• 1.

    Duncan IJH. The changing concept of animal sentience. Appl Anim Behav Sci 2006;100:1119.

  • 2.

    Molony V, Kent JE. Assessment of acute pain in farm animals using behavioral and physiological measurements. J Anim Sci 1997;75:266272.

  • 3.

    Molony V, Kent JE, Robertson IS. Assessment of acute and chronic pain after different methods of castration of calves. Appl Anim Behav Sci 1995;46:3348.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 4.

    Anil SS, Anil L, Deen J. Challenges of pain assessment in domestic animals. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2002;220:313319.

  • 5.

    Rutherford K. Assessing pain in animals. Anim Welf 2002;11:3153.

  • 6.

    Weary DM, Niel L, Flower FC, et al. Identifying and preventing pain in animals. Appl Anim Behav Sci 2006;100:6476.

  • 7.

    Hudson C, Whay H, Huxley J. Recognition and management of pain in cattle. In Pract 2008;30:126134.

  • 8.

    Sneddon LU, Elwood RW, Adamo SA, et al. Defining and assessing animal pain. Anim Behav 2014;97:201212.

  • 9.

    AVMA. Castration and dehorning of cattle. Available at: www.avma.org/KB/Policies/Pages/Castration-and-Dehorning-of-Cattle.aspx. Accessed Jun 19, 2019.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 10.

    Collier RJ, Doelger SG, Head HH, et al. Effects of heat stress during pregnancy on maternal hormone concentrations, calf birth weight and postpartum milk yield of Holstein cows. J Anim Sci 1982;54:309319.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 11.

    Sordillo LM, Aitken SL. Impact of oxidative stress on the health and immune function of dairy cattle. Vet Immunol Immunopathol 2009;128:104109.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 12.

    Warnick LD, Janssen D, Guard CL, et al. The effect of lameness on milk production in dairy cows. J Dairy Sci 2001;84:19881997.

  • 13.

    West JW. Effects of heat-stress on production in dairy cattle. J Dairy Sci 2003;86:21312144.

  • 14.

    Tao S, Monteiro APA, Thompson IM, et al. Effect of late-gestation maternal heat stress on growth and immune function of dairy calves. J Dairy Sci 2012;95:71287136.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 15.

    Lyles JL, Calvo-Lorenzo MS, Bill E. Kunkle Interdisciplinary Beef Symposium: practical developments in managing animal welfare in beef cattle: what does the future hold? J Anim Sci 2014;92:53345344.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 16.

    Endres MI, Schwartzkopf-Genswein K. Overview of cattle production systems. In: Tucker CB, ed. Advances in cattle welfare. Cambridge, England: Woodhead Publishing, 2018;126.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 17.

    Coetzee JF, Gehring R, Tarus-Sang J, et al. Effect of sub-anesthetic xylazine and ketamine (“ketamine stun”) administered to calves immediately prior to castration. Vet Anaesth Analg 2010;37:566578.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 18.

    Heinrich A, Duffield TF, Lissemore KD, et al. The effect of meloxicam on behavior and pain sensitivity of dairy calves following cautery dehorning with a local anesthetic. J Dairy Sci 2010;93:24502457.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 19.

    Faulkner PM, Weary DM. Reducing pain after dehorning in dairy calves. J Dairy Sci 2000;83:20372041.

  • 20.

    Graf B, Senn M. Behavioural and physiological responses of calves to dehorning by heat cauterization with or without local anaesthesia. Appl Anim Behav Sci 1999;62:153171.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 21.

    Grøndahl-Nielsen C, Simonsen HB, Damkjer Lund J, et al. Behavioural, endocrine and cardiac responses in young calves undergoing dehorning without and with use of sedation and analgesia. Vet J 1999;158:1420.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 22.

    Stewart M, Stafford KJ, Dowling SK, et al. Eye temperature and heart rate variability of calves disbudded with or without local anaesthetic. Physiol Behav 2008;93:789797.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 23.

    Petrie NJ, Mellor DJ, Stafford KJ, et al. Cortisol responses of calves to two methods of disbudding used with or without local anaesthetic. N Z Vet J 1996;44:914.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 24.

    Sutherland MA, Mellor DJ, Stafford KJ, et al. Cortisol responses to dehorning of calves given a 5-h local anaesthetic regimen plus phenylbutazone, ketoprofen, or adrenocorticotropic hormone prior to dehorning. Res Vet Sci 2002;73:115123.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 25.

    Heinrich A, Duffield TF, Lissemore KD, et al. The impact of meloxicam on postsurgical stress associated with cautery dehorning. J Dairy Sci 2009;92:540547.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 26.

    McMeekan C, Stafford KJ, Mellor DJ, et al. Effects of a local anaesthetic and a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory analgesic on the behavioural responses of calves to dehorning. N Z Vet J 1999;47:9296.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 27.

    Stewart M, Stookey JM, Stafford KJ, et al. Effects of local anesthetic and a nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drug on pain responses of dairy calves to hot-iron dehorning. J Dairy Sci 2009;92:15121519.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 28.

    Morisse JP, Cotte JP, Huonnic D. Effect of dehorning on behaviour and plasma cortisol responses in young calves. Appl Anim Behav Sci 1995;43:239247.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 29.

    Coetzee JF, Lubbers BV, Toerber SE, et al. Plasma concentrations of substance P and cortisol in beef calves after castration or simulated castration. Am J Vet Res 2008;69:751762.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 30.

    Whay HR. Lameness and pain in dairy cows: does it hurt and does it matter? in Proceedings. 1st Reg Conf Cow Comfort and Lameness (RCCCL) 2016;107112.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 31.

    Flower FC, Sedlbauer M, Carter E, et al. Analgesics improve the gait of lame dairy cattle. J Dairy Sci 2008;91:30103014.

  • 32.

    Leslie KE, Petersson-Wolfe CS. Assessment and management of pain in dairy cows with clinical mastitis. Vet Clin North Am Food Anim Pract 2012;28:289305.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 33.

    Hewson CJ, Dohoo IR, Lemke KA, et al. Canadian veterinarians' use of analgesics in cattle, pigs, and horses in 2004 and 2005. Can Vet J 2007;48:155164.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 34.

    Gleerup KB, Andersen PH, Munksgaard L, et al. Pain evaluation in dairy cattle. Appl Anim Behav Sci 2015;171:2532.

  • 35.

    Coetzee JF, Nutsch AL, Barbur LA, et al. A survey of castration methods and associated livestock management practices performed by bovine veterinarians in the United States. BMC Vet Res 2010;6:12.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 36.

    Earley B, Crowe MA. Effects of ketoprofen alone or in combination with local anesthesia during the castration of bull calves on plasma cortisol, immunological, and inflammatory responses. J Anim Sci 2002;80:10441052.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 37.

    Wood G, Molony V. Welfare aspects of castration and tail docking of lambs. In Pract 1992;14:27.

  • 38.

    Fajt VR, Wagner SA, Norby B. Analgesic drug administration and attitudes about analgesia in cattle among bovine practitioners in the United States. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2011;238:755767.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 39.

    Remnant JG, Tremlett A, Huxley JN, et al. Clinician attitudes to pain and use of analgesia in cattle: where are we 10 years on? Vet Rec 2017;181:400.

  • 40.

    Hewson CJ, Dohoo IR, Lemke KA, et al. Factors affecting Canadian veterinarians' use of analgesics when dehorning beef and dairy calves. Can Vet J 2007;48:11291136.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 41.

    Huxley JN, Whay HR. Current attitudes of cattle practitioners to pain and the use of analgesics in cattle. Vet Rec 2006;159:662668.

  • 42.

    United States Regions. Available at: www.nationalgeographic.org/maps/united-states-regions/Accessed Feb 18, 2018.

  • 43.

    Allen KA, Coetzee JF, Edwards-Callaway LN, et al. The effect of timing of oral meloxicam administration on physiological responses in calves after cautery dehorning with local anesthesia. J Dairy Sci 2013;96:51945205.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 44.

    Thomsen PT, Gidekull M, Herskin MS, et al. Scandinavian bovine practitioners' attitudes to the use of analgesics in cattle. Vet Rec 2010;167:256258.

  • 45.

    Laven RA, Huxley JN, Whay HR, et al. Results of a survey of attitudes of dairy veterinarians in New Zealand regarding painful procedures and conditions in cattle. N Z Vet J 2009;57:215220.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 46.

    Martin MS, Grau SA, Rutherford BW, et al. Survey of cow-calf producer perspectives on management strategies and industry challenges. Part 1: handling practices, and health and industry challenges. Transl Anim Sci 2018;3:195203.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 47.

    Winder CB, LeBlanc SJ, Haley DB, et al. Practices for the disbudding and dehorning of dairy calves by veterinarians and dairy producers in Ontario, Canada. J Dairy Sci 2016;99:1016110173.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 48.

    Misch LJ, Duffield TF, Millman ST, et al. An investigation into the practices of dairy producers and veterinarians in dehorning dairy calves in Ontario. Can Vet J 2007;48:12491254.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 49.

    Paul ES, Podberscek AL. Veterinary education and students' attitudes towards animal welfare. Vet Rec 2000;146:269272.

  • 50.

    Hazel SJ, Signal TD, Taylor N. Can teaching veterinary and animal-science students about animal welfare affect their attitude toward animals and human-related empathy? J Vet Med Educ 2011;38:7483.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 51.

    Heleski CR, Mertig AG, Zanella AJ. Assessing attitudes toward farm animal welfare: a national survey of animal science faculty members. J Anim Sci 2004;82:28062814.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 52.

    Wikman I, Hokkanen AH, Pastell M, et al. Dairy producer attitudes to pain in cattle in relation to disbudding calves. J Dairy Sci 2013;96:68946903.

  • 53.

    Moggy MA, Pajor EA, Thurston WE, et al. Management practices associated with pain in cattle on western Canadian cow-calf operations: a mixed methods study. J Anim Sci 2017;95:958969.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 54.

    Lee BH. Managing pain in human neonates—applications for animals. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2002;221:233237.

  • 55.

    Taddio A, Katz J, Ilersich AL, et al. Effect of neonatal circumcision on pain response during subsequent routine vaccination. Lancet 1997;349:599603.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 56.

    Walker JB, Cook NB, Tucker CB, et al. Dairy Cattle Animal Welfare Audit Program. Dallas: Dean Foods Co, 2017;3641.

  • 57.

    Saputo Animal Welfare Policy. Available at: www.saputo.com/en/our-promise/responsible-sourcing/animal-welfare. Accessed Dec 9, 2019.

  • 58.

    Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs. Code of Recommendations for the Welfare of Livestock: Cattle. London: Defra Publications 2003;3031.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 59.

    Extralabel drug use in animals. 21 CFR 530.

  • 60.

    FDA. Animal Medicinal Drug Use Clarification Act of 1994 (AMDUCA). Available at: www.fda.gov/animal-veterinary/acts-rules-regulations/animal-medicinal-drug-use-clarification-act-1994-amduca. Accessed Jun 10, 2019.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 61.

    Friton GM, Cajal C, Ramirez-Romero R. Long-term effects of meloxicam in the treatment of respiratory disease in fattening cattle. Vet Rec 2005;156:809811.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 62.

    Theurer ME, White BJ, Coetzee JF, et al. Assessment of behavioral changes associated with oral meloxicam administration at time of dehorning in calves using a remote triangulation device and accelerometers. BMC Vet Res 2012;8:48.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 63.

    Health Canada. Drug Product database. Available at: www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/drugs-health-products/drug-products/drug-product-database.html. Accessed Jun 13 2019.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 64.

    Adcock SJJ, Tucker CB. Painful procedures: when and what should we be measuring in cattle? In: Tucker CB, ed. Advances in cattle welfare. Cambridge, England: Woodhead Publishing, 2018;157198.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 65.

    American Association of Bovine Practitioners. Dehorning Guidelines. Available at: www.aabp.org/Resources/AABP_Guidelines/Dehorning-2019.pdf. Accessed Dec 20, 2019.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 66.

    Stafford KJ, Mellor DJ. Addressing the pain associated with disbudding and dehorning in cattle. Appl Anim Behav Sci 2011;135:226231.

  • 67.

    Stock ML, Baldridge SL, Griffin D, et al. Bovine dehorning: assessing pain and providing analgesic management. Vet Clin North Am Food Anim Pract 2013;29:103133.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 68.

    AVMA. Pain in animals. Available at: www.avma.org/KB/Policies/Pages/Pain-in-Animals.aspx. Accessed Jul 2, 2019.

Advertisement

Current attitudes of veterinarians and producers regarding the use of local and systemic analgesia in beef and dairy cattle in the United States

Elizabeth C. S. JohnstoneFrom the Department of Animal Sciences, College of Agricultural Sciences, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80523

Search for other papers by Elizabeth C. S. Johnstone in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
 MS
,
Johann F. CoetzeeFrom the Department of Anatomy and Physiology and Institute of Computational Comparative Medicine, College of Veterinary Medicine, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS 66506

Search for other papers by Johann F. Coetzee in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
 BVSc, PhD
,
Pablo J. PinedoFrom the Department of Anatomy and Physiology and Institute of Computational Comparative Medicine, College of Veterinary Medicine, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS 66506

Search for other papers by Pablo J. Pinedo in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
 DVM, PhD
, and
Lily Edwards-CallawayFrom the Department of Animal Sciences, College of Agricultural Sciences, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80523

Search for other papers by Lily Edwards-Callaway in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
 PhD

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To survey cattle producers and veterinarians about the use of analgesia on US cattle operations.

SAMPLE

1,187 members of the following database, electronic mailing lists, and social media groups: FarmProgress master file, American Association of Bovine Practitioners, Academy of Veterinary Consultants, National Milk Producers Federation Farm Evaluators, Dairy Moms Facebook group, and Dairy Girl Network Facebook group.

PROCEDURES

An online survey was developed to gather information about the frequency of local and systemic analgesia use for common painful procedures and diseases in cattle < 2, 2 to 12, and > 12 months old. Respondents also rated their extent of agreement with each of 10 statements related to pain management in cattle. The survey was available from June 11 to August 10, 2018. Descriptive data were generated. Logistic regression was used for comparisons among cattle age groups and respondents on the basis of their industry role.

RESULTS

In general, frequency of analgesia use increased as cattle age increased, regardless of the procedure or disease. The odds of analgesia use were lower for men, compared with women, and greater for veterinarians, compared with producers. Many respondents indicated they were cognizant of the benefits of analgesia use in cattle but perceived federal regulations and drug costs as impediments to the implementation of pain mitigation protocols on cattle operations.

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Results provided insight into current perceptions and use of analgesia in cattle, which can be used to guide implementation of pain mitigation protocols on US beef and dairy cattle operations.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To survey cattle producers and veterinarians about the use of analgesia on US cattle operations.

SAMPLE

1,187 members of the following database, electronic mailing lists, and social media groups: FarmProgress master file, American Association of Bovine Practitioners, Academy of Veterinary Consultants, National Milk Producers Federation Farm Evaluators, Dairy Moms Facebook group, and Dairy Girl Network Facebook group.

PROCEDURES

An online survey was developed to gather information about the frequency of local and systemic analgesia use for common painful procedures and diseases in cattle < 2, 2 to 12, and > 12 months old. Respondents also rated their extent of agreement with each of 10 statements related to pain management in cattle. The survey was available from June 11 to August 10, 2018. Descriptive data were generated. Logistic regression was used for comparisons among cattle age groups and respondents on the basis of their industry role.

RESULTS

In general, frequency of analgesia use increased as cattle age increased, regardless of the procedure or disease. The odds of analgesia use were lower for men, compared with women, and greater for veterinarians, compared with producers. Many respondents indicated they were cognizant of the benefits of analgesia use in cattle but perceived federal regulations and drug costs as impediments to the implementation of pain mitigation protocols on cattle operations.

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Results provided insight into current perceptions and use of analgesia in cattle, which can be used to guide implementation of pain mitigation protocols on US beef and dairy cattle operations.

Supplementary Materials

    • Supplementary Appendix S1 (PDF 832 KB)

Contributor Notes

Address correspondence to Dr. Edwards-Callaway (lily.edwards-callaway@colostate.edu).