Consistency of faecal scoring using two canine faecal scoring systems.
Journal
The Journal of small animal practice
ISSN: 1748-5827
Titre abrégé: J Small Anim Pract
Pays: England
ID NLM: 0165053
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
03 2021
03 2021
Historique:
received:
04
08
2020
revised:
28
10
2020
accepted:
26
11
2020
pubmed:
26
1
2021
medline:
14
4
2021
entrez:
25
1
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
To determine the agreement of canine faecal scoring between individuals with different levels of experience using two available faecal scoring systems. Naturally-voided, undisturbed bowel movements from 126 dogs were evaluated by veterinarians (n = 3) and members of the lay public (n = 126) within 15 minutes of defecation. Each participant was provided a copy of the Purina and Waltham faecal scoring charts in order to characterise the faeces. Agreement between veterinarians and lay people was assessed with kappa statistics, Bland-Altman analysis and visualised with Bland-Altman plots. Variable levels of consistency were observed in assessing faecal form among individuals with varying degrees of experience. Fair to substantial agreement existed between individual veterinarians scoring the same bowel movement (kappa statistic ranging from 0.40 to 0.77 on the Purina Scale and 0.54 to 0.61 on the Waltham Scale), while the agreement scores between the veterinarian and the lay public was fair (kappa statistic of 0.38 on the Purina Scale and 0.34 on the Waltham Scale). Disagreement in faecal scores occurred more frequently with lay people versus veterinarians. The consistency of faecal scoring improved based on the level of experience with the highest agreement consistently noted between veterinarians. In all comparisons, there was inconsistency in faecal scoring which might have implications for veterinarians managing diarrhoeic canine patients. Further studies are needed to better investigate how faecal scoring can be optimised for use in clinical and research settings.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
167-173Informations de copyright
© 2021 British Small Animal Veterinary Association.
Références
Allenspach, K., Wieland, B., Grone, A., et al. (2007) Chronic enteropathies in dogs: evaluation of risk factors for negative outcome. Journal of Veterinary Internal Medicine 21, 700-708
Amarenco, G. (2014) Bristol stool chart: prospective and monocentric study of "stools introspection" in healthy subjects. Progrès en Urologie 24, 708-713
Cheng, R. W., Chiu, Y. C., Wu, K. L., et al. (2015) Predictive factors for inadequate colon preparation before colonoscopy. Techniques in Coloproctology 19, 111-115
Grellet, A., Feugier, A., Chastant-Maillard, S., et al. (2012) Validation of a fecal scoring scale in puppies during the weaning period. Preventive Veterinary Medicine 106, 315-323
Hernot, D. C., Dumon, H. J., Biourge, V. C., et al. (2006) Evaluation of association between body size and large intestinal transit time in healthy dogs. American Journal of Veterinary Research 67, 342-347
HOSPITAL., B. P. State of Pet Health Report 2012 [Online]. www.stateofpethealth.com. Accessed January 1, 2019.
Jergens, A. E., Schreiner, C. A., Frank, D. E., et al. (2003) A scoring index for disease activity in canine inflammatory bowel disease. Journal of Veterinary Internal Medicine 17, 291-297
Lewis, S. J. & Heaton, K. W. (1997) Stool form scale as a useful guide to intestinal transit time. Scandinavian Journal of Gastroenterology 32, 920-924
Meyer, H., Zentek, J., Habernoll, H., et al. (1999) Digestibility and compatibility of mixed diets and faecal consistency in different breeds of dog. Zentralblatt für Veterinärmedizin. Reihe A 46, 155-165
Nationwide Pet Policyholders Top 10 Conditions for Dogs and Cats. 2016 [Online]. https://phz8.petinsurance.com/healthzone/pet-health/health-conditions/top-10-reasons-pets-visit-vets. Accessed January 1, 2019
Propst, E. L., Flickinger, E. A., Bauer, L. L., et al. (2003) A dose-response experiment evaluating the effects of oligofructose and inulin on nutrient digestibility, stool quality, and fecal protein catabolites in healthy adult dogs. Journal of Animal Science 81, 3057-3066
Purina Fecal Score Chart [Online]. https://www.proplanveterinarydiets.ca/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/PPPVD-Fecal-Scoring-Chart-EN-FINAL.pdf. Accessed January 1, 2019
Rakha, G. M., Abdl-Haleem, M. M., Farghali, H. A., et al. (2015) Prevalence of common canine digestive problems compared with other health problems in teaching veterinary hospital, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Cairo University, Egypt. Veterinary World 8, 403-411
Remes-Troche, J. M., Ozturk, R., Philips, C., et al. (2008) Cholestyramine - a useful adjunct for the treatment of patients with fecal incontinence. International Journal of Colorectal Disease 23, 189-194
Rolfe, V. E., Adams, C. A., Butterwick, R. E., et al. (2002) Relationships between fecal consistency and colonic microstructure and absorptive function in dogs with and without nonspecific dietary sensitivity. American Journal of Veterinary Research 63, 617-622
Saevik, B. K., Skancke, E. M. & Trangerud, C. (2012) A longitudinal study on diarrhoea and vomiting in young dogs of four large breeds. Acta Veterinaria Scandinavica 54, 8
Srinivas, M., Srinivasan, V., Jain, M., et al. (2019) A cross-sectional study of stool form (using Bristol stool chart) in an urban South Indian population. JGH Open 3, 464-467
Viera, A. J. & Garrett, J. M. (2005) Understanding interobserver agreement: the kappa statistic. Family Medicine 37, 360-363
Waltham Faeces Scoring System [Online]. https://www.waltham.com/dyn/_assets/_pdfs/other-resources/waltham-scoring.pdf. Accessed January 1, 2019.
Wells, D. L. & Hepper, P. G. (1999) Prevalence of disease in dogs purchased from an animal rescue shelter. The Veterinary Record 144, 35-38