FREE SHIPPING over $40
OVER 9000 FIVE-STAR REVIEWS
5% OFF ALL SUBSCRIPTIONS
100% HAPPINESS GUARANTEE
Analyze Diet
0
Home / Equine Research Bank / Vet Rec / Scoping review of end-of-life decision-making models used in...
The Veterinary record2022; 191(4); e1730; doi: 10.1002/vetr.1730

Scoping review of end-of-life decision-making models used in dogs, cats and equids.

Abstract: End-of-life decisions for companion animals can be stressful for veterinarians and owners, and when delayed result in poor animal welfare. Delayed euthanasia has been identified as a particularly prominent issue for horses. This scoping review aimed to identify the available literature on veterinary decision-making models, which can support end-of-life planning. A protocol was preregistered, and a structured literature search was performed on six electronic databases. Publications were reviewed against specifically developed eligibility criteria. Data from original studies and narrative-type reviews were extracted separately, and the components of each model were charted. A total of 2211 publications were identified, 23 met the inclusion criteria and were included in the final review. Eight were original research studies and 15 were narrative reviews or similar. Publications were not indexed uniformly, increasing the difficulty of discovering relevant sources. The end-of-life decision-making process comprised three stages: (1) making the decision, (2) enacting the decision and (3) aftercare. Twenty key components of decision-making models were identified, although no publication reflected all of these. A lack of original research studies and equine-specific publications was identified. Shared decision-making models for euthanasia in veterinary practice should include all three stages and consider species-specific issues.
© 2022 The Authors. Veterinary Record published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of British Veterinary Association.
Get Full Text
Publication Date: 2022-06-15 PubMed ID: 35703328DOI: 10.1002/vetr.1730Google 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
  • Review

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.

This research paper reviews existing literature on decision-making models used in veterinary practice for end-of-life care and euthanasia of dogs, cats, and horses. It identifies three stages in the end-of-life decision-making process and underscores the need for species-specific issues and aftercare considerations to be included in shared decision-making models for euthanasia.

Research Aim

  • The paper aims to explore the current literature on veterinary decision-making models to aid in end-of-life planning for pet owners and veterinarians. The focus is on dogs, cats, and horses, with a special emphasis on delayed-euthanasia in horses – an issue identified as problematic.

Research Methodology

  • A planned protocol was used and a systematic literature review was conducted across six electronic databases to identify relevant publications.
  • The authors developed specific eligibility criteria for selecting relevant publications.
  • Data from original studies and narrative reviews were separately extracted, and the various components of each end-of-life decision-making model were recorded.

Findings

  • A total of 2211 publications were initially identified; however, only 23 met the inclusion criteria for the review. Eight of the selected publications were original research studies and 15 were narrative reviews.
  • The paper identified inconsistencies in how publications were indexed, which made identification of relevant sources challenging.
  • The end-of-life decision-making process was found to consist of three stages: making the decision, enacting the decision, and aftercare.
  • 20 distinct components of end-of-life decision-making models were identified. However, no single publication accounted for all the key components.

Gaps Identified and Suggestions

  • The paper noted a scarcity of original research in this area, implying the need for more primary studies.
  • There was a lack of literature focusing on horses specifically in terms of euthanasia.
  • The authors suggest that shared decision-making models for euthanasia should consider all three stages of the process and need to account for the differing needs of species.

Cite This Article

APA
Cameron A, Pollock K, Wilson E, Burford J, England G, Freeman S. (2022). Scoping review of end-of-life decision-making models used in dogs, cats and equids. Vet Rec, 191(4), e1730. https://doi.org/10.1002/vetr.1730

Publication

The Veterinary record
ISSN: 2042-7670
NlmUniqueID: 0031164
Country: England
Language: English
Volume: 191
Issue: 4
Pages: e1730

Researcher Affiliations

Cameron, Amelia
  • School of Veterinary Medicine and Science, University of Nottingham, Loughborough, UK.
Pollock, Kristian
  • Nottingham Centre for the Advancement of Research into Supportive, Palliative and End-of-Life Care (NCARE), School of Health Sciences, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
Wilson, Eleanor
  • Nottingham Centre for the Advancement of Research into Supportive, Palliative and End-of-Life Care (NCARE), School of Health Sciences, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
Burford, John
  • School of Veterinary Medicine and Science, University of Nottingham, Loughborough, UK.
England, Gary
  • School of Veterinary Medicine and Science, University of Nottingham, Loughborough, UK.
Freeman, Sarah
  • School of Veterinary Medicine and Science, University of Nottingham, Loughborough, UK.

MeSH Terms

  • Animal Welfare
  • Animals
  • Death
  • Decision Making
  • Dog Diseases
  • Dogs
  • Euthanasia, Animal
  • Horse Diseases
  • Horses
  • Humans
  • Veterinarians

References

This article includes 59 references
  1. Christiansen SB, Kristensen AT, Lassen J, Sandøe P. Veterinarians’ role in clients’ decision-making regarding seriously ill companion animal patients.. Acta Vet Scand 2016;58:30.
  2. Cornell KK, Kopcha M. Client-veterinarian communication: skills for client centered dialogueue and shared decision making.. Vet Clin North Am Small Anim Pract 2007;37:37-47.
  3. Bukstein DA, Guerra DG, Huwe T, Davis RA. A review of shared decision-making: a call to arms for health care professionals.. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol 2020;125:273-9.
  4. Chrenka EA, Solberg LI, Asche SE, Dehmer SP, Ziegenfuss JY, Whitebird RR. Is shared decision-making associated with better patient-reported outcomes? A longitudinal study of patients undergoing total joint arthroplasty.. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2022;480:82-91.
  5. Bomhof-Roordink H, Gartner FR, Stiggelbout AM, Pieterse AH. Key components of shared decision making models: a systematic review.. BMJ Open 2019;9:e031763.
  6. Shaw JR, Lagoni L. End-of-life communication in veterinary medicine: delivering bad news and euthanasia decision making.. Vet Clin North Am Small Anim Pract 2007;37:95-108.
  7. Rioja-Lang FC, Connor M, Bacon H, Dwyer CM. Determining a welfare prioritization for horses using a delphi method.. Animals 2020;10:647.
  8. Horseman S, Whay B, Mullan S, Knowles T, Barr A, Buller H. Horses in our hands. 2016. https://storage.googleapis.com/stateless-whwwp-screenbeetle-c/2019/09/14b98a4b-horses-in-our-hands_august-2016.pdf Accessed 17th February 2021
  9. Ireland JL, Clegg PD, Mcgowan CM, McKane SA, Pinchbeck GL. A cross-sectional study of geriatric horses in the United Kingdom. Part 2: health care and disease.. Equine Vet J 2011;43:37-44.
  10. Mcgowan TW, Phillips CJC, Hodgson DR, Perkins N, McGowan CM. Euthanasia in aged horses: relationship between the owner's personality and their opinions on, and experience of, euthanasia of horses.. Anthrozoos 2012;25:261-75.
  11. Rollin BE. Euthanasia, moral stress, and chronic illness in veterinary medicine.. Vet Clin North Am Small Anim Pract 2011;41:651-9.
  12. Tricco AC, Lillie E, Zarin W, O'Brien KK, Colquhoun H, Levac D. PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR): checklist and explanation.. Ann Intern Med 2018;169:467-73.
  13. Peters MDJ, Godfrey C, Mcinerney P, Hartley T, Steyn H, Berner K. Scoping Reviews (2020 version).. JBI manual for evidence synthesis 2020. Chapter 11: Scoping reviews - JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis.
  14. Parker RA, Yeates JW. Assessment of quality of life in equine patients.. Equine Vet J 2011;44:244-9.
  15. Van Eps A, Hunt RJ, Belknap JK. Management changes in the laminitis case.. Equine laminitis 2017. p. 411-9.
  16. Arora A, Clarida K, Londono Forero M. Pet loss best practice guidelines for veterinary teams.. 2020.
  17. Arora A, Clarida K, Steffan M. Final report: pet loss best practice guidelines for veterinary teams.. 2020.
  18. Smith AJ. Perspectives on feeding and nutrition.. Vet Clin North Am Small Anim Pract 2019;49:501-17.
  19. Bishop G, Cooney K, Cox S, Downing R, Mitchener K, Shanan A. 2016 AAHA/IAAHPC end-of-life care guidelines.. J Am Anim Hosp Assoc 2016;52:341-56.
  20. Grimm H, Bergadano A, Musk GC, Otto K, Taylor PM, Duncan JC. Drawing the line in clinical treatment of companion animals: recommendations from an ethics working party.. Vet Rec 2018;182:664.
  21. Bley CR. Principles for ethical treatment decision-making in veterinary oncology.. Vet Comp Oncol 2018;16:171-7.
  22. Arksey H, O'malley L. Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework.. Int J Soc Res Methodol 2005;8:19-32.
  23. Goldberg KJ. Goals of care: development and use of the serious veterinary illness conversation guide.. Vet Clin North Am Small Anim Pract 2019;49:399-415.
  24. Hosey G, Melfi V. Human-animal interactions, relationships and bonds: a review and analysis of the literature.. Int J Comp Psychol 2014;27:117-42.
  25. Clough HGR, John B, Amanda R. A scoping review of the current literature exploring the nature of the horse-human relationship.. Vet Evid 2019;4.
  26. Clough H, Roshier M, England G, Burford J, Freeman S. Qualitative study of the influence of horse-owner relationship during some key events within a horse's lifetime.. Vet Rec 2021;188:e79.
  27. Nickels BM, Feeley TH. Breaking bad news in veterinary medicine.. Health Commun 2018;33:1105-13.
  28. Lehnus KS, Fordyce PS, Mcmillan MW. Ethical dilemmas in clinical practice: a perspective on the results of an electronic survey of veterinary anaesthetists.. Vet Anaesth Analg 2019;46:260-75.
  29. Cooney KA, Kogan LR, Brooks SL, Ellis CA. Pet owners' expectations for pet end-of-life support and after-death body care: exploration and practical applications.. Top Companion Anim Med 2021;43:100503.
  30. Epstein M, Kuehn NF, Landsberg G, Lascelles BD, Marks SL, Schaedler JM. AAHA senior care guidelines for dogs and cats.. J Am Anim Hosp Assoc 2005;41:81-91.
  31. Batchelor CEM, Mckeegan DEF. Survey of the frequency and perceived stressfulness of ethical dilemmas encountered in UK veterinary practice.. Vet Rec 2012;170:19.
  32. Matte AR, Khosa DK, Coe JB, Meehan MP. Impacts of the process and decision-making around companion animal euthanasia on veterinary wellbeing.. Vet Rec 2019;185:480.
  33. Adams CL, Bonnett BN, Meek AH. Predictors of owner response to companion animal death in 177 clients from 14 practices in Ontario.. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2000;217:1303-9.
  34. Matte AR, Khosa DK, Coe JB, Meehan M, Niel L. Exploring pet owners’ experiences and self-reported satisfaction and grief following companion animal euthanasia.. Vet Rec 2020;187:e122.
  35. Fernandez-Mehler P, Gloor P, Sager E, Lewis FI, Glaus TM. Veterinarians' role for pet owners facing pet loss.. Vet Rec 2013;172:555.
  36. Mason S. Palliative care in small animal oncology.. In Pract 2016;38:203-17.
  37. Murray LMA, Byrne K, D'eath RB. Pair-bonding and companion recognition in domestic donkeys, Equus asinus.. Appl Anim Behav Sci 2013;143:67-74.
  38. Burden F, Thiemann A. Donkeys are different.. J Equine Vet Sci 2015;35:376-82.
  39. Springer S, Jenner F, Tichy A, Grimm H. Austrian veterinarians' attitudes to euthanasia in equine practice.. Animals 2019;9:44.
  40. Stoewen DL, Coe JB, Macmartin C, Stone EA, E Dewey C. Qualitative study of the communication expectations of clients accessing oncology care at a tertiary referral center for dogs with life-limiting cancer.. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2014;245:785-95.
  41. Stoewen DL, Coe JB, Macmartin C, Stone EA, Dewey CE. Qualitative study of the information expectations of clients accessing oncology care at a tertiary referral center for dogs with life-limiting cancer.. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2014;245:773-83.
  42. Villagran M, Goldsmith J, Wittenberg-Lyles E, Paula Baldwin. Creating COMFORT: a communication-based model for breaking bad news.. Communi Edu 2010;59:220-34.
  43. Buckman R. Breaking bad news: the S-P-I-K-E-S strategy.. Community Oncol 2005;2:138-42.
  44. Beauchamp TL, Childress JF. Principles of biomedical ethics.. 2013.
  45. Buckman R. How to break bad news: a guide for health care professionals.. 1992.
  46. Brandt JC, Grabill CM. Communicating with special populations: children and older adults.. Vet Clin North Am Small Anim Pract 2007;37:181-98.
  47. Keller VF, Carroll JG. A new model for physician-patient communication.. Patient Educ Couns 1994;23:131-40.
  48. Gray C, Moffett J. Dealing with difficult situations.. Handbook of veterinary communication skills 2010. p. 100-26.
  49. Von Gunten CF, Ferris FD, Emanuel LL. Ensuring competency in end-of-life care: communication and relational skills.. JAMA 2000;284:3051-7.
  50. Hewson C. Grief for pets. Part 3: supporting clients.. Vet Nursing J 2015;30:26-30.
  51. Baile WF, Buckman R, Lenzi R, Glober G, Beale EA, Kudelka AP. SPIKES-A six-step protocol for delivering bad news: application to the patient with cancer.. Oncologist 2000;5:302-11.
  52. Knesl O, Hart BL, Fine AH, Cooper L, Patterson-Kane E, Houlihan KE. Veterinarians and humane endings: when is it the right time to euthanize a companion animal?. Front Vet Sci 2017;4:45.
  53. Pierce J, Shanan A. Ethical decision making in animal hospice and palliative care.. Hospice and palliative care for companion animals: principles and practice 2017. p. 57-71.
  54. Jonsen AR, Siegler M, Winslade WJ. Clinical ethics: a practical approach to ethical decisions in clinical medicine.. 2010.
  55. Bernacki RE, Block SD. Communication about serious illness care goals: a review and synthesis of best practices.. JAMA Intern Med 2014;174:1994-2003.
  56. Karlawish JHT, Quill T, Meier DE. A consensus-based approach to providing palliative care to patients who lack decision-making capacity.. Ann Intern Med 1999;130:835-40.
  57. Lummis M, Marchitelli B, Shearer T. Communication: difficult conversation in veterinary end-of-life care.. Vet Clin North Am Small Anim Pract 2020;50:607-16.
  58. Vandekieft GK. Breaking bad news.. Am Fam Physician 2001;64:1975-8.
  59. Narayanan V, Bista B, Koshy C. ‘BREAKS’ protocol for breaking bad news.. Indian J Palliat Care 2010;16:61-5.

Citations

This article has been cited 5 times.
Subscribe to our newsletter
Join 99,344 horse owners like you who receive our email updates on horse health and nutrition.