Epidemiology and clinical management of nail clipping in dogs under UK primary veterinary care.
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES
This study aimed to report the frequency, risk factors and clinical management of nail clipping in dogs under primary veterinary care across the United Kingdom during 2019 within the VetCompass Programme.
MATERIALS AND
METHODS
From a population of 2,250,741 dogs under veterinary care, 2440 nail clipping cases (3380 events) were randomly selected. Data on demographics, clinical rationale and nail details were extracted from clinical notes. A cross-sectional analysis was conducted to estimate the 1-year (2019) proportion of nail clipping and to identify associations with demographic risk factors.
RESULTS
The 1-year proportion of nail clipping was 5.64% (95% CI 5.43 to 5.86). Breeds with the highest odds for nail clipping compared to non-designer crossbreds included Chihuahua (OR 2.21, 95% CI 1.88 to 2.60), beagle (OR 2.09, 95% CI 1.54 to 2.83) and Greyhound (OR 2.02, 95% CI 1.37 to 2.97). Dogs aged (1 to 2) years had the highest odds (OR 1.61, 95% CI 1.35 to 1.92). Nail clipping was the primary reason for veterinary visits in 59.4% of events, with overgrown or ingrown nails (12.66%) and broken claws or dewclaws (8.84%) being the most common clinical justifications.
CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: The findings highlight the importance of veterinary-led nail care guidance to canine welfare, with breed-specific considerations. Further research is needed to better understand how the underlying biological and behavioural factors are affecting the variables identified here and contribute to nail clipping probability. Nail clipping should be prioritised in veterinary education and care strategies to address its clinical and welfare implications effectively due to its high frequency.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.