Signs of distress in dogs are often normalized during routine veterinary care, creating an animal welfare concern. We sought to test whether targeted interventions during veterinary visits affect physiological indicators of stress in dogs. Some 28 dogs were examined within four visits across 8 weeks. All dogs received the same care during the first visit and were then randomized into control and intervention groups for visits 2–4. In the intervention group, 14 dogs underwent procedures designed to reduce stress and to enlist their collaboration during examination. The 14 dogs in the control group received routine care. At each visit, heart rate (HR), serum cortisol (CORT), neutrophil lymphocyte ratio (NLR), and creatine kinase (CK) were measured. A composite stress index based on the summed standardized scores for these markers was constructed. No differences in HR, NLR, and CK parameters between groups were found, and both groups had a decrease in CORT by visit four. However, the intervention group showed a greater overall decrease in CORT between the first and fourth visit than the control group (p < 0.04). The composite stress index differed between the first and fourth visits for the intervention group, but not for the control group (Intervention p = 0.03; Control p= 0.288). There was a tendency for the composite stress index to worsen at visit four vs. visit one for the control group. The findings suggest that dogs that participated in adaptive, collaborative exams and procedures designed to minimize fear had a greater reduction in stress over time compared to those receiving standard care.

Signs of distress in dogs during veterinary visits are often normalised rather than viewed as welfare concerns. Interventions designed to reduce fear during veterinary visits were evaluated to see if they affected dogs’ behaviours compared to dogs without interventions. Twenty-eight dogs were examined at four visits across eight weeks. Dogs were randomised into intervention (distress reduction/adaptive care) and control groups (standard care) and evaluated via the Working Dog Questionnaire – Pet Dog Version (WDQ-Pet). At visit 1 (baseline) all dogs received the control protocol. Homework was assigned following visit 1 to practice collaborative examination (intervention) or to pet the dog (control) for the same allotted time. At each visit, behaviours were scored (clinical stress score) via video and in-person observations when dogs entered the hospital, stepped onto a scale to be weighed, entered the exam room, at the beginning and end of examination, and after venipuncture. There were no differences between groups at visit 1, or across visits entering the hospital or exam room. At visit 4, intervention scores either decreased or remained low when weighed, and at the beginning and end of the physical exam. Control scores were significantly higher than the intervention scores during these periods. Reduced clinical stress scores indicate intervention dogs had improved care experience compared to the control. The study results highlight the value of applying simple and adaptable interventions, ultimately leading to improved animal care and welfare.