FREE SHIPPING over $40
OVER 9000 FIVE-STAR REVIEWS
5% OFF ALL SUBSCRIPTIONS
100% HAPPINESS GUARANTEE
Analyze Diet
0
Home / Equine Research Bank / Equine Vet J / Factors that influence owner consent for exploratory laparot...
Equine veterinary journal2022; 55(4); 656-665; doi: 10.1111/evj.13868

Factors that influence owner consent for exploratory laparotomy in horses with colic in Australia and New Zealand.

Abstract: Horse owners' motivators and barriers for consent to exploratory laparotomy are poorly understood. Objective: To (1) determine the proportion of Australian and New Zealand horse owners who would consent to exploratory laparotomy and (2) identify motivators and barriers for consent. Methods: Cross-sectional survey. Methods: A questionnaire was developed and distributed online. Descriptive statistics were calculated by tabulating respondents by their answers to whether they would consent to exploratory laparotomy. Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to identify variables associated with consenting to exploratory laparotomy. Results: Two thousand two hundred horse owners participated with a 68.3% survey completion rate. Most were female (95.6%), and 18.7% stated they would consent to exploratory laparotomy, 55.2% would consider exploratory laparotomy and 26.1% would not consent to exploratory laparotomy being performed on their horse. Geographical location, intended use of the horse and perceptions regarding the cost and prognosis of exploratory laparotomy, as well as the previous experience of respondents significantly impacted the decision. Self-reported level of financial comfort, gender of respondents, number of horses owned and pre-existing relationship with nearest equine referral clinic did not impact the decision. Top motivators for exploratory laparotomy were high probability of survival, trust in hospital, emotional value of horse and the alternative being euthanasia. Top barriers for exploratory laparotomy were financial cost, uncertain outcome, welfare concern and age of the horse. Conclusions: Self-selection bias and acquiescence in responses. Conclusions: Most respondents indicated that they would consider or consent to exploratory laparotomy. Several factors for owners to decide for exploratory laparotomy could be identified. Improved owner education regarding the positively reported survival rates for exploratory laparotomy would be beneficial. Unassigned: Les motivateurs et les obstacles derrières la décision des propriétaires d'autoriser ou pas une laparotomie exploratrice (LE) sur leurs chevaux demeurent mal compris. Objective: (1) Déterminer la proportion des propriétaires de chevaux en Australie et Nouvelle-Zélande qui consentiraient à une LE et (2) identifier les motivateurs et obstacles contribuant à leur consentement. TYPE D'ÉTUDE: Étude transversale. MÉTHODES: Un questionnaire a été développé et distribué en ligne. Des statistiques descriptives ont été calculées en classifiant les répondants selon s'ils consentiraient ou non à une LE. Des analyses uni et multivariées ont été utilisées pour identifier les variables associées au consentement à la LE. RÉSULTATS: Deux milles deux cents propriétaires de chevaux ont participé et le taux de remplissage du sondage était de 68.3%. La majorité étaient des femmes (95.6%) et 18.7% donneraient leur consentement pour une LE, 55.2% considéraient une LE et 26.1% ne consentiraient pas à une LE pour leur cheval. La localisation géographique, la discipline du cheval et les perceptions relativement aux coûts et au pronostic pour une LE, de même que leurs expériences précédentes influenceraient la décision des participants de façon significative. La situation monétaire des participants (rapportés de leur plein gré), leur genre, le nombre de chevaux dont ils sont propriétaires et une relation pré-existante avec une clinique de référence à proximité n'influenceraient pas leur décision. Les motivateurs les plus importants pour le consentement à la LE étaient une chance de survie élevée, leur confiance envers le centre de référence, la valeur émotionnelle du cheval et les alternatives possibles à l'euthanasie. Les obstacles les plus flagrants étaient les coûts, une chance de survie incertaine, des préoccupations par rapport au bien-être du cheval et son âge. Unassigned: Biais de sélection et degré d'accord des réponses. Conclusions: La plupart des répondants consentiraient ou au moins considéraient une LE. Plusieurs facteurs influençant la décision des propriétaires ont pu être identifiés. Il est impératif pour les vétérinariares traitants d'éduquer les clients en ce qui concerne les taux de survie plus positifs suivant les laparotomies exploratrices.
© 2022 EVJ Ltd.
Get Full Text
Publication Date: 2022-08-31 PubMed ID: 36053952DOI: 10.1111/evj.13868Google Scholar: Lookup
The Equine Research Bank provides access to a large database of publicly available scientific literature. Inclusion in the Research Bank does not imply endorsement of study methods or findings by Mad Barn.
LinkedInCopy
  • Journal Article

Summary

This research summary has been generated with artificial intelligence and may contain errors and omissions. Refer to the original study to confirm details provided. Submit correction.

The research provides insight into the factors that influence Australian and New Zealand horse owners’ decision to consent to exploratory laparotomy, a surgical procedure performed on colicky horses. Statistics show that only a small percentage of the respondents would readily agree to the surgery without hesitation, while the majority would need to consider it first.

Study Objective and Methodology

  • The study aims to understand the proportion of horse owners who would consent to exploratory laparotomy, and to identify their motivators and barriers for granting consent.
  • A cross-sectional online survey was conducted. The questionnaire explored whether horse owners would consent to the operation and what factors might sway their decisions.
  • The responses of the survey were utilized to identify variables associated with consenting to the surgery using univariate and multivariate analyses.

Results of the Study

  • A total of 2,200 horse owners participated with a 68.3% survey completion rate.
  • The majority of the respondents were female (95.6%). Only 18.7% would readily agree to the surgery being performed, 55.2% would need to consider it, and 26.1% would not consent at all.
  • Factors such as geographical location, intended use of the horse, perceptions of the cost and prognosis of the procedure, and past experiences significantly affected the decision-making process.
  • The number of horses owned by the respondent, the gender of the respondent, their perceived financial comfort level, and pre-existing relationship with the nearest equine referral clinic, however, did not impact the decision.

Motivators and Barriers for Laparotomy

  • Top motivators for the procedure were a high probability of survival, trust in the hospital, emotional value of the horse, and the alternative being euthanasia.
  • Barriers were the financial implications, uncertain outcome, welfare concerns, and the age of the horse.

Conclusions and Recommendations

  • Despite self-selection bias in participation and acquiescence in responses, several important factors were identified that influence the decision-making process of horse owners regarding exploratory laparotomy.
  • Most respondents demonstrated willingness to consider or consent to the surgery.
  • It was suggested that further thorough education concerning the high survival rates from exploratory laparotomy might help in gaining more consent from horse owners in the future.

Cite This Article

APA
Averay K, Wilkins C, de Kantzow M, Simon O, van Galen G, Sykes B, Verwilghen D. (2022). Factors that influence owner consent for exploratory laparotomy in horses with colic in Australia and New Zealand. Equine Vet J, 55(4), 656-665. https://doi.org/10.1111/evj.13868

Publication

Equine veterinary journal
ISSN: 2042-3306
NlmUniqueID: 0173320
Country: United States
Language: English
Volume: 55
Issue: 4
Pages: 656-665

Researcher Affiliations

Averay, Kate
  • Sydney School of Veterinary Science, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Wilkins, Clara
  • Sydney School of Veterinary Science, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
de Kantzow, Max
  • Sydney School of Veterinary Science, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Simon, Olivier
  • Equine Health and Performance Centre, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
van Galen, Gaby
  • Sydney School of Veterinary Science, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Sykes, Benjamin
  • School of Veterinary Sciences, Massey University, Palmerston North, New Zealand.
Verwilghen, Denis
  • Sydney School of Veterinary Science, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.

MeSH Terms

  • Horses
  • Animals
  • Female
  • Male
  • Australia
  • Laparotomy / veterinary
  • Colic / veterinary
  • Cross-Sectional Studies
  • New Zealand / epidemiology
  • Horse Diseases / surgery
  • Surveys and Questionnaires

Grant Funding

  • Sydney School of Veterinary Science Post-Graduate / University of Sydney

References

This article includes 27 references
  1. Bowden A, England G, Burford J, Mair T, Furness W, Freeman S. Prevalence and outcome of conditions seen at out-of-hours primary assessment at two practices over a 3-year period (2011-2013). Equine Vet J 2017;49(Suppl 51):11.
    doi: 10.1111/evj.14_12732google scholar: lookup
  2. Kaneene JB, Miller R, Ross W, Gallagher K, Marteniuk J, Rook J. Risk factors for colic in the Michigan (USA) equine population. Prev Vet Med 1997;30:23-36.
  3. Tinker MK, White N, Lessard P, Thatcher C, Pelzer K, Davis B. Prospective study of equine colic risk factors. Equine Vet J 1997;29:454-8.
  4. Traub-Dargatz JL, Kopral CA, Seitzinger AH, Garber LP, Forde K, White NA. Estimate of the national incidence of and operation-level risk factors for colic among horses in the United States, spring 1998 to spring 1999. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2001;219:67-71.
  5. Freeman DE. Fifty years of colic surgery. Equine Vet J 2018;50:423-35.
    doi: 10.1111/evj.12817google scholar: lookup
  6. Brockman BK, Taylor VA, Brockman CM. The price of unconditional love: consumer decision making for high-dollar veterinary care. J Business Res 2008;61:397-405.
  7. Spitznagel MB, Marchitelli B, Gardner M, Carlson MD. Euthanasia from the veterinary client's perspective: psychosocial contributors to euthanasia decision making. Vet Clin North Am Small Anim Pract 2020;50:591-605.
  8. Archer DC. Colic surgery: keeping it affordable for horse owners. Vet Rec 2019;185:505-7.
  9. Barker I, Freeman SL. Assessment of costs and insurance policies for referral treatment of equine colic. Vet Rec 2019;185:508.
  10. Close K, Epstein KL, Sherlock CE. A retrospective study comparing the outcome of horses undergoing small intestinal resection and anastomosis with a single layer (Lembert) or double layer (simple continuous and Cushing) technique. Vet Surg 2014;43:471-8.
    doi: 10.1111/j.1532-950x.2014.12143.xgoogle scholar: lookup
  11. Morton AJ, Blikslager AT. Surgical and postoperative factors influencing short-term survival of horses following small intestinal resection: 92 cases (1994-2001). Equine Vet J 2002;34:450-4.
    doi: 10.2746/042516402776117700google scholar: lookup
  12. Semevolos SA, Ducharme NG, Hackett RP. Clinical assessment and outcome of three techniques for jejunal resection and anastomosis in horses: 59 cases (1989-2000). J Am Vet Med Assoc 2002;220:215-8.
    doi: 10.2460/javma.2002.220.215google scholar: lookup
  13. Freeman DE, Hammock P, Baker GJ, Goetz T, Foreman JH, Schaeffer DJ. Short- and long-term survival and prevalence of postoperative ileus after small intestinal surgery in the horse. Equine Vet J 2000;32(Suppl 32):42-51.
    doi: 10.1111/j.2042-3306.2000.tb05333.xgoogle scholar: lookup
  14. Mair TS, Smith LJ. Survival and complication rates in 300 horses undergoing surgical treatment of colic. Part 1: short-term survival following a single laparotomy. Equine Vet J 2005;37:296-302.
    doi: 10.2746/0425164054529409google scholar: lookup
  15. Hart SK, Southwood LL, Aceto HW. Impact of colic surgery on return to function in racing Thoroughbreds: 59 cases (1996-2009). J Am Vet Med Assoc 2014;244:205-11.
    doi: 10.2460/javma.244.2.205google scholar: lookup
  16. Egenvall A, Penell J, Bonnett B, Blix J, Pringle J. Demographics and costs of colic in Swedish horses. J Vet Intern Med 2008;22:1029-37.
  17. Bowden A, Burford J, Brennan M, England G, Freeman S. Horse owners' knowledge, and opinions on recognising colic in the horse. Equine Vet J 2020;52:262-7.
  18. Bushell R, Murray J. A survey of senior equine management: owner practices and confidence. Livest Sci 2016;186:69-77.
  19. Chapman GE, Baylis M, Archer DC. Survey of UK horse owners' knowledge of equine arboviruses and disease vectors. Vet Rec 2018;183:59.
  20. Cole F, Hodgson D, Reid S, Mellor D. Owner-reported equine health disorders: results of an Australia-wide postal survey. Aust Vet J 2005;83:490-5.
  21. Scantlebury CE, Perkins E, Pinchbeck GL, Archer DC, Christley RM. Could it be colic? Horse-owner decision making and practices in response to equine colic. BMC Vet Res 2014;10:1-14.
  22. Slater J. Equine disease surveillance. Vet Rec 2014;175:271-2.
  23. McGowan T, Pinchbeck G, Phillips C, Perkins N, Hodgson D, McGowan C. A survey of aged horses in Queensland, Australia. Part 1: management and preventive health care. Aust Vet J 2010;88:420-7.
  24. Murray J-AM, Bloxham C, Kulifay J, Stevenson A, Roberts J. Equine nutrition: a survey of perceptions and practices of horse owners undertaking a massive open online course in equine nutrition. J Equine Vet Sci 2015;35:510-7.
  25. Smyth G, Dagley K. Demographics of Australian horse owners: results from an internet-based survey. Aust Vet J 2015;93:433-8.
  26. Smith G. Does gender influence online survey participation?: a record-linkage analysis of university faculty online survey response behavior. ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 501717; 2008.
  27. Starcke K, Brand M. Decision making under stress: a selective review. Neurosci Biobehav Rev 2012;36:1228-48.

Citations

This article has been cited 0 times.
Subscribe to our newsletter
Join 99,357 horse owners like you who receive our email updates on horse health and nutrition.