• 1.

    Brown DC, Boston RC & Coyne JC, et al. Development and psychometric testing of an instrument designed to measure chronic pain in dogs with osteoarthritis. Am J Vet Res 2007;68:631637.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 2.

    Brown DC. Sources and handling of losses to follow-up in parallel-group randomized clinical trials in dogs and cats: 63 trials (2000–2005). Am J Vet Res 2007;68:694698.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 3.

    Wiseman ML, Nolan AM & Reid J, et al. Preliminary study on owner-reported behaviour changes associated with chronic pain in dogs. Vet Rec 2001;149:423424.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 4.

    Wiseman-Orr ML, Nolan AM & Reid J, et al. Development of a questionnaire to measure the effects of chronic pain on health-related quality of life in dogs. Am J Vet Res 2004;65:10771084.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 5.

    Wiseman-Orr ML, Scott EM & Reid J, et al. 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;67:18261836.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 6.

    Segurson SA, Serpell JA, Hart BL. Evaluation of a behavioral assessment questionnaire for use in the characterization of behavioral problems of dogs relinquished to animal shelters. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2005;227:17551761.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 7.

    Hsu Y, Serpell JA. Development and validation of a questionnaire for measuring behavior and temperament traits in pet dogs. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2003;223:12931300.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 8.

    Hudson JT, Slater MR & Taylor L, et al. Assessing repeatability and validity of a visual analogue scale questionnaire for use in assessing pain and lameness in dogs. Am J Vet Res 2004;65:16341643.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 9.

    Kapatkin AS, Tomasic M & Beech J, et al. Effects of electrostimulated acupuncture on ground reaction forces and pain scores in dogs with chronic elbow joint arthritis. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2006;228:13501354.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 10.

    Robinson DA, Mason DR & Evans R, et al. The effect of tibial plateau angle on ground reaction forces 4–17 months after tibial plateau leveling osteotomy in Labrador Retrievers. Vet Surg 2006;35:294299.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 11.

    Dahlberg J, Fitch G & McClure SR, et al. The evaluation of extracorporeal shockwave therapy in naturally occurring osteoarthritis of the stifle in dogs. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2005;18:147152.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 12.

    Innes JF, Fuller CJ & Grover ER, et al. Randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled parallel group study of P54FP for the treatment of dogs with osteoarthritis. Vet Rec 2003;152:457460.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 13.

    Lipscomb VJ, AliAbadi FS & Lees P, et al. Clinical efficacy and pharmacokinetics of carprofen in the treatment of dogs with osteoarthritis. Vet Rec 2002;150:684689.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 14.

    Moreau M, Dupuis J & Bonneau NH, et al. Clinical evaluation of a nutraceutical, carprofen and meloxicam for the treatment of dogs with osteoarthritis. Vet Rec 2003;152:323329.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 15.

    Moreau M, Dupuis J & Bonneau NH, et al. Clinical evaluation of a powder of quality elk velvet antler for the treatment of osteoarthrosis in dogs. Can Vet J 2004;45:133139.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 16.

    Vasseur PB, Johnson AL & Budsberg SC, et al. Randomized, controlled trial of the efficacy of carprofen, a nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drug, in the treatment of osteoarthritis in dogs. J Am Vet Med Assoc 1995;206:807811.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 17.

    Siwak CT, Murphey HL & Muggenburg BA, et al. Age-dependent decline in locomotor activity in dogs is environment specific. Physiol Behav 2002;75:6570.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 18.

    Siwak CT, Tapp PD, Milgram NW. Effect of age and level of cognitive function on spontaneous and exploratory behaviors in the Beagle dog. Learn Mem 2001;8:317325.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 19.

    Siwak CT, Tapp PD & Zicker SC, et al. Locomotor activity rhythms in dogs vary with age and cognitive status. Behav Neurosci 2003;117:813824.

  • 20.

    Hansen BD, Lascelles BD & Keene BW, et al. Evaluation of an accelerometer for at-home monitoring of spontaneous activity in dogs. Am J Vet Res 2007;68:468475.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 21.

    Nuttall T, McEwan N. Objective measurement of pruritus in dogs: a preliminary study using activity monitors. Vet Dermatol 2006;17:348351.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 22.

    Dow C, Michel KE & Love M, et al. Evaluation of optimal sampling interval for activity monitoring in companion dogs. Am J Vet Res 2009;70:444448.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 23.

    Brown DC, Boston RC & Coyne JC, et al. Ability of the canine brief pain inventory to detect response to treatment in dogs with osteoarthritis. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2008;233:12781283.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 24.

    Senn SJaRAB. Estimating treatment effects in clinical trials subject to regression to the mean. Biometrics 1985;41:555559.

  • 25.

    Barnett AG, van der Pols JC, Dobson AJ. Regression to the mean: what it is and how to deal with it. Int J Epidemiol 2005;34:215220.

  • 26.

    Brown DC. Control of selection bias in parallel-group controlled clinical trials in dogs and cats: 97 trials (2000–2005). J Am Vet Med Assoc 2006;229:990993.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 27.

    Brown DC, Michel KE & Love M, et al. Evaluation of the effect of signalment and body conformation on activity monitoring in companion dogs. Am J Vet Res 2010;71:322325.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

Use of an activity monitor to detect response to treatment in dogs with osteoarthritis

Dorothy Cimino Brown DVM, MSCE, DACVS1, Raymond C. Boston PhD2, and John T. Farrar MD, PhD3
View More View Less
  • 1 Department of Clinical Studies–Philadelphia, School of Veterinary Medicine and Center for Clinical Epidemiology & Biostatistics, School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104.
  • | 2 Center for Clinical Epidemiology & Biostatistics, School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104.
  • | 3 Center for Clinical Epidemiology & Biostatistics, School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104.

Abstract

Objective—To determine whether an activity monitor (AM) could be used to detect changes in activity in dogs with osteoarthritis treated with carprofen or a placebo.

Design—Randomized controlled trial.

Animals—70 dogs with no clinically important abnormalities other than osteoarthritis for which they were not currently being treated.

Procedures—Dogs wore an AM continuously for 21 days. On days 8 through 21, the dogs were treated with carprofen (n = 35) or a placebo (35). Total activity counts for days 1 through 7 (baseline) were compared with total activity counts for days 15 through 21 (endpoint). The change in total activity count from baseline to endpoint was assessed within each treatment group as well as between groups. Linear regression analysis was performed to test for an association between treatment and percentage change in activity counts while controlling for other variables.

Results—For placebo-treated dogs, median baseline total activity count was not significantly different from median endpoint total activity count (1,378,408 vs 1,310,112, respectively). For dogs receiving carprofen, there was a significant increase in median activity count from baseline to endpoint (1,276,427 vs 1,374,133). When age and baseline activity counts were controlled for, dogs in the carpofen-treated group had a 20% increase in activity counts, compared with placebo-treated dogs (95% confidence interval, 10% to 26%).

Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—Results suggested that the AM used in the present study may be a valid outcome assessment tool for documenting improved activity associated with treatment in dogs with osteoarthritis.

Abstract

Objective—To determine whether an activity monitor (AM) could be used to detect changes in activity in dogs with osteoarthritis treated with carprofen or a placebo.

Design—Randomized controlled trial.

Animals—70 dogs with no clinically important abnormalities other than osteoarthritis for which they were not currently being treated.

Procedures—Dogs wore an AM continuously for 21 days. On days 8 through 21, the dogs were treated with carprofen (n = 35) or a placebo (35). Total activity counts for days 1 through 7 (baseline) were compared with total activity counts for days 15 through 21 (endpoint). The change in total activity count from baseline to endpoint was assessed within each treatment group as well as between groups. Linear regression analysis was performed to test for an association between treatment and percentage change in activity counts while controlling for other variables.

Results—For placebo-treated dogs, median baseline total activity count was not significantly different from median endpoint total activity count (1,378,408 vs 1,310,112, respectively). For dogs receiving carprofen, there was a significant increase in median activity count from baseline to endpoint (1,276,427 vs 1,374,133). When age and baseline activity counts were controlled for, dogs in the carpofen-treated group had a 20% increase in activity counts, compared with placebo-treated dogs (95% confidence interval, 10% to 26%).

Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—Results suggested that the AM used in the present study may be a valid outcome assessment tool for documenting improved activity associated with treatment in dogs with osteoarthritis.

Contributor Notes

Supported by National Institutes of Health Grant No. 1-K08-DA-017720-02.

The authors thank Molly Love for technical assistance.

Address correspondence to Dr. Brown (dottie@vet.upenn.edu).