Over time the human–animal bond has been changed. For instance, the role of pets has changed from work animals (protecting houses, catching mice) to animals with a social function, giving companionship. Pets can be important for the physical and mental health of their owners but may also transmit zoonotic infections. The One Health initiative is a worldwide strategy for expanding collaborations in all aspects of health care for humans, animals, and the environment. However, in One Health communications the role of particularly dogs and cats is often underestimated. Objective: Evaluation of positive and negative One Health issues of the human–companion animal relationship with a focus on zoonotic aspects of cats and dogs in industrialized countries. Method: Literature review. Results: Pets undoubtedly have a positive effect on human health, while owners are increasing aware of pet’s health and welfare. The changing attitude of humans with regard to pets and their environment can also lead to negative effects such as changes in feeding practices, extreme breeding, and behavioral problems, and anthropozoonoses. For the human, there may be a higher risk of the transmission of zoonotic infections due to trends such as sleeping with pets, allowing pets to lick the face or wounds, bite accidents, keeping exotic animals, the importation of rescue dogs, and soil contact. Conclusions: One Health issues need frequently re-evaluated as the close human–animal relationship with pet animals can totally differ compared to decennia ago. Because of the changed human–companion animal bond, recommendations regarding responsible pet-ownership, including normal hygienic practices, responsible breeding, feeding, housing, and mental and physical challenges conforming the biology of the animal are required. Education can be performed by vets and physicians as part of the One Health concept.

It is crucial for good dog welfare that humans be able to accurately and adequately recognize and meet dogs’ needs. However, humans may do a poor job of recognizing dogs’ needs due to their tendency to anthropomorphize. The aim of this study was to develop a framework for dogs’ needs that would help humans to recognize and meet their actual needs, thereby improving dogs’ quality of life. Using the Delphi method, to reach as close to a consensus as possible from an expert panel, Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs was adapted to become the Dogs’ Hierarchy of Needs. To do so, the relevant scientific literature was reviewed to identify 37 specific dog needs, which were group into seven need groups. Those groups were then organized onto five need levels, which were as analogous to Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs as possible. The expert panel was asked to assess various aspects of the adapted hierarchy in comparison to the original, including face validity, whether they agreed with how the need levels were ordered in terms of importance/priority, and whether they felt that any need groups should be more or less prioritized for any specific dog categories (e.g., senior dogs). After three rounds of expert feedback, there was sufficient consensus for all aspects except items pertaining to the prioritization of any need groups for specific dog categories. That aspect of the adapted hierarchy will need to be readdressed in the next phase of this project: the development of a tool to assess the quality of life of dogs that reside in shelters/rescue organizations and post-adoption once they have been rehomed.

Every shelter dog is faced with the challenge to adapt to a kennel environment. To monitor the welfare of individual shelter dogs, evaluating behavioural and physiological parameters, potentially useful as indicators for adaptability of individual dogs is crucial. Nocturnal activity, i.e. resting patterns, has already been identified as a candidate indicator of adaptability and can be easily measured remotely with the help of sensors. We investigated the usefulness of a 3-axial accelerometer (Actigraph®) to monitor nocturnal activity in shelter dogs every night during the full first two weeks in-shelter starting directly at shelter intake, as a measure of welfare. Additionally, urinary cortisol/creatinine ratio (UCCR), body weight and behaviour data were collected to evaluate stress responses. A control group of pet dogs in homes, matched to the shelter dog group, was also monitored. Shelter dogs had higher nocturnal activity and UCCRs than pet dogs, especially during the first days in the shelter. Nocturnal activity, both accelerometer measures and activity behaviour, and UCCRs decreased over nights in the shelter. Smaller dogs had higher nocturnal activity and UCCRs than larger dogs and showed less autogrooming during the first nights. Dogs with no previous kennel experience had higher nocturnal activity and UCCRs, and showed less body shaking, than dogs with previous kennel experience. Overall, sheltered dogs also showed less body shaking during the first night. The number of dogs showing paw lifting decreased over days. Age class and sex effected only few activity behaviours. Shelter dogs significantly lost body weight after 12 days in the shelter compared to the moment of intake. Shelter dogs had disrupted nocturnal resting patterns and UCCRs compared to pet dogs and seem to partly adapt to the shelter environment after two weeks. Sensor-supported identification of nocturnal activity can be a useful additional tool for welfare assessments in animal shelters.

Dogs in shelters are faced with the challenge of adapting to a kennel after relinquishment and to a novel home after adoption. To measure adaptability of dogs, more feasible behavioural and physiological parameters need to be validated in different contexts. To evaluate nocturnal activity as an indicator of adaptability, we compared nocturnal activity, urinary cortisol:creatinine ratio (UCCR), and body weight changes of sheltered dogs the first period after intake in the shelter and after adoption. Nocturnal activity and UCCRs were significantly lower the first days after adoption than in the shelter. After adoption, nocturnal activity was significantly lower on night 2 than night 1, but not on night 3 and 4, suggesting a form of ‘rebound of resting’ during night 2 in the new home. UCCRs significantly decreased 7 days after adoption. Body weight decreased in the shelter but increased again after adoption. These findings suggest that overall, dogs rest better in a novel home than in a novel shelter but, in both contexts, some form of adaptation takes place. Nocturnal activity measured by an accelerometer differentiated well between shelter and home environments, and corresponded to UCCR responses, which supports usefulness of the method to monitor canine adaptability to novel environments.