Search

(1) Background: People with disabilities may benefit from an assistance dog (AD). Despite regulations that prohibit the denial of ADs to public places, this still occurs on a regular basis. The main argument for denial of access is that dogs compromise hygiene with their presence, which could cause a health hazard. Meanwhile, people are allowed to walk into and out of public places freely. (2) Objective: As a pilot study, to investigate the number of Enterobacteriaceae and the presence of Clostridium difficile bacteria on the paws of ADs and pet dogs (PDs) as well as the shoe soles of their users and owners. With the results, an assessment can be made as to whether measures are required to reduce environmental contamination (e.g., in hospitals). (3) Methods: In total, 25 ADs, 25 PDs, and their 50 users/owners participated in the study. Each participant walked their dog for 15&ndash, 30 min prior to the sampling of the front paws. Each PD owner or AD user filled out a general questionnaire about the care of their dogs, and AD users were asked to fill out an additional questionnaire on their experiences regarding the admittance of their ADs to public places (in particular, hospitals). Dutch hospitals were questioned on their protocols regarding the admittance of ADs and their visitor numbers, including the percentage of AD users, to put these numbers into perspective. (4) Results: Dog paws were more often negative for Enterobacteriaceae compared to shoe soles (72% and 42%, respectively) and also had significantly lower bacterial counts (mean of 3.54log10 and 5.03log10 colony-forming units (CFUs), respectively, p &lt, 0.05). This was most distinct in the comparison between PDs and their owners (3.75log10 and 5.25log10 CFUs, 0.05), the numbers were similar between ADs and their users (3.09log10 and 4.58log10 CFUs, p = 0.2). C. difficile was found on one (4%) AD user&rsquo, s shoe soles. Moreover, 81% of AD users had been denied access with their current AD once or several times, the main reason being hygiene. The results of the visibly and invisibly disabled were significantly different. The number of AD users as opposed to the total number of hospital visitors was 0.03% in one hospital and is estimated to be 0.02% in the Netherlands. (5) Conclusions: The general hygiene of dogs&rsquo, paws is far better than that of shoe soles, mostly demonstrated by the better general hygiene of PD paws compared with their owners&rsquo, shoe soles, ADs and their users had comparable levels of general hygiene. In addition, the number of AD users amongst the total number of hospital visitors in the Netherlands is very limited. Thus, hygiene measures to reduce any contamination due to dog paws do not seem necessary.

Dog parks represent a recent trend in western countries, enabling owners to spend quality time with their pets in a controlled environment. Despite their growing popularity, few studies have been performed to date on these parks to investigate dog intestinal parasitic infections and soil contamination. The present study examined 369 faecal and 18 soil samples collected from 3 dog parks in Greater Lisbon, Portugal. Additionally, 102 interviews were performed with dog owners to assess dog-walking behaviours and parasite risk. In total, 33% of the faecal dog samples were infected with at least one parasitic agent: hookworms (16.5%), Cryptosporidium spp. (11.9%), Giardia spp. (11.4%), Toxascaris leonina (1.1%), Cystoisospora spp. (1.1%), Toxocara spp. (0.5%), and Sarcocystis sp. (0.3%). The soil of all the parks was contaminated with hookworm eggs. This is the first study performed in a European urban area to assess canine faecal contamination and parasitic agents in dog parks. Our results highlight the potential of these parks as a source of transmission for canine parasites, including some with zoonotic potential. Public awareness and effective preventive measures should be promoted to minimise the health-risk impact to both animals and humans, under the scope of environmental and public health.

Dissertação de Mestrado Integrado em Medicina Veterinária Dog parks may pose a risk for the transmission of parasitic zoonotic agents via the faeces and soil contact. This is the first study to investigate gastrointestinal infections in park-attending dogs in Lisbon. The research was carried out under the frame of a field study including both parasitological and a survey approach. 369 faecal and 18 soil samples were collected from three dog parks in the Lisbon area and analysed for parasite eggs. 102 questionnaires were filled. The overall prevalence for positive faecal samples was 33%. Ancylostomatidae represent 17%, Cryptosporidium spp. 12%, Giardia spp. 11%, Toxascaris leonina and Cystoisospora spp. 1% each, Toxocara spp. 0.5% and Sarcocystis spp. 0.3%. From soil samples, 28% were contaminated with only Ancylostomatidae eggs. In the last 12 months 94% of the dogs were observed by a veterinarian. 90% were dewormed in the previous six months, from which 28% at least four times a year. Additionally, 26% of the dogs share the house with at least one dog, 50% visit the park daily, and 75% were always allowed to be off-leash. Also, 1% was fed with raw meat. Despite 94% of the owner’s claimed faecal collection of their pets, it was common to see 10-20 faecal samples on the environment of every dog space on sampling days. Regarding the pet-owner relationship, 76% of the dogs were allowed to lick their owners’ faces, 82% to be in their bedroom and 43% to sleep in their bed. Approximately one third of faecal samples of dogs in canine parks was infected with gastrointestinal parasites, some with potential zoonotic risk. Less than a quarter of the dogs were dewormed following the recommended schedule (at least 4 times a year). The majority of the owners have close physical contact with their dogs, increasing the transmission risk of zoonoses. Public awareness about potential risks and preventive procedures is therefore advised. RESUMO - Risco parasitário gastrointestinal em parques caninos na área de Lisboa - Os parques caninos podem representar um risco para a transmissão de agentes parasitários zoonóticos através do contato com fezes e solo. Este é o primeiro estudo a investigar infeções gastrointestinais em cães que frequentam parques caninos em Lisboa. O estudo foi realizado sob a estrutura de um estudo de campo, incluindo tanto uma abordagem parasitológica como um questionário. 369 amostras fecais e 18 amostras de solo foram recolhidos de três parques caninos na área da Grande Lisboa e analisadas para ovos de parasitas. 102 inquéritos foram preenchidos. A prevalência global de amostras fecais positivas foi de 33%. A presença de Ancylostomatidae representa 17%, Cryptosporidium spp. 12%, Giardia spp. 11%, Toxascaris leonina e Cystoisospora spp. 1% cada, Toxocara spp. 0.5% e Sarcocystis spp. 0.3%. Das amostras de solo, 28% estavam contaminadas apenas com ovos de Ancylostomatidae. Nos últimos 12 meses 94% dos cães foram observados por um veterinário. 90% foram desparasitados nos seis meses anteriores, dos quais 28% pelo menos quatro vezes por ano. Além disso, 26% dos cães partilha a casa com, pelo menos um cão, 50% visita o parque diariamente, e 75% foi sempre autorizado a estar solto. Além disso, 1% era alimentado com comida crua. Apesar de 94% dos proprietários alegar a colheita das fezes dos seus animais de estimação, era comum ver 10-20 amostras fecais em cada espaço canino nos dias de amostragem. Tendo em conta o relacionamento do animal de estimação com o dono, 76% dos cães eram autorizados a lamber as caras dos donos, 82% a estar no seu quarto e 43% a dormir na sua cama. Aproximadamente um terço das amostras fecais de cães de parques caninos estava infectado com parasitas gastrointestinais, alguns com potencial risco zoonótico. Menos de um quarto dos cães eram desparasitados seguindo o esquema recomendado (pelo menos 4 vezes por ano). A maioria dos proprietários tem contato físico com os seus cães, aumentando o risco de transmissão de zoonoses. A sensibilização do público sobre os riscos potenciais e os procedimentos de prevenção é, portanto, aconselhável.