A high proportion of dogs and cats are fearful during veterinary visits, which in some cases may escalate into aggression. Here, we discuss factors that contribute to negative emotions in a veterinary setting and how these can be addressed. We briefly summarise the available evidence for the interventions discussed. The set-up of the waiting area (e.g., spatial dividers; elevated places for cat carriers), tailoring the examination and the treatment to the individual, considerate handling (minimal restraint when possible, avoiding leaning over or cornering animals) and offering high-value food or toys throughout the visit can promote security and, ideally, positive associations. Desensitisation and counterconditioning are highly recommended, both to prevent and address existing negative emotions. Short-term pain from injections can be minimised by using tactile and cognitive distractions and topical analgesics, which are also indicated for painful procedures such as ear cleanings. Recommendations for handling fearful animals to minimise aggressive responses are discussed. However, anxiolytics or sedation should be used whenever there is a risk of traumatising an animal or for safety reasons. Stress-reducing measures can decrease fear and stress in patients and consequently their owners, thus strengthening the relationship with the clients as well as increasing the professional satisfaction of veterinary staff.

To identify characteristics that distinguish long-term (LT: stay > 1 year) from short-term shelter dogs (ST: ≤5 months) and to investigate if a long-term stay impairs welfare, we compared ST and LT dogs in Austrian no-kill shelters. Analyses including characteristics such as breed, sex, or age (shelter records), problem behaviour, and personality (questionnaires completed by staff) showed that LT dogs were significantly more often a “dangerous breed”, male, and older when admitted to the shelter. They were rated higher on “aggression” and “high arousal” and lower on the personality dimension “amicability”. A welfare assessment protocol including reaction toward humans (Shelter Quality Protocol), and in-kennel observations were used to assess the effect of the long-term stay. LT dogs tended to show more signs of aggression toward an unfamiliar human, but welfare assessment revealed no difference. During resting periods, LT dogs spent more time resting head up and had more bouts resting head down. Prior to feeding, they stood, vocalised, and yawned more. LT dogs are characterised by specific features such as being aroused easily and having difficulties to relax. Whether this is a result of the long-term stay or personality-associated, consequently causing lower adoption rates, remains to be determined.

In children up to six years interactions such as interfering with the dog’s resources but also benign behaviors (e.g. petting) commonly precede a bite incident with the family dog. Therefore, the aim of the present study was to explore the development of everyday interactions between children up to six years and their family dogs and whether parents’ attitudes to supervision are related to those interactions. Additionally, we investigated whether behavior of dogs that had lived in the family for longer than the child differed from those that grew up with children. A self-selected sample of caregivers living with a child up to six years and a family dog was surveyed via an online questionnaire (N = 402). Frequency of observed child behaviors directed towards the dog and dog behaviors directed towards the child were scored on a six-point scale (1-never, 6-very often). Data on characteristics of the caregiver, the child and the dog were collected and a section surveying attitudes to supervision of child-dog interactions was included. Additionally, we asked whether the dog already injured the child. Benign child behaviors towards dogs were most frequently reported (mean±S.D.: 4.1±1.2), increased with child age (rs = 0.38, p<0.001) and reached high levels from six month on. Overall, resource-related interactions were relatively infrequent (2.1±1.1). Most common was the dog allowing the child to take objects from its mouth (4.1±1.7). This behavior was more common with older children (rs = 0.37, p<0.001). Reported injuries during resource-related interactions occurred while feeding treats or taking objects from the dog during fetch play. Dogs that had lived in the family for longer than the child showed less affiliative behaviors towards the child (e.g. energetic affiliative: U = -7.171, p<0.001) and more fear-related behaviors (U = -3.581, p<0.001). Finally, the caregivers’ attitudes to supervision were related to all child behaviors (e.g. allow unsafe behaviors – benign child behavior: rs = 0.47, p<0.001). The results of this study underline the need for a dog bite prevention approach directed towards the caregivers very early in the child-dog relationship, taking into account the child’s age and individual needs of the dog.