Is It Possible to Mitigate Fear of Fireworks in Dogs? A Study on the Behavioural and Physiological Effects of a Psychoactive Supplement.

Canine fear of fireworks is a common problem worldwide, with serious implications for the welfare of both dogs and their owners. Therapies for the problem are available, and herbal and nutraceutical agents are increasingly suggested by professionals; nonetheless, studies on their real efficacy in reducing firework fear are lacking. In a randomised, double-blinded, placebo-controlled study, 44 dogs (25 in the "supplement" group and 19 in the "placebo" group) completed a long-term continuous treatment with either a supplement made of tryptophan, valerian, and passiflora or a placebo, including two real exposures to fireworks (on 2020 Christmas and 2021 New Years' Eve, after 42 and 48 days of treatment, respectively). Owners of both groups received the same general environmental management and food/toy offering recommendations for trying with their dogs on those nights. Behavioural (measured by LSSS-Lincoln Sound Sensitivity Scale and PANAS-Positive and Negative Activation scale, as rated by the owners) and stress (measured via salivary cortisol measures) reactions were evaluated. Significantly greater fear decrease (LSSS) was recorded in the "supplement" dogs, as compared to the "placebo" group. Cortisol dosages on New Year's Eve ("noisy" night) were in line with behavioural results; "supplement" dogs showed a smaller increase in the stress response from 22:30 to 00:30 h on New Year's Eve and a greater decrease in their stress response from 02:30 h to 10:30 h on New Year's Day compared to "placebo" dogs. Smaller cortisol levels were also shown by "supplement" dogs than "placebo" dogs on a controlled "quiet night" (27th December). Owners' rates on PANAS remained stable during the whole period of therapy for both groups. The evaluated supplement, a combination of tryptophan, valerian, and passiflora, showed satisfactory results and rare side effects when treating dogs fearful of fireworks.

Tramadol plus metamizole combined or not with anti-inflammatory drugs is clinically effective for moderate to severe chronic pain treatment in cancer patients.

OBJECTIVE: To test the effectiveness and safety of tramadol plus metamizole combined or not with a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) for treating moderate to severe chronic neoplastic pain in dogs, and its impact on quality of life (QL). STUDY DESIGN: Prospective, uncontrolled, open-label, clinical study. ANIMALS: Sixty nine client-owned dogs with multiple forms of cancer and visual analog scale (VAS) pain score ≥ 40 after receiving NSAIDs for at least 7 days. METHODS: The MN group received metamizole + NSAID, MNT group received metamizole + NSAID + tramadol and MT group received metamizole + tramadol. Pain was scored by the 0 to 100 mm VAS (0 = no pain, 100 = worst pain) and analgesic therapy was considered effective if 25 mm differences in VAS scores were observed between day 0 and the follow ups. The QL was evaluated according to a 0 to 36 scoring method for dogs (0 = worst, 36 = best) and side effects were recorded. Data were registered at day 0 (baseline) and at the first and second follow ups (7 and 14 days after day 0, respectively). RESULTS: The MN group had less analgesia at day 7 (25%) and day 14 (42%) than MNT (59%, p = 0.0274; 76%, p = 0.0251, respectively) and MT groups (69%, p = 0.0151; 81%, p = 0.0341, respectively). The QL scores were lower in the MN group at the first (score 23) and second follow up (score 26) than in MNT (27, p = 0.0847; 30, p = 0.0002) and MT (28, p = 0.0384; 31, p = 0.0001) groups. Side effects were more commonly observed in the MN group (87%) than in MNT (24%, p < 0.0001) and MT groups (25%, p = 0.0003) at the first follow up. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Tramadol plus metamizole combined or not with NSAID were well tolerated and clinically effective to treat moderate to severe pain in dogs with cancer and improved QL.

Validity of a health-related quality-of-life scale for dogs with signs of pain secondary to cancer.

OBJECTIVE: To develop and validate a health-related quality-of-life scale for dogs with pain secondary to cancer. DESIGN: Questionnaire development. ANIMALS: 40 healthy dogs with no history or signs of pain, 20 dogs with dermatologic disease but no signs of pain other than mild pruritus, and 20 dogs with cancer. PROCEDURE: Owners of all dogs completed a questionnaire containing 12 questions with 4 options for each question, and a quality-of-life score ranging from 0 to 36 was calculated. Scores for dogs with cancer were compared with scores for healthy dogs and dogs with dermatologic disease. RESULTS: All owners indicated that the questionnaire was easy to complete. Scores for healthy dogs were significantly different from scores for dogs with cancer and scores for dogs with dermatologic disease. Scores for dogs with dermatologic disease were significantly different from scores for dogs with cancer. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Results suggested that a simple questionnaire may be useful in assessing health-related quality of life in dogs with pain secondary to cancer, in that dogs with cancer had significantly lower scores than did healthy dogs and dogs with dermatologic disease.