Are Horse Owners Able to Estimate Their Animals' Body Condition Score and Cresty Neck Score?
body condition score
cresty neck score
horse
overconditioning
Journal
Veterinary sciences
ISSN: 2306-7381
Titre abrégé: Vet Sci
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101680127
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
03 Oct 2022
03 Oct 2022
Historique:
received:
08
09
2022
revised:
30
09
2022
accepted:
01
10
2022
entrez:
26
10
2022
pubmed:
27
10
2022
medline:
27
10
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Obesity and overconditioning are becoming more prevalent in horses, and are influencing the animal's health, activity, and reproductive efficiency. Body condition score (BCS) and cresty neck score (CNS) have been correlated with the development of various diseases. Many of the papers in the literature evaluate the prevalence of obesity and overconditioning in horse populations considering BCS given by owners. The aim of this study was to evaluate the validity of the owners' estimation of the degree of equine obesity or overconditioning by comparing BCS and CNS provided by each owner and a board-certified vet to a cohort of 259 horses and their agreement based on age, breed, sex, and activity of the animals. Overconditioning was present in 29% and 24% of horses according to the owners and the vet, respectively, and obesity in 2% and 1%, respectively. Agreement between BCS and CNS given by the owners and the vet was slight, with owners scoring horses either lower or higher than the vet. Agreement between the owners and the vet assessment was also influenced by age, breed, sex, and activity of the animals. Education of owners and caretakers to correctly assess BCS and CNS and regular evaluation of the animals throughout the year is important to prevent the development of obesity and overconditioning and related diseases.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36288157
pii: vetsci9100544
doi: 10.3390/vetsci9100544
pmc: PMC9611487
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Références
Vet Clin North Am Equine Pract. 2021 Apr;37(1):111-137
pubmed: 33820604
Acta Vet Scand. 2016 Oct 20;58(Suppl 1):59
pubmed: 27766968
Equine Vet J. 2017 Mar;49(2):196-200
pubmed: 26877245
Equine Vet J. 2015 Mar;47(2):196-201
pubmed: 24735219
Equine Vet J. 2011 Sep;43(5):552-61
pubmed: 21496091
Prev Vet Med. 2021 Mar;188:105285
pubmed: 33530014
Vet Res Commun. 2010 Jun;34 Suppl 1:S41-5
pubmed: 20458536
J Vet Intern Med. 2019 Mar;33(2):335-349
pubmed: 30724412
Anim Genet. 2010 Dec;41 Suppl 2:159-65
pubmed: 21070291
Equine Vet J. 2017 Nov;49(6):759-766
pubmed: 28543943
Vet Clin North Am Equine Pract. 2009 Apr;25(1):51-65, vi
pubmed: 19303550
J Equine Vet Sci. 2018 Sep;68:26-32
pubmed: 31256884
J Anim Sci. 2002 Oct;80(10):2695-703
pubmed: 12413093
J Vet Intern Med. 2012 Nov-Dec;26(6):1413-8
pubmed: 22946995
J Anim Sci. 2003 Sep;81(9):2311-21
pubmed: 12968707
Vet Rec. 2011 Feb 5;168(5):131
pubmed: 21257596
J Anim Physiol Anim Nutr (Berl). 2018 Aug;102(4):1062-1068
pubmed: 29707811
Aust Vet J. 2016 Nov;94(11):427-432
pubmed: 27785793
PeerJ. 2014 Mar 20;2:e299
pubmed: 24711963
Equine Vet J. 1988 Jan;20(1):41-5
pubmed: 3366105
Animal. 2018 Mar;12(3):597-605
pubmed: 28712370
PLoS One. 2019 Jul 24;14(7):e0220203
pubmed: 31339945
Equine Vet J. 1983 Oct;15(4):371-2
pubmed: 6641685
Vet J. 2009 Feb;179(2):204-10
pubmed: 18440844
J Anim Sci. 2014 May;92(5):2230-8
pubmed: 24663191
Vet Clin North Am Equine Pract. 2011 Apr;27(1):59-72
pubmed: 21392654