Amare Bihon, Daniel Amognehegn, Getachew Derbew, Tsedalu Yirsa
{"title":"工作马:埃塞俄比亚西北部Debre Markos地区及其周边地区福利和管理实践评估。","authors":"Amare Bihon, Daniel Amognehegn, Getachew Derbew, Tsedalu Yirsa","doi":"10.1111/evj.14497","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Working equines play a crucial role in human livelihoods globally, yet their management is often inadequate.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To assess the welfare and management practices of working equines.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>A cross-sectional study was conducted from December 2022 to April 2023 in and around Debre Markos, Northwest Ethiopia.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Physical examination and structured interviews were used as data collection tools. A total of 384 equines (186 donkeys, 144 horses, and 54 mules) and their owners were selected through a purposive sampling method.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The results showed that 60.4% of the equines were used for transporting goods. While the majority of the respondents used both traditional and modern treatments for disease control, regular check-ups were infrequently practised. Notably, 54.2% of owners refrained from using saddles for their equines, 72.4% of individuals did not engage in hoof care for their equines, and 13% neglected enclosure cleaning. The prevalence of different lesions was 52.1%, with donkeys being more likely to develop skin, mouth, and foot lesions than horses (Adjusted odds ratio (OR) 3.008, 95% CI 1.572-5.752, p = 0.001). Farmers were more likely to practise regular check-ups for their equines compared to merchants, while controlling for other factors (OR 0.441, 0.286-0.679, p < 0.001), and literate individuals were more likely to conduct regular check-ups than unschooled individuals (OR: 3.867, 2.436-6.139, p < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Main limitation: </strong>Seasonal variations-welfare and management practices may change depending on the season, affecting factors such as workload, feed availability, and disease prevalence. Subjectivity in welfare assessment-some welfare indicators, such as body condition scoring and behavioural observations, may involve subjective judgement, leading to potential observer bias. Reliance on owner reports - information obtained through interviews and questionnaires may be influenced by recall bias or social desirability bias, as owners may not always report poor management practices accurately.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Significant issues were identified in regular check-ups, harness usage, enclosure cleaning, and hoof management. Therefore, improving owners' awareness and implementation of these practices is strongly recommended to enhance equine welfare in the study area.</p>","PeriodicalId":11796,"journal":{"name":"Equine Veterinary Journal","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Working equines: Assessment of welfare and management practices in and around Debre Markos District, Northwest Ethiopia.\",\"authors\":\"Amare Bihon, Daniel Amognehegn, Getachew Derbew, Tsedalu Yirsa\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/evj.14497\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Working equines play a crucial role in human livelihoods globally, yet their management is often inadequate.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To assess the welfare and management practices of working equines.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>A cross-sectional study was conducted from December 2022 to April 2023 in and around Debre Markos, Northwest Ethiopia.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Physical examination and structured interviews were used as data collection tools. A total of 384 equines (186 donkeys, 144 horses, and 54 mules) and their owners were selected through a purposive sampling method.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The results showed that 60.4% of the equines were used for transporting goods. While the majority of the respondents used both traditional and modern treatments for disease control, regular check-ups were infrequently practised. Notably, 54.2% of owners refrained from using saddles for their equines, 72.4% of individuals did not engage in hoof care for their equines, and 13% neglected enclosure cleaning. The prevalence of different lesions was 52.1%, with donkeys being more likely to develop skin, mouth, and foot lesions than horses (Adjusted odds ratio (OR) 3.008, 95% CI 1.572-5.752, p = 0.001). Farmers were more likely to practise regular check-ups for their equines compared to merchants, while controlling for other factors (OR 0.441, 0.286-0.679, p < 0.001), and literate individuals were more likely to conduct regular check-ups than unschooled individuals (OR: 3.867, 2.436-6.139, p < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Main limitation: </strong>Seasonal variations-welfare and management practices may change depending on the season, affecting factors such as workload, feed availability, and disease prevalence. Subjectivity in welfare assessment-some welfare indicators, such as body condition scoring and behavioural observations, may involve subjective judgement, leading to potential observer bias. Reliance on owner reports - information obtained through interviews and questionnaires may be influenced by recall bias or social desirability bias, as owners may not always report poor management practices accurately.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Significant issues were identified in regular check-ups, harness usage, enclosure cleaning, and hoof management. Therefore, improving owners' awareness and implementation of these practices is strongly recommended to enhance equine welfare in the study area.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11796,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Equine Veterinary Journal\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Equine Veterinary Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"97\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/evj.14497\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"农林科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"VETERINARY SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Equine Veterinary Journal","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/evj.14497","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"VETERINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:马在全球人类生计中发挥着至关重要的作用,但它们的管理往往不足。目的:评价工作马的福利和管理措施。研究设计:一项横断面研究于2022年12月至2023年4月在埃塞俄比亚西北部Debre Markos及其周边地区进行。方法:采用体格检查和结构化访谈作为数据收集工具。通过有目的的抽样方法,共选择了384匹马(驴186匹、马144匹、骡子54匹)及其主人。结果:60.4%的马用于运输货物。虽然大多数答复者同时使用传统和现代治疗方法来控制疾病,但很少进行定期检查。值得注意的是,54.2%的主人不给马使用马鞍,72.4%的人不给马做蹄部护理,13%的人忽视了围栏的清洁。不同病变的患病率为52.1%,驴比马更容易出现皮肤、口腔和足部病变(校正优势比(OR) 3.008, 95% CI 1.572-5.752, p = 0.001)。与商人相比,农民更有可能对马进行定期检查,同时控制其他因素(OR 0.441, 0.286-0.679, p)。主要限制:季节性变化——福利和管理做法可能会因季节而变化,影响因素如工作量、饲料供应和疾病流行。福利评估的主观性——一些福利指标,如身体状况评分和行为观察,可能涉及主观判断,导致潜在的观察者偏见。对业主报告的依赖——通过访谈和问卷获得的信息可能受到回忆偏差或社会期望偏差的影响,因为业主可能并不总是准确地报告不良的管理做法。结论:在定期检查、马具使用、围场清洁和蹄子管理中发现了重大问题。因此,强烈建议提高业主对这些做法的认识和实施,以提高研究地区马的福利。
Working equines: Assessment of welfare and management practices in and around Debre Markos District, Northwest Ethiopia.
Background: Working equines play a crucial role in human livelihoods globally, yet their management is often inadequate.
Objective: To assess the welfare and management practices of working equines.
Study design: A cross-sectional study was conducted from December 2022 to April 2023 in and around Debre Markos, Northwest Ethiopia.
Methods: Physical examination and structured interviews were used as data collection tools. A total of 384 equines (186 donkeys, 144 horses, and 54 mules) and their owners were selected through a purposive sampling method.
Results: The results showed that 60.4% of the equines were used for transporting goods. While the majority of the respondents used both traditional and modern treatments for disease control, regular check-ups were infrequently practised. Notably, 54.2% of owners refrained from using saddles for their equines, 72.4% of individuals did not engage in hoof care for their equines, and 13% neglected enclosure cleaning. The prevalence of different lesions was 52.1%, with donkeys being more likely to develop skin, mouth, and foot lesions than horses (Adjusted odds ratio (OR) 3.008, 95% CI 1.572-5.752, p = 0.001). Farmers were more likely to practise regular check-ups for their equines compared to merchants, while controlling for other factors (OR 0.441, 0.286-0.679, p < 0.001), and literate individuals were more likely to conduct regular check-ups than unschooled individuals (OR: 3.867, 2.436-6.139, p < 0.001).
Main limitation: Seasonal variations-welfare and management practices may change depending on the season, affecting factors such as workload, feed availability, and disease prevalence. Subjectivity in welfare assessment-some welfare indicators, such as body condition scoring and behavioural observations, may involve subjective judgement, leading to potential observer bias. Reliance on owner reports - information obtained through interviews and questionnaires may be influenced by recall bias or social desirability bias, as owners may not always report poor management practices accurately.
Conclusions: Significant issues were identified in regular check-ups, harness usage, enclosure cleaning, and hoof management. Therefore, improving owners' awareness and implementation of these practices is strongly recommended to enhance equine welfare in the study area.
期刊介绍:
Equine Veterinary Journal publishes evidence to improve clinical practice or expand scientific knowledge underpinning equine veterinary medicine. This unrivalled international scientific journal is published 6 times per year, containing peer-reviewed articles with original and potentially important findings. Contributions are received from sources worldwide.