Table 2 - uploaded by Kathryn Dybdall
Content may be subject to copyright.
Source publication
Animals entering a shelter environment may behave differently upon arrival depending upon their previous experiences and life history. To examine this, 86 domestic cats were scored using a seven-level behavioral measure for the first 3 days upon entering an animal shelter. Data were then grouped according to cats surrendered by their owner (OS) or...
Contexts in source publication
Context 1
... cats (51%) were determined to be unsuited for adoption and were euthanized, with 24 unsuited for adoption due to disease. A larger percentage of the group of cats euthanized for disease were strays (67%) compared to owner surrender cats (33%) (see Table 2 for details). ...
Context 2
... we examined the differences between the stress ratings of the 86 cats and their outcome, an ANOVA revealed those cats determined suitable for adoption had lower mean stress ratings than cats determined unsuitable for adoption (F 1,85 = 4.837, p = 0.031; see Table 2). Moreover, when we analyzed the stress ratings of just the cats determined non-adoptable, the OS cats had significantly higher stress ratings than the S cats (F 1,43 = 5.345, p = 0.026; see Table 2). ...
Context 3
... we examined the differences between the stress ratings of the 86 cats and their outcome, an ANOVA revealed those cats determined suitable for adoption had lower mean stress ratings than cats determined unsuitable for adoption (F 1,85 = 4.837, p = 0.031; see Table 2). Moreover, when we analyzed the stress ratings of just the cats determined non-adoptable, the OS cats had significantly higher stress ratings than the S cats (F 1,43 = 5.345, p = 0.026; see Table 2). Of those determined non-adoptable, a little over half (54.55%) were euthanized due to illness or disease. ...
Context 4
... this sub group of diseased cats, OS cats showed significantly greater behavioral stress ratings than S cats (F 1,23 = 5.734, p = .026; see Table 2). Other reasons for euthanasia were as follows: 12 for aggression (OS n = 6, S n = 6), 4 for litterbox issues (OS n = 2, S n = 2), and 4 for other (OS n = 1, S n = 3). ...
Citations
... Wells and Hepper (2000) investigated dogs that were adopted from shelters and found that stray animals were more likely to have owner-reported undesirable behaviours than surrendered animals. Within shelters, one study found that owner-surrendered cats showed more behavioural signs of stress in comparison to stray cats (Dybdall et al. 2007). While further research is required to understand differences in populations from various sources, the present study shows that the population of animals relinquished after being posted on supported self-rehoming websites are less preferred by adopters than those that are diverted. ...
As animals experience distress in animal shelters, leaders call for increased efforts to divert intake of companion animals away from shelters. One novel intake diversion strategy is supported self-rehoming, where owners find new homes for their animals without surrendering to a physical shelter. This study aimed to identify predictors of successful diversion of animals through the AdoptaPet.com ‘Rehome’ online platform. Data for dogs (n = 100,342) and cats (n = 48,484) were analysed through logistic regression to assess the association of animal- and owner-related factors and outcome. Overall, 87.1% of dogs and 85.7% of cats were successfully diverted from animal shelters, out of which, 37.8% of dogs and 35.3% of cats were kept by their original owner. Multiple animal-related factors predicted increased odds of diversion (e.g. younger, smaller). Dog and cat owners who set a longer rehoming deadline (i.e. > 8 weeks) were over twice as likely to keep or adopt out their animal. Dog owners who surrendered for owner-related reasons had increased odds of diversion in comparison to animal behaviour issues. We conclude that online-supported, self-rehoming platforms provide pet owners with an alternative to relinquishment that may reduce the intake of animals to shelters; however, owners with animals that are not preferred by adopters may have to decide whether to keep their animal or relinquish their animal to a shelter or rescue. These results provide guidance for animal shelter professionals on the likelihood of successful diversion programmes given certain animal and owner characteristics.
... Returning to the shelter is potentially stressful for cats, leading to a compromise in their welfare. While it is impossible to definitively say for all cats if being in a shelter is more stressful than living in a home [3], the type of shelter housing [4,5], density of cats [6,7], cat intake origin [8], and provided enrichment in a shelter [4,9] can impact the level of stress cats experience. Cats who are more stressed in the shelter eat less, lose more weight, and are more likely to develop upper-respiratory infections. ...
... A sign of stress can be a change in physical health; 82% of shelter cats lost weight in their first week in the shelter [10]. For owned cats, the transition from home to shelter poses the risk of increased stress compared to stray cats entering the shelter, but it is unknown if this holds true for cats who were adopted and then returned to the shelter [8]. Therefore, returns represent a risk to cat welfare by potentially increasing stress and exposure to disease. ...
There is considerable research on why cats are initially relinquished to shelters, but much less attention has been given to returns, despite the significant implications for shelter capacity and cat welfare. Furthermore, the structure of many databases fails to account for cats who are returned beyond 30 days, despite this making up a substantial portion of returns. In the current study, we examined common risk factors and reasons for return in a population of 2642 shelter cats. We found that cats who were older at the time of adoption or had a bite history had an increased risk of return, whereas cats that were in foster care prior to adoption had a decreased risk of return. We divided the returns by the time to return (<30 days: short term, >30 days: long term) to examine whether time to return had an impact. Approximately half the cats were returned in the short term. Cats were more likely to be returned for reasons, such as behavior, unwanted, and other pet in the short term and personal reasons, cost, euthanasia, and stray in the long-term return. Strategies to reduce returns should consider different solutions for short and long returns to maximize effectiveness.
... Welfare assessments can be used to monitor the welfare and QOL of animals throughout their time in the shelter. Some welfare assessments have been used to monitor acclimation during the initial few days (Dybdall et al., 2007;Gourkow et al., 2014b) and weeks (Dybdall, 2011;Tanaka et al., 2012) in the shelter, while other assessments have been used to evaluate QOL of animals that reside in the shelter long term (Gouveia et al., 2011;Tanaka et al., 2017). These assessments are generally focused on behavioral, physical, or physiological metrics; however, some may include resource metrics such as food and water provisions or staff availability (Arhant and Troxler, 2017;Barnard et al., 2016). ...
... Of the thirty publications included in the review; thirteen studies specifically focused on using welfare assessments to monitor acclimation to the shelter environment. Eleven studies were published in peerreviewed journals (Andrukonis et al., 2021;Arhant et al., 2015;Arhant and Troxler, 2017;Broadley et al., 2014;Dybdall et al., 2007;Ellis et al., 2021;Gourkow et al., 2014b;Gouveia et al., 2011;McCobb et al., 2005;Tanaka et al., 2017Tanaka et al., , 2012 and two studies were part of a thesis or dissertation (Dybdall, 2011;Hawkins, 2005). Seven studies used a single assessment tool to evaluate acclimation (Arhant et al., 2015;Arhant and Troxler, 2017;Broadley et al., 2014;Dybdall et al., 2007;Gouveia et al., 2011;Tanaka et al., 2017Tanaka et al., , 2012 and five studies used two or more assessment tools to monitor acclimation (Andrukonis et al., 2021;Dybdall, 2011;Ellis et al., 2021;Gourkow et al., 2014b;Hawkins, 2005). ...
... Eleven studies were published in peerreviewed journals (Andrukonis et al., 2021;Arhant et al., 2015;Arhant and Troxler, 2017;Broadley et al., 2014;Dybdall et al., 2007;Ellis et al., 2021;Gourkow et al., 2014b;Gouveia et al., 2011;McCobb et al., 2005;Tanaka et al., 2017Tanaka et al., , 2012 and two studies were part of a thesis or dissertation (Dybdall, 2011;Hawkins, 2005). Seven studies used a single assessment tool to evaluate acclimation (Arhant et al., 2015;Arhant and Troxler, 2017;Broadley et al., 2014;Dybdall et al., 2007;Gouveia et al., 2011;Tanaka et al., 2017Tanaka et al., , 2012 and five studies used two or more assessment tools to monitor acclimation (Andrukonis et al., 2021;Dybdall, 2011;Ellis et al., 2021;Gourkow et al., 2014b;Hawkins, 2005). ...
The aim of this scoping review was to provide an overview of the published welfare and quality of life assessments that are available for shelter cats. The specific objectives were to identify the available assessments, characterize the assessments as validated or non-validated, and discuss how the available tools were used in the shelter environment. Literature published globally, in English or with an available English translation, between the years 2000 and 2021 was identified through searching five databases and hand searching. Abstracts and full papers were screened, relevant articles obtained based on the inclusion criteria, and welfare assessment methods were characterized. Of 687 unique citations identified, 30 met the inclusion criteria of including a quality of life assessment or welfare analysis in shelter cats. There were seven validated ethogram-based assessment tools and two validated physiological-based assessment methods used to evaluate stress and welfare. Assessment tools were used to either evaluate a cat’s acclimation to the shelter environment or evaluate welfare interventions. The Cat Stress Score (CSS) was the most commonly used tool to evaluate stress, with its inclusion in 19 publications. However, the stress level identified on the CSS only correlated with measures of physiological stress in one out of four studies, highlighting the difficulty and complexity of determining stress levels in cats. In general, welfare assessments that incorporated physical and behavior metrics provided a comprehensive evaluation of general welfare and were shown to be reliable between raters. Cats generally acclimate to the shelter within a few weeks. Stress and welfare assessments indicated that the acclimation period was less stressful for cats that were provided hide boxes and/or human interaction. Shelters should consider incorporating a validated assessment into their welfare program and incorporate interventions, such as hide boxes or structured human interaction, to help relieve acute acclimation stress.
... The most popular, as previously mentioned, is the CSS [6]. While this rating system is widely used, it has been criticized for not being sensitive enough to recognise certain expressions of stress (e.g., feigned sleep; [23]), lacking a published training guide [24], and variable or rarely reported interobserver reliability. Zeiler et al. [25] introduced a Demeanour Scoring system (referred to elsewhere as a Handling Scale score; [26]) to monitor behaviour of cats over time during hospitalization. ...
Safeguarding the well-being of cats is essential to the mission of any responsible animal shelter. Environmental enrichment and behaviour modification are often key to this goal. Measuring response to these interventions is essential to ensure strategies are successful. There are often many staff and volunteers involved in these efforts, and a lack of standardised language can make monitoring progress difficult. Ordinal rating scales of key behaviours can be a useful way to summarise observations and ensure that common language is used. However, it is crucial that these scales have good interobserver agreement and reliability, so operational definitions and training systems are important. This paper presents a method for evaluating four different expressions of cat welfare on a 0–5 scale: modified Fear, Anxiety, and Stress score; Response to Petting score; Participation in Play score; and Food Intake Summary score. All scales showed almost perfect average interobserver agreement (linear weighted κ) and excellent average interobserver reliability (interclass correlation coefficient). These scales may prove useful to other shelters, or any other environment where evaluating response to interventions is important to the welfare of cats, such as research facilities or home environments. The exceptional interobserver agreement and reliability of this study compared with some others highlights the importance of standardised training programs.
... Some common triggers of stress in cats are summarized in Table 1. For example, the exposure to a novel environment and social interaction (21,42) and change in caretaking routine (32,33,44) is controlled by owners or working staff but not the cat. Cats that have no outdoor access or are in lengthy sheltering may not be meeting their needs of expressing natural behavior and social interaction (4,58). ...
... Bath (36,37) Hospital visit (38)(39)(40), handling and restraint practices (28,29) Confinement (27,41) Novel environment (e.g., entering shelter) (21,42,43) New socialization, such as group housing (21,42) Prolonged/chronic stress Sickness behavior, (e.g., vomiting) Changed caretaking routine (24,32,33,44) Anorexia Long-term sheltering (31) House soiling problem (45,46) In appropriate elimination (1,47) Social conflict, blocked access to the litterbox (1), changes related to litter (47,48) Chronic disease, such as feline idiopathic cystitis (49) Fecal marking (1) Outdoor and indoor social conflicts (1) Urine marking (1,50) Lower urinary tract disorders (51), substantial changes in the social and physical environment (1,49,50,52) Depression-like symptom (e.g., inactivity) Long-term sheltering (53) Aggression (2,(54)(55)(56) Social conflicts (2,54,57), high housing density (43), co-residence with dogs (58) and other cats (59), long-term sheltering (53) Stereotypic behavior (e.g., over grooming or self-mutilation, tail biting, and obsessive vocalization) (60,61) Stress from chronic disease, environmental and social conflict (1, 60, 61) Frustration from limited outdoor access (58,61,62) concealed areas (i.e., hiding), reduced activity level and diversity, anxious body postures, and aggression are indicative of acute stress in cats (8,24,26). Noteworthy, coping style (e.g., reactive or proactive) was reported to impact behavioral responses of individual cats to stressful events or environments such as acute cage confinement (41). ...
... Bath (36,37) Hospital visit (38)(39)(40), handling and restraint practices (28,29) Confinement (27,41) Novel environment (e.g., entering shelter) (21,42,43) New socialization, such as group housing (21,42) Prolonged/chronic stress Sickness behavior, (e.g., vomiting) Changed caretaking routine (24,32,33,44) Anorexia Long-term sheltering (31) House soiling problem (45,46) In appropriate elimination (1,47) Social conflict, blocked access to the litterbox (1), changes related to litter (47,48) Chronic disease, such as feline idiopathic cystitis (49) Fecal marking (1) Outdoor and indoor social conflicts (1) Urine marking (1,50) Lower urinary tract disorders (51), substantial changes in the social and physical environment (1,49,50,52) Depression-like symptom (e.g., inactivity) Long-term sheltering (53) Aggression (2,(54)(55)(56) Social conflicts (2,54,57), high housing density (43), co-residence with dogs (58) and other cats (59), long-term sheltering (53) Stereotypic behavior (e.g., over grooming or self-mutilation, tail biting, and obsessive vocalization) (60,61) Stress from chronic disease, environmental and social conflict (1, 60, 61) Frustration from limited outdoor access (58,61,62) concealed areas (i.e., hiding), reduced activity level and diversity, anxious body postures, and aggression are indicative of acute stress in cats (8,24,26). Noteworthy, coping style (e.g., reactive or proactive) was reported to impact behavioral responses of individual cats to stressful events or environments such as acute cage confinement (41). ...
Domestic cats are descended from solitary wild species and rely heavily on the olfaction system and chemical signals for daily activities. Cats kept as companion animals may experience stress due to a lack of predictability in their physical or social environment. The olfactory system is intimately connected to the brain regions controlling stress response, thus providing unique opportunities for olfactory strategies to modify stress and related behavioral problems in cats. However, the olfactory intervention of stress in cats has been mainly focused on several analog chemical signals and studies often provide inconsistent and non-replicable results. Supportive evidence in the literature for the potentially effective olfactory stimuli (e.g., cheek and mammary gland secretions, and plant attractants) in treating stress in cats was reviewed. Limitations with some of the work and critical considerations from studies with natural or negative results were discussed as well. Current findings sometimes constitute weak evidence of a reproducible effect of cat odor therapy for stress. The welfare application of an olfactory stimulus in stress alleviation requires a better understanding of its biological function in cats and the mechanisms at play, which may be achieved in future studies through methodological improvement (e.g., experiment pre-registration and appropriate control setting) and in-depth investigation with modern techniques that integrate multisource data. Contributions from individual and environmental differences should be considered for the stress response of a single cat and its sensitivity to olfactory manipulation. Olfactory strategies customized for specific contexts and individual cats can be more effective in improving the welfare of cats in various stressful conditions.
... This may have been stress related. Even cats well adapted to life in conventional homes are notoriously neophobic, 19 and may initially react negatively to unfamiliar environments or people. Stress levels in shy cats placed in cages decreased over several days. ...
Objectives
The aim of this study was to analyze the behavioral characteristics and success of adoption for previously hoarded cats.
Methods
Shelter records and post-adoption surveys were analyzed for hoarded cats ⩾6 months old at intake. A non-standard scoring system was used. Intake scores were allocated contemporaneously and socialization scores were applied retrospectively for three time points (TPs): 5–10 days post-intake (shelter TP), ⩽1 week post-adoption (home TP1) and >1 week post-adoption (home TP2). Adoption returns were compared between hoarded and non-hoarded cats.
Results
The study included 195 hoarded cats, of which 174 were adopted. Of 164 cats with intake scores, 86 (52%) were scored as ‘friendly’ at intake. Forty-five cats had socialization scores for all of the TPs, and of these, the percentages of ‘supersocial’ or ‘social’ decreased from 87% at the shelter TP to 47% at home TP1, then increased to 84% at home TP2. Most cats that scored as ‘tense’ at intake had supersocial or social scores at home TP2. Nine of the 88 cats with survey results had out-of-box (OOB) elimination in either the shelter or home but only 1/88 in both. Adopters expressed positive feelings for 42/43 cats for which feelings-based language was used in their survey responses. Notable behaviors, such as neediness, were recorded for 48/88 cats. Relationships with other household pets were typically positive. Eighteen of 174 hoarded (10%) and 188/2662 non-hoarded (7.1%) cats were returned post-adoption. Of these, six hoarded and 87 non-hoarded returns included behavioral reasons. There were no significant differences between hoarded and non-hoarded cats for total or behavioral returns.
Conclusions and relevance
Hoarded cats had high adoption rates, high adopter satisfaction and the potential for good emotional well-being in adoptive homes. Behavior at intake and OOB elimination in the shelter may not reflect post-adoption behavior. Behavior-based outcome decisions for these vulnerable animals should be deferred to allow time for habituation.
... 61 Los efectos ansiolíticos de fármacos comúnmente administrados para controlar el estrés en pequeñas especies (gabapentina), reflejaron CSS entre 1 y 3 en pacientes premedicados 1 o 2 h antes de la cita en el hospital, correspondientes a mascotas relajadas o levemente tensas. 62 Por otra parte, Dybdall K, et al. 63 determinaron el comportamiento de gatos remitidos a refugios por sus propios dueños, quienes presentan frecuentemente CSS elevados con midriasis, hiperventilación, orejas y bigotes hacia atrás, y una mayor prevalencia de infecciones del tracto respiratorio alto, en comparación con animales recuperados de la calle, debido a que la separación con su cuidador constituye un estresor psicosocial adicional que compromete la inmunidad como consecuencia del estrés crónico. ...
... Medium-sized cages are a good option, so long as shelter employees provide isolated individuals regular physical social contact [51]. If a cat is taken off the street, the problem arises of identifying which category it belongs to; this, however, can be solved relatively easily by observing its reaction to other cats and to people [52,53]. Trained volunteers play a key role here, as they do also in resocializing cats who were previously owned by humans, but then spent a long time in the streets. ...
Urban environments are inhabited by several types of feline populations, which we can differentiate as feral cats, free-roaming pets, and confined pets. Due to a shift in the cultural representation of cats from pest controllers to companion animals, cats living semi-independently of humans are perceived increasingly negatively, while the pet population has become the object of intense care. A regulative approach converges with a concern for welfare in the operation and educational campaigns of municipal shelters, which through their implementation of neutering policies have proven to be key players in the contemporary relation of urban cats and humans. The generally widespread notion of cat welfare associated with a secure life comes into tension with the fact that the psychobiological needs of feral cats are significantly different than those of pets. It becomes apparent that individual interactions between humans and cats in urban environments in the Anthropocene are increasingly influenced by the intervention of institutions that can be characterized as seeking to administer the wild.
... The way in which cats respond to a novel environment can depend on their experience and behavioural style or temperament (Dybdall et al., 2007). The bold/shy behavioural style is a general response to novelty (McCune, 1995). ...
It is often stressful for cats to be placed in cages in a shelter and environmental enrichment (EE) of the caging is one mechanism for mitigating this stress. The behavioural style of 72 cats was assessed as bold or shy. They were then randomly allocated (approximately balanced by behavioural style) to one of the following EE treatments in single standard cages: a hiding box (BOX), a perching shelf (SHELF), or no additional EE (CTRL) and their behavioural and faecal glucocorticoid metabolite (FGM) responses were examined. Continuous focal observations of activity, location in the cage, and posture were conducted using video recordings of two 4-h periods/day/cat, over a period of 10 days. Food intake and Cat-Stress-Scores (CSS) were recorded daily. Faecal samples were collected for analysis of FGM. The data were analysed using repeated measures models with fixed effects of day, treatment group, behavioural style, and their interactions. Cats in BOX had significantly lower FGM, and consumed significantly more food daily, than did cats in CTRL. Shy cats had a significantly greater probability of registering a CSS ≥ 3 and had a significantly greater CSS on days 1-3 than bold cats, and within the treatment group BOX, shy cats spent a significantly greater percentage of time in the hiding box than bold cats. Day in study was a significant factor for daily food intake and percentage of time spent eating – which tended to increase across time – and for percentage of time spent grooming – which tended to decrease across time. These results suggest that the caging was a stressor that was partially mitigated by the inclusion of EE (a hiding box), that the stress responses of bold and shy cats differed, and that the stress diminishes with time. The results confirm the benefit of the provision of a hiding box in singly housed caging.
... While one study has shown that cats can acclimate to this new environment in 2-5 weeks [4], another study found that some cats may never adjust to this new form of confinement and may remain stressed for months [6,7]. The diverse origins of cats that enter animal shelters (e.g., owner surrendered vs. feral vs. stray) may also impact their behavior towards human interaction [8]. ...
Reducing stress is important to maintaining the health of shelter cats and decreasing the risk of upper respiratory disease (URD). The aim of this study was to determine if the frequency and/or duration of daily routine handling of shelter cats affects the likelihood of URD development. At a closed admission shelter, each cat free of URD on intake was given a cage card for recording handling data. These data included: date and times when the cat was handled, duration of handling, if and when the cat developed signs of URD, and the handler identity. Cox regression was used to determine the relationship between these factors and URD development. We found cats that did not develop URD were handled significantly more than cats that did (1.1 times per day vs. 0.7 times per day, p < 0.001). Increased frequency of handling had a borderline significant effect on the hazard of developing URD (HR 0.37; CI: 0.13–1.1; p = 0.066). No other parameters were significantly associated with the development of URD; however, small sample size may be responsible for this finding. A larger study is needed to elucidate the relationship between handling and URD development.
