1h ago
Dan O’Neill urged vets to remove clients’ “feeling of heroism” around BOAS surgery and focus on their pets’ long-term welfare.
Chris Simpson
Job Title
Dan O'Neill, RVC associate professor in companion animal epidemiology, and Rowena Packer, senior lecturer in companion animal behaviour and welfare science.
Vets should consider euthanasia rather than brachycephalic obstructive airway syndrome (BOAS) surgery, a leading clinician and RVC academic has suggested.
Dan O’Neill told the Vet Times Podcast BOAS surgery “never solves the problem” for brachycephalic animals, which “always go on to have a lifetime of respiratory compromise anyway, [surgery] just lessens it a little bit”.
The associate professor in companion animal epidemiology continued: “By the time we need to do such invasive surgery as BOAS and the surgery itself adds to the welfare issues of these animals, it may often be better for the animals’ welfare point of view that those animals are euthanised kindly.
“It is not always the case that living is better than not living.
“Sadly, when some of these animals reach this point and even with BOAS surgery are going to continue to have a life not worth living, then we do need to be considering euthanasia.”
Rowena Packer, RVC senior lecturer in companion animal behaviour and welfare science, agreed with her colleague.
She said: “That’s really key. It’s raising the bar for what’s acceptable welfare for these animals with extreme conformation.
“I think there seems to be a perception that if you love them enough, if you have the financial resources to intervene with what is basically palliating these harms… but there’s still that underlying burden of suffering… we have to accept, actually, that it probably is not enough for these dogs to live an acceptable quality of life.”
Of questions vets could ask clients, Dr Packer said: “Are we aiming high enough for this individual animal, or are we just accepting that their welfare will never be great – which I think is a real disservice to these individuals, particularly when we think some of them have very short lives, and if they have a short life full of suffering, can we really stand back and say we think that’s okay?”
Asked how vets should approach such conversations with clients in practice, Prof O’Neill suggested the Innate Health Assessment (IHA) tool could be useful.
Launched in November, the tool helps owners assess their dog’s ability to perform all the natural functions and behaviours normally expected for its species via a 10-point checklist.
Prof O’Neill noted that pre-purchase discussions would differ from conversations where the client already owned a brachycephalic animal.
He said: “It means having a conversation about the actual suffering, the actual welfare of the animal, rather than this wider heroic thing about extending life for us being better than not extending life.”
Dr Packer said vets must make clear “you are supportive, but that those difficult decisions do need to be made”.
She concluded: “It’s a really tough one, because we know from some of our previous work these owners are often extremely bonded with their dogs, and because of that can be very resistant to new information or information that’s conflicting with their worldview – that these dogs are beautiful and unique and need to be preserved at all costs.
“So, I think that’s an area actually we probably do need to do more research on, too.”