Can you handle it? Validating negative responses to restraint in cats

摘要

Cats routinely undergo handling and restraint for examinations and procedures throughout their lifetime. In recent years there has been increased awareness that some forms of restraint have the potential to negatively impact cat health and welfare, but there has been limited research to assess alternatives. Full-body restraint is known to be aversive and cause stress responses across a range of species. The current study therefore validated measures for identifying negative cat responses to handling by comparing passive restraint (n = 22; the control treatment) to full-body restraint (n = 25; negative treatment), during a physical examination. Given that cats respond differently to unfamiliar people, and handlers are often unfamiliar to cats, an Unfamiliar Person Test was used to account for differences in cat responses to an unknown handler. Cats were then restrained according to treatment, and assessed for behavioural and physiological responses during the following phases: 1) placement into restraint, 2) restraint, and 3) post-restraint. The results show the odds of struggling were 8.2 (95% CI: 1.47, 58.53; P = .009) times greater in cats being placed into full-body restraint in comparison to passively restrained cats. During the physical examination, full-body restrained cats showed more breaths per minute (P = .004), more lip licks per minute (F-1(,42) = 6.18; P = .017), and were more likely to hold their ears in a back or side position during the first 15 s of handling (P & 0.0001), compared to passively restrained cats. Analysis of pupil dilation ratio (pupil diameter/iris diameter) showed an interaction between treatment and friendliness (F-1(,43) = 8.39; P = .006); unfriendly cats handled using full-body restraint showed a larger pupil dilation ratio than unfriendly cats handled with passive restraint (P = .0007). Immediately after the handler released the cat from restraint, the odds of staying on the examination table were 6.1 (95% CI: 1.04, 36.10; F-1(,44) = 4.23; P = .0458) times greater for cats restrained with passive restraint, in comparison to cats that underwent full-body restraint. These results provide scientific validation of negative cat responses to handling, and may be used in further research to assess the welfare effects of different handling techniques.