Search

Rabbits are popular pets, but research into their welfare is limited. This study analysed the potential association(s) between the provision of suitable housing and owner demographic factors.Data from 2017, 2018 and 2019 PDSA Animal Wellbeing (PAW) report surveys gave a sample of 1333 UK rabbit owners. Whether the rabbit housing was adequate or inadequate was ascertained by asking owners to indicate images of hutch and run size or indoor environment type that were similar to their own. The owner demographic factors collected included gender, education, household income and deprivation. Chi-squared tests and binary logistic regression (univariable and multivariable) were used to investigate factors associated with adequate/inadequate housing.One-third (31.2%) of rabbits lived in inadequate housing and half were housed alone (51.4%). Male owners were more likely to report providing inadequate housing than females (odds ratio [OR] = 1.795, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.319-2.441, p 0.001). Compared to owners over 55 years old, those aged 25-34 years were more likely to house their rabbits inadequately (OR = 2.050, 95% CI 1.286-3.267, p = 0.003). Owners with a household income below average were more likely to report providing inadequate housing compared to those with a household income above average (OR = 1.406, 95% CI 1.025-1.928, p = 0.035).The findings identify that inadequate rabbit housing is provided by owners of all ages, genders and deprivation levels but highlight some particular owner demographics that could be useful to target if resources are limited.

The PDSA look at the findings of their latest animal wellbeing report, and discuss what its findings mean for pet health and welfare.

Background The Five Welfare Needs in UK animal welfare legislation underpin a legal duty of care and are an animal welfare assessment framework. Health and welfare problems arise when these needs are unmet. The veterinary professions work with others to address these problems, but there is no publicly funded U.K. companion animal welfare surveillance to identify priorities, or promote and monitor change. Methods The veterinary charity, the People's Dispensary for Sick Animals (PDSA), together with the market research organisation, YouGov, has undertaken a longitudinal nationwide survey, assessing whether the U.K.'s pet dogs, cats and rabbits are having their Five Welfare Needs met. Data from nationally representative samples of pet-owning adults, drawn from YouGov's online survey panel, have been used to produce the PDSA Animal Wellbeing (PAW) Report annually since 2011. Results Examples are given of how the PAW Report has been used to monitor trends in animal welfare problems, drive collaborative behaviour change campaigns, create evidence-based funding applications and inspire innovation in veterinary practice. Conclusion The PAW Report has contributed to closing a gap in national companion animal welfare surveillance. When governments rely on non-governmental organisations to assist with animal welfare surveillance, reliable sources such as the PAW Report can inform research, policy and legislation.

Background Veterinary animal welfare advocacy can be undertaken at individual, community, national and international levels. The People’s Dispensary for Sick Animals (PDSA), a veterinary charity with 48 Pet Hospitals UK-wide, created a consultative staff network to put an explicit organisational focus on animal welfare–focused veterinary practice. Methods PDSA created a national internal committee—a Pet Wellbeing Task Force—composed of veterinary staff representatives. Together with recruited hospital-based Champions who serve as a focus for animal welfare and ethics within their clinical teams, the resulting staff network has described a vision of animal welfare and ethics within companion animal veterinary practice, with accompanying practice-level actions. These actions have formed the basis for national clinical audit, repeated three times since 2013. Results The audit, alongside targeted interventions, has driven organisational change (eg, new policies), led to measurable improvements in pet wellbeing (eg, improved pain assessment and management) and stimulated collaborative practice-based research with universities. Conclusion A dedicated staff network has facilitated organisation-wide communication on animal welfare and ethics; offered a safe space to raise and discuss animal welfare and ethical issues; and fostered leadership, by working towards model veterinary practice with respect to animal welfare and ethics, with benefits for pet patients, staff and the wider veterinary and veterinary nursing professions.