RESUMO
BACKGROUND: The survival of horses diagnosed with critical colic (requiring referral or euthanasia) relies on rapid and effective decision-making by the owner and veterinary practitioner. OBJECTIVES: To explore UK horse owners' and veterinary practitioners' experiences of decision-making for critical cases of equine colic. STUDY DESIGN: Qualitative study using a phenomenological approach. METHODS: Individual, semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted with 14 horse owners and 13 veterinary practitioners (vets) who had experienced a critical decision (referral or euthanasia) for a horse with colic. A purposive, convenience sample of participants was recruited. Sessions explored participant's experience of colic, including recognition, help-seeking behaviour, and challenges. Thematic analysis was performed on collected data. RESULTS: Four over-arching themes were identified; 'head', 'heart', 'practicalities' and 'impact'. Owners acknowledged responsibility for their horse's welfare but had different perspectives than vets on the importance of finance ('head'). Both vets and owners described how the horse-human relationship ('heart') often led to conflict during decision-making. The vet-client relationship was influential on decision-making for both owners and vets; involving other people in decision-making was described both positively and negatively by participants ('heart'). 'Practicalities', such as lack of preparedness, transport issues and adverse weather conditions, were identified by both owners and vets as barriers. Owners described a 'rollercoaster' of emotions after a critical decision, with profound impacts on their mental wellbeing, feelings of guilt, and long-term changes in behaviour ('impact'), and a lack of support to manage these feelings. MAIN LIMITATIONS: Small sample size. CONCLUSIONS: This study describes stakeholder decision-making during critical cases of equine colic. Factors that commonly influenced decisions included an owner's previous knowledge and beliefs, social pressures, logistics and the relationship between the owner and vet. The study highlighted long-term impacts on the owner, including their management and decisions for subsequent horses. These factors should be considered in shared decision-making.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: There is limited evidence on factors affecting critical decision making for horses with colic. This study's aim was to describe the assessment and decision making involved in horses referred for management of colic. METHODS: An in-depth case analysis was used to document case presentation, decision making and outcomes for horses referred for colic to two UK equine veterinary practices over a 12-month period. The data recorded included previous history, presenting signs, response to treatment, case outcome and factors affecting decisions for further treatment or euthanasia. RESULTS: Data were available for 60 cases: 55 were hospitalised for medical or surgical treatment and five horses were euthanased following initial assessment. The main factors affecting treatment decisions were severity of clinical signs (80%, 47/59), financial concerns (10%, 6/59) and ongoing health issues or previous history of colic (5%, 3/59). Factors associated with euthanasia decisions were postoperative complications (5/18), poor prognosis (4/18), deteriorating clinical signs (3/18) and financial concerns (3/18). LIMITATION: The limited study population may affect the extent to which the findings can be generalised. CONCLUSION: The severity of clinical signs was the key factor in treatment decision making. The main factors affecting euthanasia decisions were clinical deterioration, poor prognosis and financial constraints. These findings should be incorporated into clinical case recording to capture the multifactorial nature of decision making.