Producers and veterinarians are considered responsible for improving animal welfare, as they are responsible for implementing practices that directly impact the animal’s well-being. Most husbandry procedures performed in cattle do not include pain mitigation, and understanding challenges faced by these stakeholders to use analgesics is key in improving on-farm pain management strategies. Therefore, the objectives of this study were to explore producer and veterinarian perspectives on pain management practices by (1) exploring inquires received by Food Animal Residue Avoidance Databank (FARAD) regarding analgesic use in cattle and (2) using a survey instrument to identify factors that impact pain management implementation in the US cattle industry. Albeit analgesia use increased in the past ten years for some producers and the majority of veterinarians, administering analgesics for pain management on US cattle farms remains a challenge. From a producer perspective, drug cost, availability and logistics for administration. From a veterinarian perspective, lack of Food and Drug Administration (FDA) products hinders the support of on-farm protocols requiring extra-label drug use. Future steps to improve analgesic use on-farm include identifying and approving drugs that demonstrate efficacy for managing pain in cattle and disseminating educational resources to support stakeholders in both the implementation and drug withdrawal process.

OBJECTIVE To survey cattle producers and veterinarians about the use of analgesia on US cattle operations. SAMPLE 1,187 members of the following database, electronic mailing lists, and social media groups: FarmProgress master file, American Association of Bovine Practitioners, Academy of Veterinary Consultants, National Milk Producers Federation Farm Evaluators, Dairy Moms Facebook group, and Dairy Girl Network Facebook group. PROCEDURES An online survey was developed to gather information about the frequency of local and systemic analgesia use for common painful procedures and diseases in cattle < 2, 2 to 12, and > 12 months old. Respondents also rated their extent of agreement with each of 10 statements related to pain management in cattle. The survey was available from June 11 to August 10, 2018. Descriptive data were generated. Logistic regression was used for comparisons among cattle age groups and respondents on the basis of their industry role. RESULTS In general, frequency of analgesia use increased as cattle age increased, regardless of the procedure or disease. The odds of analgesia use were lower for men, compared with women, and greater for veterinarians, compared with producers. Many respondents indicated they were cognizant of the benefits of analgesia use in cattle but perceived federal regulations and drug costs as impediments to the implementation of pain mitigation protocols on cattle operations. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE Results provided insight into current perceptions and use of analgesia in cattle, which can be used to guide implementation of pain mitigation protocols on US beef and dairy cattle operations.

Schools can potentially benefit from system-wide approaches to the dissemination of health promotion practices. This intervention study undertaken in the Hunter Region of NSW, Australia, used a pre-post design to assess whether a phone and mail intervention dissemination strategy was associated with an increase in the proportion of 218 primary schools undertaking eight health promotion practices. Health promotion practices addressed the prevention of harm associated with five agreed health issues-smoking, nutrition, playground safety, asthma and infectious diseases. The study also assessed acceptability of the dissemination strategy to schools, cost and whether intervention schools' characteristics were associated with uptake of health promotion practices. Compared to baseline a significant improvement in prevalence was observed at both 1 and 2 year follow-up for seven of the eight health promotion practices addressed. The greatest improvement occurred in the first year of the project. There was a greater uptake of the practice of providing information regarding passive smoking in urban schools. The dissemination strategy was found to have a cost per adopted practice of 121 Australian dollars and to be acceptable to the large majority (>90%) of schools. The results suggest that the dissemination strategy may represent a relatively low cost method of enhancing health promotion practices in schools and of monitoring such practices. Further research addressing the methodological issues of this study is needed to confirm these findings.

Although leading veterinary organizations emphasize the importance of animal welfare knowledge, there exists a gap in current veterinary student animal welfare education and training. A survey instrument was created to assess third-year Doctor of Veterinary Medicine (DVM) student knowledge of key animal welfare topics, opinions regarding the inclusion of welfare education in the veterinary curriculum, and views on veterinarian responsibilities as advocates. In Spring 2018, Colorado State University added a required animal welfare course to the DVM curriculum. Pre- and post-course paper surveys were distributed to the third-year students enrolled in the animal welfare course. One hundred thirty one completed pre-course surveys were collected and 125 completed post-course surveys were collected. Of the pre and post-course surveys collected, 61 were paired with identification codes and utilized for statistical comparison. Results indicated that the course led students to view the inclusion of an animal welfare course in the veterinary curriculum more favorably ( p = 0.009) and improved their confidence in conducting research on animal welfare topics ( p < 0.001). The course did not change students' sense of responsibility toward welfare advocacy. Associations were not found between attitudes toward these issues and demographic variables of home community, respondent gender, and track selection ( p > 0.06). Veterinarians were consistently ranked by students as the most influential member of a community in matters of animal welfare. Future research on the lack of veterinary student knowledge of animal welfare should be done on a national scale to facilitate strategic development of mandatory animal welfare courses in veterinary curricula. Future research should be designed to gain knowledge regarding DVM students' opinions and attitudes regarding effective methods of incorporating animal welfare education into their professional training.

Objectives To explore pharmacists’ views and experiences of pharmacist-administered vaccinations, motivators and barriers to pharmacists administering vaccinations and their preferences for expansions to such services. Methods All practising pharmacist members (n = 3400) of the Pharmaceutical Society of New Zealand were invited to participate in an online survey in 2017. Key findings A total of 468 pharmacists completed the survey (14%). Most (86%) strongly agreed/agreed that pharmacists should provide vaccinations, primarily citing patient benefit, for example, convenience, potential for increased vaccination uptake, easing general practice burden and better utilisation of the pharmacist. Half had completed vaccinator training, mainly for professional satisfaction, to help public or community health and/or to provide a new service for their community. Trained pharmacists had administered influenza (95%), pertussis (47%), zoster (45%) and/or meningococcal vaccines (13%), with patient cost limiting some vaccination uptake. Cost or workplace constraints were leading reasons for the 17% not planning to undertake vaccinator training. Key barriers for pharmacy owners not offering vaccinations were set-up or other costs, insufficient funding (62%) or staffing/time concerns (27%). Some trained vaccinators (39%) wanted the recipient age lowered below 13 years, and 44% wanted intern pharmacists to be able to administer vaccinations. Conclusion This study found strong support for this service, including benefits for patients, and for customer relationships. Identified barriers including service setup and patient costs could be reduced by expanding the categories (e.g. pharmacy students and technicians) of staff able to vaccinate and having more government funded vaccines available through pharmacies, therefore, improving access for patients.