Analysis of 2,570 responses to Dog Aging Project End of Life Survey demonstrates that euthanasia is associated with cause of death but not age

Elizabeth B. Pearson Department of Small Animal Clinical Sciences, School of Veterinary Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX

Search for other papers by Elizabeth B. Pearson in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed Close
 DVM
,
Jessica M. Hoffman Department of Biological Sciences, College of Science and Mathematics, Augusta University, Augusta, GA

Search for other papers by Jessica M. Hoffman in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed Close
 PhD
,
Rachel L. Melvin Department of Small Animal Clinical Sciences, School of Veterinary Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX

Search for other papers by Rachel L. Melvin in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed Close
 DVM
,
Kellyn E. McNulty Department of Small Animal Clinical Sciences, School of Veterinary Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX

Search for other papers by Kellyn E. McNulty in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed Close
 DVM
,
Dog Aging Project Consortium
,
Kate E. Creevy Department of Small Animal Clinical Sciences, School of Veterinary Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX

Search for other papers by Kate E. Creevy in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed Close
 DVM, MS, DACVIM
, and
Audrey Ruple Department of Population Health Sciences, Virginia-Maryland College of Veterinary Medicine, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA

Search for other papers by Audrey Ruple in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed Close
 DVM, PhD, DACVPM
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.2460/javma.23.07.0366
Volume/Issue:
Online Early
Online Publication Date:
28 Sep 2023
Restricted access
Sign In Reprints and Permissions Purchase Article

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

The Dog Aging Project End of Life Survey was used to evaluate factors associated with manner of death (euthanasia vs unassisted death), including cause of death (CoD), reason for euthanasia (RFE) if performed, medical symptoms, old age characteristics, and perimortem quality of life (QoL).

SAMPLE

Responses collected between the End of Life Survey launch (January 20, 2021) through December 31, 2021, from 2,570 participants whose dogs died.

METHODS

Response frequencies were described. Associations between manner of death and medical symptoms or old age characteristics were evaluated using logistic regression. Factors associated with RFE were evaluated using multinomial regression. The effects of CoD, age at death, and QoL on the frequency of euthanasia as the manner of death were evaluated using multivariate logistic regression.

RESULTS

2,195 (85.4%) dogs were euthanized, and 375 (14.6%) experienced unassisted death. The most frequent owner-reported CoD was illness/disease (n = 1,495 [58.1%]). The most frequently reported RFE was pain/suffering (n = 1,080 [49.2% of those euthanized]). As age increased, RFE was more likely to be “poor QoL” than any other response. In a multivariate regression including CoD, chronologic age, and QoL, euthanasia as the manner of death was not significantly associated with age.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Euthanasia was a common manner of death for dogs in the US. Compared with unassisted death, euthanasia was associated with CoD illness/disease, lower QoL scores, and the presence and number of medical symptoms and old age characteristics. Understanding factors associated with manner of death is important to veterinarians who care for dogs at the end of life.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

The Dog Aging Project End of Life Survey was used to evaluate factors associated with manner of death (euthanasia vs unassisted death), including cause of death (CoD), reason for euthanasia (RFE) if performed, medical symptoms, old age characteristics, and perimortem quality of life (QoL).

SAMPLE

Responses collected between the End of Life Survey launch (January 20, 2021) through December 31, 2021, from 2,570 participants whose dogs died.

METHODS

Response frequencies were described. Associations between manner of death and medical symptoms or old age characteristics were evaluated using logistic regression. Factors associated with RFE were evaluated using multinomial regression. The effects of CoD, age at death, and QoL on the frequency of euthanasia as the manner of death were evaluated using multivariate logistic regression.

RESULTS

2,195 (85.4%) dogs were euthanized, and 375 (14.6%) experienced unassisted death. The most frequent owner-reported CoD was illness/disease (n = 1,495 [58.1%]). The most frequently reported RFE was pain/suffering (n = 1,080 [49.2% of those euthanized]). As age increased, RFE was more likely to be “poor QoL” than any other response. In a multivariate regression including CoD, chronologic age, and QoL, euthanasia as the manner of death was not significantly associated with age.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Euthanasia was a common manner of death for dogs in the US. Compared with unassisted death, euthanasia was associated with CoD illness/disease, lower QoL scores, and the presence and number of medical symptoms and old age characteristics. Understanding factors associated with manner of death is important to veterinarians who care for dogs at the end of life.

Supplementary Materials

    • Supplementary Material (PDF 105 KB)
    • Supplementary Table S1 (PDF 133 KB)
    • Supplementary Table S2 (PDF 115 KB)
    • Supplementary Table S3 (PDF 85 KB)
    • Supplementary Table S4 (PDF 89 KB)
    • Supplementary Table S5 (PDF 112 KB)
    • Supplementary Table S6 (PDF 114 KB)

Contributor Notes

Corresponding author: Dr. Creevy (kcreevy@tamu.edu)

Members of the Dog Aging Project Consortium are listed online (avmajournals.avma.org) as Supplementary Material accompanying this article.

Cover Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association
Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association
Publication Date:
28 Sep 2023
  • 1.

    AVMA 2022 Pet Ownership and Demographic Sourcebook. AVMA Veterinary Economics Division; 2022.

  • 2.

    Urfer SR, Kaeberlein M, Promislow DEL, Creevy KE. Lifespan of companion dogs seen in three independent primary care veterinary clinics in the United States. Canine Med Genet. 2020;7(1):7. doi:10.1186/s40575-020-00086-8

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 3.

    New JC Jr, Kelch WJ, Hutchison JM, et al. Birth and death rate estimates of cats and dogs in US households and related factors. J Appl Anim Welf Sci. 2004;7(4):229-241. doi:10.1207/s15327604jaws0704_1

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 4.

    O’Neill DG, Church DB, McGreevy PD, Thomson PC, Brodbelt DC. Longevity and mortality of owned dogs in England. Vet J. 2013;198(3):638-643. doi:10.1016/j.tvjl.2013.09.020

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 5.

    McNulty KE, Creevy KE, Fitzpatrick A, et al. Development and validation of a novel instrument to capture companion dog mortality data: the Dog Aging Project End of Life Survey. J Am Vet Med Assoc. 2023;261(9):1326-1336. doi:10.2460/javma.23.02.0078

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 6.

    AVMA 2012 Pet Ownership and Demographic Sourcebook. AVMA Veterinary Economics Division; 2012.

  • 7.

    AVMA Pet Ownership and Demographics Sourcebook: 2017-2018 Edition. AVMA Veterinary Economics Division; 2018.

  • 8.

    Ruple A, Jones M, Simpson M, Page R. The Golden Retriever Lifetime Study: assessing factors associated with owner compliance after the first year of enrollment. J Vet Intern Med. 2021;35(1):142-149. doi:10.1111/jvim.15921

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 9.

    Parslow RA, Jorm AF, Christensen H, Rodgers B, Jacomb P. Pet ownership and health in older adults: findings from a survey of 2,551 community-based Australians aged 60-64. Gerontology. 2005;51(1):40-47. doi:10.1159/000081433

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 10.

    Tzivian L, Friger M, Kushnir T. Associations between stress and quality of life: differences between owners keeping a living dog or losing a dog by euthanasia. PLoS One. 2015;10(3):e0121081. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0121081

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 11.

    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(9):1303-1309. doi:10.2460/javma.2000.217.1303

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 12.

    Archer J, Winchester G. Bereavement following death of a pet. Br J Psychol. 1994;85(pt 2):259-271. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8295.1994.tb02522.x

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 13.

    Gosse GH. Factors Associated with the Human Grief Experience as a Result of the Death of a Pet. Hofstra University; 1988.

  • 14.

    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(1):95-108. doi:10.1016/j.cvsm.2006.09.010

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 15.

    Dickinson GE, Roof PD, Roof KW. A survey of veterinarians in the US: euthanasia and other end-of-life issues. Anthrozoos. 2011;24(2):167-174. doi:10.2752/175303711X12998632257666

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 16.

    Hutton VE. Animal euthanasia - empathic care or empathic distress? Vet Rec. 2019;185(15):477-479. doi:10.1136/vr.l5718

  • 17.

    Tran L, Crane MF, Phillips JK. The distinct role of performing euthanasia on depression and suicide in veterinarians. J Occup Health Psychol. 2014;19(2):123-132. doi:10.1037/a0035837

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 18.

    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(15):480. doi:10.1136/vr.105540

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 19.

    Mitchener KL, Ogilvie GK. Understanding compassion fatigue: keys for the caring veterinary healthcare team. J Am Anim Hosp Assoc. 2002;38(4):307-310. doi:10.5326/0380307

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 20.

    The Whoqol Group. The World Health Organization quality of life assessment (WHOQOL): development and general psychometric properties. Soc Sci Med. 1998;46(12):1569-1585. doi:10.1016/S0277-9536(98)00009-4

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 21.

    Costanza R, Fisher B, Ali S, et al. Quality of life: an approach integrating opportunities, human needs, and subjective well-being. Ecol Econ. 2007;61(2-3):267-276. doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2006.02.023

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 22.

    Barcaccia B, Esposito G, Matarese M, Bertolaso M, Elvira M, De Marinis MG. Defining quality of life: a wild-goose chase? Eur J Psychol. 2013;9(1):185-203. doi:10.5964/ejop.v9i1.484

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 23.

    Creevy KE, Akey JM, Kaeberlein M, et al.; Dog Aging Project Consortium. An open science study of ageing in companion dogs. Nature. 2022;602(7895):51-57. doi:10.1038/s41586-021-04282-9

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 24.

    The Dog Aging Project. Accessed August 14, 2023. https://dogagingproject.org/

  • 25.

    Dog Aging Project End of Life survey instruments. Github. https://github.com/dogagingproject/dataRelease/blob/master/Survey_Instruments/EOLS/DAP_EOLS.pdf

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 26.

    Harris PA, Taylor R, Thielke R, Payne J, Gonzalez N, Conde JG. Research electronic data capture (REDCap)-a metadata-driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support. J Biomed Inform. 2009;42(2):377-381. doi:10.1016/j.jbi.2008.08.010

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 27.

    Harris PA, Taylor R, Minor BL, et al.; REDCap Consortium. The REDCap Consortium: building an international community of software platform partners. J Biomed Inform. 2019;95:103208. doi:10.1016/j.jbi.2019.103208

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 28.

    Dog Aging Project. HLES Github. Accessed August 15, 2023. https://github.com/dogagingproject/dataRelease/tree/master/Survey_Instruments/HLES

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 29.

    Dog Aging Project - 2022 Curated Data Open Access Release. Terra. https://app.terra.bio/

  • 30.

    Greer KA, Canterberry SC, Murphy KE. Statistical analysis regarding the effects of height and weight on life span of the domestic dog. Res Vet Sci. 2007;82(2):208-214. doi:10.1016/j.rvsc.2006.06.005

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 31.

    Creevy KE, Grady J, Little SE, et al. 2019 AAHA Canine Life Stage Guidelines. J Am Anim Hosp Assoc. 2019;55(6):267-290. doi:10.5326/JAAHA-MS-6999

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 32.

    R Core Team. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Version 4.2.1. Accessed August 15, 2022. https://www.R-project.org/

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 33.

    Venables WN, Ripley BD, Venables WN. Modern Applied Statistics with S. 4th ed. Springer; 2002. doi:10.1007/978-0-387-21706-2

  • 34.

    Reid J, Wiseman-Orr ML, Scott EM, Nolan AM. Development, validation and reliability of a web-based questionnaire to measure health-related quality of life in dogs. J Small Anim Pract. 2013;54(5):227-233. doi:10.1111/jsap.12059

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 35.

    Wiseman-Orr ML, Scott EM, Reid J, Nolan AM. Validation of a structured questionnaire as an instrument to measure chronic pain in dogs on the basis of effects on health-related quality of life. Am J Vet Res. 2006;67(11):1826-1836. doi:10.2460/ajvr.67.11.1826

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 36.

    Lavan RP. Development and validation of a survey for quality of life assessment by owners of healthy dogs. Vet J. 2013;197(3):578-582. doi:10.1016/j.tvjl.2013.03.021

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 37.

    Brown DC, Boston RC, Coyne JC, Farrar JT. Ability of the canine brief pain inventory to detect response to treatment in dogs with osteoarthritis. J Am Vet Med Assoc. 2008;233(8):1278-1283. doi:10.2460/javma.233.8.1278

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 38.

    Iliopoulou MA, Kitchell BE, Yuzbasiyan-Gurkan V. Development of a survey instrument to assess health-related quality of life in small animal cancer patients treated with chemotherapy. J Am Vet Med Assoc. 2013;242(12):1679-1687. doi:10.2460/javma.242.12.1679

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 39.

    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(3):591-605. doi:10.1016/j.cvsm.2019.12.008

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 40.

    Carnes BA, Olshansky SJ. A biologically motivated partitioning of mortality. Exp Gerontol. 1997;32(6):615-631. doi:10.1016/S0531-5565(97)00056-9

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 41.

    Freeman LM, Rush JE, Farabaugh AE, Must A. Development and evaluation of a questionnaire for assessing health-related quality of life in dogs with cardiac disease. J Am Vet Med Assoc. 2005;226(11):1864-1868. doi:10.2460/javma.2005.226.1864

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 42.

    Edney ATB. Reasons for the euthanasia of dogs and cats. Vet Rec. 1998;143(4):114. doi:10.1136/vr.143.4.114

  • 43.

    Pegram C, Gray C, Packer RMA, et al. Proportion and risk factors for death by euthanasia in dogs in the UK. Sci Rep. 2021;11(1):9145. doi:10.1038/s41598-021-88342-0

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 44.

    Gray C, Radford A. Using electronic health records to explore negotiations around euthanasia decision making for dogs and cats in the UK. Vet Rec. 2022;190(9):e1379. doi:10.1002/vetr.1379

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 45.

    Ryan S, Bacon H, Endenburg N, et al. WSAVA Animal Welfare Guidelines for companion animal practitioners and veterinary teams. World Small Animal Veterinary Association. Accessed June 11, 2023. https://wsava.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/WSAVA-Animal-Welfare-Guidelines-2018.pdf

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 46.

    How do I know when it’s time? Assessing quality of life for your companion animal and making end-of-life decisions. The Ohio State University Veterinary Medical Center. Accessed June 11, 2023. https://vet.osu.edu/vmc/sites/default/files/import/assets/pdf/hospital/companionAnimals/HonoringtheBond/HowDoIKnowWhen.pdf

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

Advertisement