Consideration of the human-animal bond typically focuses on the benefits of companion animals to human health and well-being, but it is essential that in realizing these benefits the welfare needs of the animals, both physical and mental, are also met. Positive emotional relationships with animals are likely to increase recognition of animal sentience and so help create positive attitudes toward animals at the societal level, but, at the individual level, the animals to which humans are bonded should also benefit from the human-animal relationship. A strong human-animal bond may benefit animal welfare (e.g., by motivating an owner to commit time and funds to necessary veterinary medical treatment), but may also be the source of compromised welfare. Highly bonded owners may, for example, be reluctant to permit euthanasia on humane grounds, and the anthropomorphic nature of many human-companion animal bonds can contribute to the development of problem behaviors and obesity. The challenge for the veterinary profession is to ensure that widespread positive sentiment toward animals, which the human-animal bond generates, is translated in to human behavior and actions that are conducive to good animal welfare. This, it is suggested, can be achieved through adequate veterinary education in veterinary and animal welfare science, ethics, and communication.

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 nongovernmental organisations to assist with animal welfare surveillance, reliable sources such as the PAW Report can inform research, policy and legislation.This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non-commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.

BackgroundVeterinary 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.MethodsPDSA 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.ResultsThe 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.ConclusionA 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.

OBJECTIVESA novel practice-based scheme monitors quality of life (QOL) in pets by assessing the five welfare needs using a 'traffic light' system and identifying improvement actions that owners can implement. The change in QOL of cats and dogs between first and second assessment consultations was analysed. METHODSData from assessment consultations for cats and dogs were collected at 51 PDSA Pet Hospitals. All animals had a first consult (PW1) and some had a second (PW2). Data included the score (red, amber or green) for each of the welfare needs categories -environment, diet, behaviour, companionship and health. Improvement actions advised during the consultation were also recorded. The frequency of each score per category was calculated for all PW1 and PW2. Scores from individuals with both PW1 and PW2 were translated into a positive, neutral or negative change in QOL. A proportion of improvement actions was analysed. RESULTSData from PW1 consultations with 42647 cats and 14315 dogs were available. PW2 was recorded for 8% of cats and 9% of dogs. Overall, a higher frequency of green scores and a lower frequency of red and amber scores was reported at PW2 compared to PW1. For individuals with both consultations, 53% of cats and 40% of dogs had a positive overall change. The category with most improvement actions suggested across PW1 and PW2 was 'health'. STATEMENT (CONCLUSIONS)QOL indicators improved between the two assessment consultations for both species. This information can assist in promoting the scheme to veterinary practices and owners. METHODSDuring August 2016, veterinary surgeons in small animal general practice in the United Kingdom and owners whose dog(s) and/or cat(s) had attended a preventative healthcare consultation during the previous 3 months were recruited. Semi-structured qualitative telephone interviews were conducted to explore experiences of, and attitudes towards, preventative healthcare consultations. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and thematically analysed to identify key themes. This abstract reports the theme: 'Expectations of vaccination consultation content'. RESULTSTwenty-nine interviews were conducted with 14 veterinary surgeons and 15 owners. Primary vaccination course consultations were described to have a relatively consistent structure which met owner expectations. In contrast, perspectives on what should be included in adult pet vaccination consultations ranged widely amongst both owners and veterinary surgeons. All veterinary surgeons and several owners described tensions that had occurred during these consultations. Time pressures, mismatched expectations and unexpected findings on clinical examination appeared to be important, and potentially modifiable, sources of owner-veterinary surgeon friction. STATEMENT (CONCLUSIONS)This research identifies mismatched expectations of what should happen during vaccination consultations. We recommend that the focus and content of adult dog and cat vaccination consultations be urgently reviewed to ensure they meet the needs and...

No abstract