarian. Willingness-to-pay estimates were £11.22 [€12.68; $15.38] for extending protection from fleas and ticks only to intestinal worm and lungworm and £7.21 [€8.14; $9.87] for recommendation from veterinarian. CONCLUSIONS: A broad spectrum of action, veterinarian recommendation, and price are key drivers for choosing antiparasitic products among dog owners. These results may help veterinarians with recommendations of antiparasitic treatment for pet owners based on the key drivers pet owners value.

L'euthanasie de convenance des animaux de compagnie : portrait du dilemme au sein de la profession vétérinaire québécoise.

Convenience euthanasia in companion animals: Dilemma among veterinarians in Quebec. Many veterinarians working in the field of companion animal medicine have to deal with requests for convenience euthanasia in their practices. As it is the case in other medical fields, veterinarians are trained to treat their patients. It is thus easy to understand that veterinarians consider convenience euthanasia as one of the most difficult ethical dilemmas they have to deal with in their practice. Regulatory boundaries concerning the practice of euthanasia are limited to the method use to induce the death of the animal but do not give any indication as to what should be the proper circumstances surrounding the request. To date, there are few articles on this matter and the perspective of veterinarians on the subject was rarely addressed. This article reports results obtained following a study conducted upon Québec's veterinarians on the topic of convenience euthanasia. The data was obtained via an online survey created by the research team to evaluate the perspective of veterinarians on the topic, how they perceived consequences of convenience euthanasia and what were the solutions they would take into consideration in order to help the profession on resolving their dilemma. The data collected sheds light on the existing duality between double allegiance regarding the duties emerging from the relation with the patient (animal) and the client (pet owner) veterinarian are facing in their daily practice. On one hand veterinarians recognized that 'convenience euthanasia' is contrary to animal welfare. On the other hand they also recognized the pet owner's right to ask for 'convenience euthanasia' when he can no longer care for its pet.(Translated by Dr. Rathwell-Deault).

Expected consequences of convenience euthanasia perceived by veterinarians in Quebec.

In companion animal practice, convenience euthanasia (euthanasia of a physically and psychologically healthy animal) is recognized as one of the most difficult situations. There is little published on veterinary perceptions of the consequences of convenience euthanasia. A qualitative study on the subject based on interviews with 14 veterinarians was undertaken. The animal's interests in the dilemma of convenience euthanasia was taken into consideration, strictly from the point of view of the physical suffering and stress related to the procedure. The veterinarian's goal was to respect the animal's interests by controlling physical pain. Most often, veterinarians made their own interests and those of the owners a priority when considering the consequences of their decision to perform or refuse convenience euthanasia.

Conséquences attendues de l'euthanasie de commodité selon les perceptions des médecins vétérinaires au Québec. En pratique des animaux de compagnie, l'euthanasie de commodité (l'euthanasie d'un animal en bonne santé physique et psychologique) est reconnue comme l'une des situations les plus difficiles. Il y a eu peu de travaux publiés sur les perceptions vétérinaires des conséquences de l'euthanasie de commodité. Une étude qualitative sur le sujet basée sur des entrevues auprès de 14 médecins vétérinaires a été entreprise. Les intérêts de l'animal dans le dilemme de l'euthanasie de commodité ont été pris en considération, strictement du point de vue des souffrances physiques et du stress lié à l'intervention. Le but du médecin vétérinaire consistait à respecter les intérêts de l'animal en contrôlant la douleur physique. Le plus souvent, les médecins vétérinaires jugeaient leurs propres intérêts et ceux des propriétaires comme étant prioritaires lors de la considération des conséquences de leur décision de réaliser ou de refuser l'euthanasie de commodité.(Traduit par Isabelle Vallières).

Conceptualization of convenience euthanasia as an ethical dilemma for veterinarians in Quebec.

Companion animal welfare in our society has become increasingly important, yet many healthy animals are euthanized in veterinary facilities. How is it possible to explain the simultaneous presence of these opposing views of obligation toward animals? The goal of this study was to describe convenience euthanasia of companion animals as experienced by veterinarians in order to understand their thought processes. A qualitative study was undertaken to analyze the results of interviews of 14 veterinarians. The study showed that veterinarians interviewed assessed convenience euthanasia based mainly on their subjective evaluation of the owner-animal bond. As most owner-animal bonds stem from an anthropocentric point of view, decisions on convenience euthanasia were taken mostly by considering the veterinarian's and the client/owner's interests.

Conceptualisation de l'euthanasie pour des raisons de commodité comme dilemme éthique pour les vétérinaires du Québec. Le respect du bien-être des animaux de compagnie dans notre société est devenu de plus en plus important. Fait paradoxal, beaucoup d'animaux en santé sont euthanasiés dans les établissements vétérinaires. Comment peut-on expliquer la présence concomitante de ces vues opposées à l'égard des obligations envers les animaux? Le but de cette étude consistait à décrire l'euthanasie des animaux de compagnie pour des raisons de commodité selon les expériences des vétérinaires afin de comprendre leurs processus de réflexion. Une étude qualitative a été entreprise afin d'analyser les résultats d'entrevues avec 14 médecins vétérinaires. L'étude a signalé que les vétérinaires interviewés évaluaient l'euthanasie pour des raisons de commodité surtout en se basant sur leur évaluation subjective du lien entre le propriétaire et l'animal. Comme la majorité des liens entre propriétaires et animaux découlent d'un point de vue anthropocentrique, les décisions pour l'euthanasie pour des raisons de commodité étaient prises surtout en considérant l'intérêt du médecin vétérinaire et du client/propriétaire.(Traduit par Isabelle Vallières).