Search

Consensus on optimal calving management is difficult to achieve among veterinarians. Some of this discordance may stem from asymmetry between the literature written by subject matter experts (SME) and the knowledge, attitude and practice (KAP) of non‐SMEs and veterinary practitioners. Hence, the objective of this study was to assess how veterinary practitioners KAPs in calving management compared with the findings in the literature. An online questionnaire survey was conducted prior to a World Buiatrics Congress by delegates (n = 80) who attended a workshop on calving management at which the outcomes of the latter were recorded. The responses from the questionnaire and the consensus from the workshop were compared and these were compared with the literature on calving management, specifically, prediction of calving, assistance at calving and farmer training in calving management. In general, there was good agreement between the aggregated individual responses to the questionnaire and the consensuses from the workshop. The suggested methods of predicting calving were well aligned between practitioners and those researched in the literature but practitioners tended to emphasize more practical aspects of prediction while the literature tends to focus more on the effectiveness of various predictor devices. Practitioners tended to recommend a later time of calving assistance than that recommended in the recent literature though they did also emphasize the importance of calving progress. The majority of practitioners conducted informal (at calving) calving training focusing on time of intervention, welfare‐friendly intervention and delivery of a live healthy calf. However, the educational literature recommends a formal training approach as being more effective. These findings indicate that practitioners may benefit from continuing professional education on the scientific merits/demerits of calving prediction devices, current best practice on intervention timing during calving and formal methods of farmer training on calving management. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Internal body temperature is an essential parameter in evaluation an animal's general health status. The rectal temperature as 'gold standard' requires restraining of the animal which may cause stress especially when not accustomed to handling procedures. Stress on the other hand should whenever possible be avoided as it negatively affects animal welfare and may increase body temperature. The present study evaluated whether measuring the body surface temperature with an infrared thermometer (IRT) may represent a stressless alternative method to rectal body temperature measurements., Material and Methods: Twelve male fattening pigs were included in the study. Body temperature was measured once a week for 11 weeks. Body surface temperature measurements were performed in the areas of the forehead, caudal base of the ear and anus using two infrared thermometers (IRT1 and IRT2) each., Results: Throughout the study, all pigs were clinically healthy. Best repeatability was found for the rectal thermometer and IRT1 in the anus region. Homogeneity of variance was not found for the measurements of the three thermometers. Mean values of body temperature were significantly different (p<0,05) between thermometers and measurement points. Thereby, the type of thermometer and measurement point possessed a moderate to strong effect. The Bland-Altman plot shows that differences in the values of the thermometers and measurement points are within the acceptable range of variation (95% interval). However, the range of variation is too substantial for clinical assessment of the body temperature., Conclusion: The repeatability of temperature data measured with IRT on the body surface of pigs is acceptable. For this procedure, restraining the animals is not necessary, therefore reducing the animal's stress level during the clinical examination. However, the correlation to the rectal body temperature is weak to moderate., Clinical Relevance: In order to use IRT for health monitoring in animals, reference values for respective IRT and measurement points need to be established. In the current study no case of hyper- or hypothermia occurred. Further research is warrented to evaluate whether IRT reliably detect fever., Competing Interests: Die Autoren erklären, dass kein Interessenkonflikt besteht., (The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial-License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).)

Measuring the body temperature is an essential component of the clinical examination of bovines. Next to its value for the diagnosis of diseases, body temperature also is an important value in clinical studies concerning estrus detection, calving time point prediction, or the evaluation of heat stress. This systematic review critically evaluates different methods of measuring bovine body temperature including rectal measurement, vaginal or ruminal temperature loggers, milk temperature, and infrared body surface thermography. Although body temperature measurement is a commonly employed and established diagnostic test, a close look at scientific studies displays multiple factors influencing body temperature data. The variability of results emphasizes the relevance of critically evaluating new measuring methods before introducing them into research or routine practice. Especially in terms of identifying specific cut-off values, i. e. for fever defined as body temperature > 39.5°C, the precision of the method is of importance, as the acquired values possess a high degree of influence on the veterinary decision taking process., Competing Interests: Die Autoren bestätigen, dass kein Interessenkonflikt besteht., (© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York.)