Background: Communication practices used by veterinarians can impact client's involvement in decision-making. The objective of this study was to evaluate the level of client involvement in veterinary care decisions and factors impacting client involvement. Methods: A random sample of practising companion animal veterinarians and a convenience sample of pet owners were recruited. Each consultation was audio-video recorded and analyzed using the Observer OPTION 5 instrument, adapted from human medicine, to assess veterinarians' level of shared decision-making. A mixed linear model was used to assess statistical associations between veterinarian, client and appointment-level factors and OPTION 5 scores. Results: Sixty veterinarians and 909 of their clients were audio-video recorded during a consultation, of which 717 interactions included a decision identified for analysis using the OPTION 5 instrument. Elements consistent with shared decision-making were uncommon, with a mean OPTION 5 score of 22.6 (median = 20.0; sd = 13.05; range = 0-75) out of 100. OPTION 5 scores were positively associated with the length of the appointment and negatively associated with the veterinarian's years in practice when controlling for statistical interaction between client income and appointment type. Conclusion: Findings suggest an opportunity exists for veterinarians to incorporate more client involvement through increased use of shared decisionmaking behaviours during veterinary consultations.

OBJECTIVE To compare pet owners’ and veterinarians’ perceptions of veterinarian-client conversations concerning pet weight and identify challenges related to communication about weight. SAMPLE POPULATION Veterinarians (n = 24) and pet owners (27) in southern Ontario, Canada. PROCEDURES 3 veterinarian and 5 pet owner focus groups were conducted with a semistructured interview format. Thematic analysis of verbatim transcripts was conducted. RESULTS Pet owners valued weight as an important health indicator for pets yet did not expect to discuss weight extensively at every appointment. Owners expected veterinarians to provide options and tailor recommendations when discussing weight management. Owners appeared more concerned with underweight animals, whereas veterinarians focused on obese animals. Veterinarians identified communication challenges, including the perception that owners are uninterested in discussing weight and conversations can become adversarial. Veterinarians reported various benefits and challenges of using humor to address pet weight and emphasized that weight-related conversations often depend on the existing veterinarian-client relationship. CLINICAL RELEVANCE Some perceptions of pet owner expectations expressed by veterinarians in this study align with owner preferences, yet several opportunities exist for changes to veterinarians’ approaches to weight-related communication with clients.

Background Pet obesity is commonly encountered by veterinary professionals, yet little is known about their perception of communicating about pet weight. The objective of this study was to explore veterinary professionals’ perception of discussing pet obesity with clients. Methods An online survey targeting veterinary professionals was distributed via social media and veterinary organisation newsletters. Topics included respondents’ perceptions of weight‐related communication, factors related to approaching weight conversations and implicit weight bias. Results A total of 102 respondents to the survey were included in the final analysis. Avoidance of discussing pet obesity with certain clients was common (53.9%; 55/102). The most endorsed term for describing pets with excess weight to clients was ‘overweight’ (97.1%; 99/102). The pet's body condition score was rated the most important factor to consider when deciding how to approach a weight discussion with clients. Although only 29 participants completed the implicit association test (IAT), most of these participants were identified as having an unconscious preference for thin people. The small sample size limited the vignette analysis to descriptive only, and the IAT results should be interpreted cautiously. Conclusion This exploratory, cross‐sectional study provides early insight into veterinary professionals’ perceptions of pet obesity‐related communication and suggests the presence of weight bias in the profession that warrants further investigation.

OBJECTIVE Pet weight may be difficult for veterinary professionals to address with clients, particularly when pets are overweight or obese. The objective of this study was to characterize the communication processes and content of weight-related conversations occurring between veterinary professionals and clients. SAMPLE Audio-video recordings of 917 veterinarian-client-patient interactions involving a random sample of 60 veterinarians and a convenience sample of clients. PROCEDURES Companion animal veterinarians in southern Ontario, Canada, were randomly recruited, and interactions with their clients were audio-video recorded. Interactions were reviewed for mentions of weight, then further analyzed by means of a researcher-generated coding framework to provide a comprehensive assessment of communication specific to weight-related interactions. RESULTS 463 of 917 (50.5%) veterinary-client-patient interactions contained an exchange involving the mention of a single patient’s (dog or cat) weight and were included in final analysis. Of the 463 interactions, 150 (32.4%) involved a discussion of obesity for a single patient. Of these, 43.3% (65/150) included a weight management recommendation from the veterinary team, and 28% (42/150) provided clients with a reason for pursuing weight management. CLINICAL RELEVANCE Findings illustrate opportunities to optimize obesity communication to improve the health and wellbeing of veterinary patients.

There is a lack of knowledge regarding the lysine (Lys) requirements of mature dogs and whether there are breed differences. The present study aimed to determine the Lys requirement in 3 breeds of mature dogs using the indicator amino acid oxidation (IAAO) technique. Thirteen adult dogs were used, 4 Miniature Dachshunds (5.39 ± 0.71 kg; 1.05 ± 0.02 yr old, mean ± SD), 4 Beagles (8.09 ± 0.40 kg; 5.03 ± 0.09 yr old, mean ± SD), and 5 Labrador Retrievers (29.42 ± 2.04 kg; 3.30 ± 0.69 yr old, mean ± SD). After 14 d of adaptation to a basal extruded kibble diet, dogs were fed a test diet mildly deficient in Lys (Lys concentration = 0.36%) at 17 (Miniature Dachshunds) or 13 g/kg BW (Beagles and Labradors) for 2 d. The test diet was supplemented with 1 of 7 isonitrogenous Lys-Ala solutions, resulting in a final dietary Lys concentration of 0.36, 0.40, 0.44, 0.50, 0.54, 0.58, and 0.62% (as fed basis). Dogs received dietary concentrations of Lys in random order and no dog received the same order. Following 2 d of adaptation to the experimental diets, the dogs underwent IAAO studies. During the IAAO studies, total daily feed was divided in 13 equal meals. At the sixth meal, dogs were fed a bolus of L-[1-13C]-Phe (9.40 mg/kg BW); thereafter, L-[1-13C]-Phe was supplied with every meal (2.4 mg/kg BW). Total production of 13CO2 (F13CO2) during isotopic steady state was determined by enrichment of 13CO2 of breath samples and total production of CO2, measured using indirect calorimetry. A 2-phase linear regression model was used to derive the mean Lys requirement, defined as the breakpoint, and the upper 95% confidence limit was calculated as the recommended allowance (RA) for Lys intake. For Miniature Dachshunds, the study was repeated with a feed intake of 14 g/kg BW, but Lys requirements could not be determined at either feed intake, suggesting a requirement below the lowest concentration and intake. Mean Lys requirements for Beagles and Labradors were 0.455% (59.16 mg/kg BW) and 0.440% (57.19 mg/kg BW), respectively, on a dry matter basis. Pooling the data for these breeds provides a mean estimate of the Lys requirement at 0.448% (58.21 mg/kg BW) with an upper 95% CL of 0.526% (68.41 mg/kg BW) on a dry matter basis. In conclusion, the Lys requirements of Beagles and Labradors are similar while the requirement for Miniature Dachshunds is undetermined and likely lower. The estimated Lys requirement for Beagles and Labradors is higher than the NRC (2006) recommendation.