Dorothy Cimino Brown1, Raymond C Boston, John T Farrar. 1. Department of Clinical Studies-Philadelphia, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA. dottie@vet.upenn.edu
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether an activity monitor (AM) could be used to detect changes in activity in dogs with osteoarthritis treated with carprofen or a placebo. DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial. ANIMALS: 70 dogs with no clinically important abnormalities other than osteoarthritis for which they were not currently being treated. PROCEDURES: Dogs wore an AM continuously for 21 days. On days 8 through 21, the dogs were treated with carprofen (n = 35) or a placebo (35). Total activity counts for days 1 through 7 (baseline) were compared with total activity counts for days 15 through 21 (endpoint). The change in total activity count from baseline to endpoint was assessed within each treatment group as well as between groups. Linear regression analysis was performed to test for an association between treatment and percentage change in activity counts while controlling for other variables. RESULTS: For placebo-treated dogs, median baseline total activity count was not significantly different from median endpoint total activity count (1,378,408 vs 1,310,112, respectively). For dogs receiving carprofen, there was a significant increase in median activity count from baseline to endpoint (1,276,427 vs 1,374,133). When age and baseline activity counts were controlled for, dogs in the carpofen-treated group had a 20% increase in activity counts, compared with placebo-treated dogs (95% confidence interval, 10% to 26%). CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Results suggested that the AM used in the present study may be a valid outcome assessment tool for documenting improved activity associated with treatment in dogs with osteoarthritis.
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether an activity monitor (AM) could be used to detect changes in activity in dogs with osteoarthritis treated with carprofen or a placebo. DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial. ANIMALS: 70 dogs with no clinically important abnormalities other than osteoarthritis for which they were not currently being treated. PROCEDURES: Dogs wore an AM continuously for 21 days. On days 8 through 21, the dogs were treated with carprofen (n = 35) or a placebo (35). Total activity counts for days 1 through 7 (baseline) were compared with total activity counts for days 15 through 21 (endpoint). The change in total activity count from baseline to endpoint was assessed within each treatment group as well as between groups. Linear regression analysis was performed to test for an association between treatment and percentage change in activity counts while controlling for other variables. RESULTS: For placebo-treated dogs, median baseline total activity count was not significantly different from median endpoint total activity count (1,378,408 vs 1,310,112, respectively). For dogs receiving carprofen, there was a significant increase in median activity count from baseline to endpoint (1,276,427 vs 1,374,133). When age and baseline activity counts were controlled for, dogs in the carpofen-treated group had a 20% increase in activity counts, compared with placebo-treated dogs (95% confidence interval, 10% to 26%). CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Results suggested that the AM used in the present study may be a valid outcome assessment tool for documenting improved activity associated with treatment in dogs with osteoarthritis.
Authors: Christina T Siwak; P Dwight Tapp; Steven C Zicker; Heather L Murphey; Bruce A Muggenburg; Elizabeth Head; Carl W Cotman; Norton W Milgram Journal: Behav Neurosci Date: 2003-08 Impact factor: 1.912
Authors: Pascale Rialland; Sylvain Bichot; Bertrand Lussier; Maxim Moreau; Francis Beaudry; Jérôme R E del Castillo; Dominique Gauvin; Eric Troncy Journal: Can J Vet Res Date: 2013-01 Impact factor: 1.310
Authors: Bishoy S Eskander; Megan Barbar; Richard B Evans; Masataka Enomoto; B Duncan X Lascelles; Michael G Conzemius Journal: Can J Vet Res Date: 2020-01 Impact factor: 1.310
Authors: Feini Qu; Brendan D Stoeckl; Peter M Gebhard; Todd J Hullfish; Josh R Baxter; Robert L Mauck Journal: Ann Biomed Eng Date: 2018-08-06 Impact factor: 3.934
Authors: Sarah Malek; Susannah J Sample; Zeev Schwartz; Brett Nemke; Peer B Jacobson; Elizabeth M Cozzi; Susan L Schaefer; Jason A Bleedorn; Gerianne Holzman; Peter Muir Journal: BMC Vet Res Date: 2012-10-04 Impact factor: 2.741