Does the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) fluoxetine modify canine anxiety related behaviour?

PICO question Does administration of the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) fluoxetine reduce the severity and / or frequency of some anxiety related behaviours in companion dogs, of at least 8 months of age, when compared with no pharmacological treatment?   Clinical bottom line Category of research question Treatment The number and type of study designs reviewed Two studies, both randomised, were critically appraised. Each had a placebo control group and the dog's owners were blinded to the treatments Strength of evidence Moderate Outcomes reported Both studies provide moderate evidence that fluoxetine, when dispensed at 1–2 mg/kg per day by oral administration and not involving a behavioural modification program for the patient, may reduce some behaviours associated with separation anxiety and / or compulsive disorders. Both studies indicate that a reduction in some unwanted behaviours may be observed after 1 week of fluoxetine medication. Both studies recommend that behavioural and environmental modifications are important adjuncts to pharmacologic treatment of dogs with either compulsive disorders or separation anxiety. Both studies also report that some dogs treated with fluoxetine experienced anorexia / decreased appetite and lethargy, although most of these effects were transient Conclusion The clinical recommendation is that fluoxetine at 1–2 mg/kg administered orally, once daily, may be beneficial in reducing the severity of some canine anxiety related behaviours   How to apply this evidence in practice The application of evidence into practice should take into account multiple factors, not limited to: individual clinical expertise, patient’s circumstances and owners’ values, country, location or clinic where you work, the individual case in front of you, the availability of therapies and resources. Knowledge Summaries are a resource to help reinforce or inform decision making. They do not override the responsibility or judgement of the practitioner to do what is best for the animal in their care

Pharmacokinetic profile of enrofloxacin and its metabolite ciprofloxacin in Asian house geckos (Hemidactylus frenatus) after single-dose oral administration of enrofloxacin

The pharmacokinetics of enrofloxacin and its active metabolite ciprofloxacin were determined following oral administration in 21 Asian house geckos (Hemidactylus frenatus) at a dose of 10 mg/kg. Changes in enrofloxacin and ciprofloxacin plasma concentrations were quantified at regular intervals over 72 h (1, 2, 6, 12, 24, 48, and 72 h). Samples were analysed by high-pressure liquid chromatography (HPLC) and the enrofloxacin pharmacokinetic data underwent a two-compartment analysis. Due to the limited ciprofloxacin plasma concentrations above the lower limit of quantification (LLOQ), the ciprofloxacin data underwent non-compartment analysis and the half-life was determined by the Lineweaver-Burke plot and analysis. The enrofloxacin and ciprofloxacin mean half-lives (t½) were 0.95 h (α) / 24.36 h (β), and 11.06 h respectively, area under the curve (AUC0-24h) were 60.56 and 3.14 µg/mL*h, respectively, maximum concentrations (Cmax) were 12.31 and 0.24 µg/mL, respectively, and time required to reach the Cmax (Tmax) were 1 and 2 h respectively. Enrofloxacin was minimally converted to the active metabolite ciprofloxacin, with ciprofloxacin concentrations contributing only 4.91% of the total fluoroquinolone concentrations (AUC0-24h). Based on the pharmacokinetic indices when using susceptibility breakpoints when determined at mammalian body temperature it is predicted that single oral administration of enrofloxacin (10 mg/kg) would result in plasma concentrations effective against susceptible bacterial species inhibited by an enrofloxacin MIC ≤ 0.5 µg/mL in vitro, but additional studies will be required to determine its efficacy in vivo

Comparison of 0.2 Mg/kg Vs. 1.0 Mg/kg of Oral Meloxicam for Safe and Effective Analgesia in Domestic Rabbits

&lt;strong&gt;PICO question&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;p&gt;In domestic rabbits, how does 1 mg/kg of oral meloxicam compare with 0.2 mg/kg of oral meloxicam for significant changes in pain behaviour, and kidney and liver biochemical analytes?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Clinical bottom line&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;p&gt;Based on current available evidence, oral meloxicam at a dosage of 0.2 mg/kg daily when used as the sole analgesic does not provide adequate pain relief in rabbits. A dosage of 1 mg/kg daily is more efficacious, but it is unclear whether this is sufficient for postoperative pain management. The literature supports the safety of meloxicam at both 0.2 mg/kg and 1 mg/kg daily for healthy rabbits, based on liver and kidney biochemical analytes.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Five studies have been reviewed, which are a mix of randomised controlled trials and prospective clinical trials.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;br /&gt; &lt;img src="https://www.veterinaryevidence.org/rcvskmod/icons/oa-icon.jpg" alt="Open Access" /&gt; &lt;img src="https://www.veterinaryevidence.org/rcvskmod/icons/pr-icon.jpg" alt="Peer Reviewed" /&gt;</jats:p

Can dog appeasing pheromone ameliorate stress behaviours associated with anxiety in mature domestic dogs?

PICO question&#x0D; Does use of dog-appeasing pheromone reduce the frequency and/or severity of non-specific stress behaviours associated with anxiety in domestic dogs, older than 6 months, when compared with no treatment?&#x0D;  &#x0D; Clinical bottom line&#x0D; Category of research question&#x0D; Treatment&#x0D; The number and type of study designs reviewed&#x0D; Eight controlled trials were appraised. Four were randomised and four were either non-randomised or did not clearly describe the method of allocating subjects into treatment groups.&#x0D; Strength of evidence&#x0D; Weak&#x0D; Outcomes reported&#x0D; There was no evidence that any dog appeasing pheromone (DAP) formulation (spray, diffuser, or collar) was superior. There was moderate evidence that DAP could reduce some behavioural manifestations of fear and/or anxiety stemming from thunderstorm noise and weak evidence that it could ameliorate some non-specific stress behaviours in hospitalised patients. In shelter dogs, there was mild evidence that DAP could reduce barking intensity and increase some behaviours associated with relaxation. When behavioural changes occurred, most were observed during exposure to DAP and there were minimal residual effects post-treatment.&#x0D; Conclusion&#x0D; The evidence for using DAP to manage stress behaviours associated with anxiety in dogs over six months of age remains weak. Until there is a stronger evidentiary basis, clinicians should be aware that a true clinical benefit is undetermined. Nevertheless, DAP is unlikely to cause harm and may still provide some therapeutic benefit. Therefore, DAP may still be employed in a multimodal management plan for some behaviour cases and may exert a placebo effect. However, if an owner’s financial resources are restrictive, clinicians should not prioritise pheromone therapy at the omission of other therapies that have established clinical effects&#x0D;  &#x0D; How to apply this evidence in practice&#x0D; The application of evidence into practice should take into account multiple factors, not limited to: individual clinical expertise, patient’s circumstances and owners’ values, country, location or clinic where you work, the individual case in front of you, the availability of therapies and resources.&#x0D; Knowledge Summaries are a resource to help reinforce or inform decision making. They do not override the responsibility or judgement of the practitioner to do what is best for the animal in their care.&#x0D;  &#x0D; </jats:p

Comparison of the effect of marine-derived omega-3 fatty acids (n-3 FAs) as an adjunct to a non-steroidal inflammatory drug (NSAID) therapy vs NSAID therapy alone, for dogs with osteoarthritis

PICO question&#x0D; Does treatment with a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) with supplementation of marine-derived  omega-3 fatty acids (n-3FAs) compared to the NSAID alone, result in an increased ability to exert force by the osteoarthritic limb(s) of dogs or alleviate other measures of osteoarthritis?&#x0D;  &#x0D; Clinical bottom line&#x0D; Category of research question&#x0D; Treatment&#x0D; The number and type of study designs reviewed&#x0D; Two prospective, block-randomised, clinical trials&#x0D; Strength of evidence&#x0D; None&#x0D; Outcomes reported&#x0D; Kwananocha et al. (2016) investigated administration of carprofen supplemented with marine-derived n-3 FAs, to carprofen alone, administered over 4 weeks. Vijarnsorn et al. (2019) investigated administration of firocoxib supplemented with n-3FA, to firocoxib alone, for 4 weeks.  There were no statistical differences between treatment groups at week 2 and week 4 post-treatment for either study. Both studies also reported orthopaedic assessment score (OAS) based on scoring the extent of patient lameness and pain in the affected joint. There were no statistical changes in OASs between treatment groups at week 2 or week 4 post-treatment for either study&#x0D; Conclusion&#x0D; There is no evidence that marine-derived n-3 FAs provide additional benefit when used as adjunctive agents with NSAIDs for the treatment of canine osteoarthritis&#x0D;  &#x0D; How to apply this evidence in practice&#x0D; The application of evidence into practice should take into account multiple factors, not limited to: individual clinical expertise, patient’s circumstances and owners’ values, country, location or clinic where you work, the individual case in front of you, the availability of therapies and resources.&#x0D; Knowledge Summaries are a resource to help reinforce or inform decision making. They do not override the responsibility or judgement of the practitioner to do what is best for the animal in their care.&#x0D;  &#x0D; </jats:p