Despite scratching behavior in owned domestic cats being a self-motivated and natural behavior, it is commonly reported as a behavior problem by owners when it results in damage to household items. The objectives of this study were to use a cross-sectional survey targeting cat owners within the United States and Canada, to explore perspectives on cat scratching behavior and management strategies, as well as identify factors that influence the performance of inappropriate scratching behavior in the household. A total of 2465 cat owners participated in the survey and three mixed logistic regression models were generated to explore associations between (1) cat demographic factors, (2) provisions of enrichment, and (3) owner demographic and management factors with owner reports of problematic scratching. In this convenience sample, inappropriate scratching was reported by 58% of cat owners. Owner perspectives and management strategies aligned with current recommendations as they preferred to use appropriate surfaces (e.g., cat trees) and training to manage scratching as opposed to surrendering, euthanizing, or declawing. Logistic regression results found fewer reports of unwanted scratching behavior if owners provide enrichment (flat scratching surfaces (p = 0.037), sisal rope (p < 0.0001), and outdoor access (p = 0.01)), reward the use of appropriate scratching objects (p = 0.007), apply attractant to preferred items (p < 0.0001), restrict access to unwanted items (p < 0.0001), provide additional scratching posts (p < 0.0001), and if their cat is 7 years of age or older (p < 0.00001). Whereas if owners use verbal (p < 0.0001) or physical correction (p = 0.007) there were higher reports of unwanted scratching. Results suggest that damage to household items from scratching behavior is related to management strategies owners employ, and these findings can be used to support owner education in mitigation and prevention of inappropriate scratching.
Veterinary care can be a source of stress for domestic dogs and their owners. If a dog owner is not satisfied with the veterinary experience, this may reduce the frequency of veterinary visits and negatively impact a dog’s health and welfare. Allowing dog owners to offer their perspectives on aspects of the veterinary appointment may help improve owner satisfaction. We assessed owner agreement towards 13 recommended handling techniques used on dogs during routine veterinary appointments, when the participants’ dog was calm, fearful, or aggressive. An online cross-sectional survey targeting current dog owners, residing in Canada and the United States, was used to examine the influence of participant’s pet attachment (using the Lexington Attachment to Pets Scale (LAPS)) and demographic information (age, gender, experience working in the veterinary field) on owner agreement towards the handling techniques. The majority of participants (N = 1176) disagreed with higher restraint techniques (e.g., full body restraint, muzzle hold) and tools (e.g., dog mask), and agreed with lower restraint techniques (e.g., minimal restraint) regardless of dog demeanor. Logistic regression models revealed that for medium/large dog owners, having previous veterinary work experience resulted in lower agreement with the use of minimal restraint (p < 0.0001) and higher agreement with the use of full body restraint on fearful dogs (p = 0.01). Small dog owners were more likely to agree with the use of minimal restraint on fearful dogs if they had a higher pet attachment score (p < 0.001), and were more likely to agree with full body restraint if they had previous veterinary work experience (p < 0.0001) or were male (p = 0.02). Owner perspectives align with current handling recommendations and provide further support for the use of low stress handling methods to improve owner satisfaction and dog welfare during routine veterinary care.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.