Quantitative versus qualitative approaches: a comparison of two research methods applied to identification of key health issues for working horses in Lesotho.
Abstract: The relative merits and potential complementarity of participatory methods and classical epidemiological techniques in veterinary-related research is a current topic of discussion. Few reported studies have applied both methodologies within the same research framework to enable direct comparison. The aim of this study was to compare issues identified by a classical epidemiological study of horses and their owners with those identified by owner communities using participatory approaches. In 2009, a cross-sectional survey was undertaken as part of an impact assessment study of farrier and saddler training programmes, and a small-scale nutrition trial, implemented in Lesotho by a UK-based equine charity. In total, 245 horses and their 237 owners participated in the survey which comprised a face-to-face structured questionnaire covering knowledge and practices relating to equine husbandry and primary healthcare, clinical examination and sampling of horses, and examination of tack used on those horses. In early 2010, 56 owners in three survey regions, some of whom participated in the survey, attended a participatory workshop. Each workshop group created a local resource map whilst discussing and identifying key issues associated with horse ownership and what might have an adverse impact on horse health and work. Following map completion, each group began by prioritising the identified issues, and then ranked them using a pairwise/ranking matrix to reflect how important issues were in relation to each other. Overall priority issues were: mouth problems, hunger and nutrition, diseases (including infectious diseases, parasites and colic), husbandry (including wound management), and feet and limb problems. Major health issues identified by cross-sectional study included sharp enamel points on teeth, endo- and ectoparasite infestation, suboptimal nutrition, tack-associated wounds, overgrown and poorly balanced feet and poor owner husbandry knowledge and practices. Whilst common issues were identified through the two research approaches, key differences also emerged. The classical, more quantitative approach provided objective measurement of problem frequency, which was compared with owners' perceptions of importance. The qualitative participatory approach provided greater opportunity for researchers to gain detailed understanding of local issues and appreciate how owners defined and prioritised problems affecting them and their animals. Both approaches provided valuable and complementary information that can be used to inform interventions aimed at providing sustainable improvements in the health and wellbeing of working animals and their owners. It is recommended that both quantitative and qualitative approaches are employed as part of detailed needs assessment work prior to defining and prioritising the charity's future interventions.
Copyright © 2013 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Publication Date: 2013-02-20 PubMed ID: 23419786DOI: 10.1016/j.prevetmed.2012.11.008Google 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.
- Comparative Study
- Journal Article
- Research Support
- Non-U.S. Gov't
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 article investigates the comparative effectiveness of quantitative and qualitative research methods when addressing key health issues for working horses in Lesotho. The study applied both techniques within the same research framework to allow for a direct comparison.
Methodology
- The researchers first conducted a cross-sectional survey in 2009, involving 245 horses and 237 owners. The survey was a part of an impact assessment study for training programmes delivered by a UK-based equine charity.
- The study used a structured questionnaire to examine knowledge and practices related to equine husbandry and primary healthcare, carry out a clinical examination of the horses, and inspect the horses’ tack.
- In 2010, they conducted a participatory workshop involving 56 horse owners from three survey regions in Lesotho. These participants discussed and identified key issues related to horse ownership and elements that could negatively impact horse health and work.
- Following the creation of regional resource maps and discussions, the workshop groups prioritised and ranked the identified issues according to pairwise importance.
Results
- The top issues identified were mouth problems, hunger and nutrition, diseases such as infectious disease, parasites and colic, as well as husbandry (including wound management) and feet and limb problems.
- The cross-sectional study identified the major health issues as sharp enamel points on teeth, endo- and ectoparasite infestation, suboptimal nutrition, wounds associated with tack, overgrown and poorly balanced feet, and poor husbandry knowledge and practices among owners.
- Although many of the issues identified were common to both research approaches, the study also noted key differences. The quantitative method provided a measure of problem frequency, allowing a comparison with owners’ perceptions of importance, while the qualitative approach provided a deeper understanding of local issues and allowed researchers to appreciate how owners defined and prioritised problems.
Recommendations
- Both the quantitative and qualitative methods provided useful and complementary information that could inform interventions to improve the health and well-being of both working animals and their owners.
- Based on the study’s findings, the authors recommend that a combination of both methods be employed in detailed needs assessment work. This could help organizations better define and prioritise future interventions.
Cite This Article
APA
Upjohn MM, Attwood GA, Lerotholi T, Pfeiffer DU, Verheyen KL.
(2013).
Quantitative versus qualitative approaches: a comparison of two research methods applied to identification of key health issues for working horses in Lesotho.
Prev Vet Med, 108(4), 313-320.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prevetmed.2012.11.008 Publication
Researcher Affiliations
- Department of Veterinary Clinical Sciences, Royal Veterinary College, Hawkshead Lane, North Mymms, Herts. AL9 7TA, UK. Melissa.Upjohn@thebrooke.org
MeSH Terms
- Animal Husbandry
- Animals
- Cross-Sectional Studies
- Data Collection / methods
- Female
- Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice
- Horse Diseases / epidemiology
- Horse Diseases / etiology
- Horses
- Humans
- Lesotho / epidemiology
- Male
- Prevalence
- Surveys and Questionnaires
Use Nutrition Calculator
Check if your horse's diet meets their nutrition requirements with our easy-to-use tool Check your horse's diet with our easy-to-use tool
Talk to a Nutritionist
Discuss your horse's feeding plan with our experts over a free phone consultation Discuss your horse's diet over a phone consultation
Submit Diet Evaluation
Get a customized feeding plan for your horse formulated by our equine nutritionists Get a custom feeding plan formulated by our nutritionists