| Literature DB >> 35071387 |
Katerina Tomsič1, Kristina Rakinić2, Alenka Seliškar1.
Abstract
The aim of this study was to assess the personal experience and attitudes of Slovenian pet owners regarding cannabinoid (CBD) use and to identify the predictors of the first use and reuse of CBDs in dogs and cats. We hypothesized that positive attitudes toward CBDs, postmodern health values, and personal experience would be significant predictors of CBD use in animals. An open online survey targeted randomly selected Slovenian dog and cat owners, regardless of their experience with cannabis products. The questionnaire consisted of six sections related to demographic data and personal experience with CBD use, information about the participant's animal, experience with CBD use in the participant's animal, reasons for not using CBDs in their animal, attitudes toward CBD use in dogs and cats, and postmodern health values. Descriptive statistics were performed to analyze demographics, personal experience with CBD use, and experience with CBD use in dogs and cats. Hierarchical multiple regression using the enter method was performed to analyze the important predictors of CBD use. A total of 408 completed questionnaires were included in the statistical analysis. A substantial proportion (38.5%) of owners had already used CBDs to treat their animal. Positive attitudes and previous personal experience were significant (p < 0.05) predictors of first use and reuse of CBDs in pets, while postmodern health values were not. In conclusion, the decision to use CBDs for medicinal purposes is based on acquired information and personal experience. Veterinarians should be informed and familiar with CBDs as a treatment option. However, further research is essential to establish the use of CBDs in veterinary medicine. Improved laws and regulations are also needed to ensure that only high-quality medications are prescribed to dogs and cats.Entities:
Keywords: attitudes; cannabinoid; cats; dogs; experience; postmodern health values; predictors; survey
Year: 2022 PMID: 35071387 PMCID: PMC8767012 DOI: 10.3389/fvets.2021.796673
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Vet Sci ISSN: 2297-1769
Descriptive statistics for each of the items and total score of the short scale of attitudes toward cannabinoids (CBDs)a.
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| CBDs are effective medicine for treatment of various diseases in dogs and cats. | 3.86 ± 0.88 | 1 | 5 |
| Cannabinoid use should not violate legislation when treating dogs and cats. | 4.45 ± 0.84 | 1 | 5 |
| CBDs are natural remedies and so they are more suitable for treatment of dogs and cats as synthetic medicines. | 3.62 ± 1.23 | 1 | 5 |
| CBDs are only currently popular in the treatment of dogs and cats.* | 4.10 ± 1.04 | 1 | 5 |
| There is not enough scientific evidence supporting the efficacy of CBDs for treatment of dogs and cats to be able to trust them.* | 3.45 ± 1.1 3 | 1 | 5 |
| I would recommend to my friends the use of CBDs for the treatment of their animals. | 3.78 ± 1.09 | 1 | 5 |
| CBDs can cause animals more harm than good.* | 4.07 ± 1.02 | 1 | 5 |
| I would refuse CBDs as a medicine for my animal, even if their used was advised to me by a veterinarian.* | 4.66 ± 0.72 | 1 | 5 |
|
|
|
|
*Reverse items.
The percentage of positive and adverse effects of cannabinoids.
|
|
|
|---|---|
| Improved well-being | 72.0 |
| Greater liveliness | 35.7 |
| Improved mobility | 34.4 |
| Other | 29.9 |
| Improved appetite | 28.0 |
| No effect | 8.3 |
|
|
|
| No effect | 57.3 |
| Other | 26.1 |
| Dizziness | 10.8 |
| Excessive appetite/thirst | 8.3 |
| Fatigue | 6.4 |
*Owners were able to select more than one category.
Descriptive statistics for postmodern health valuesa.
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Nature and natural remedies | 4.68 ± 1.17 | 1.40 | 7.00 |
| Holism | 5.49 ± 0.89 | 2.40 | 7.00 |
| Rejection of authority | 5.33 ± 1.07 | 2.20 | 7.00 |
| Individual responsibility | 5.76 ± 0.91 | 1.50 | 7.00 |
| Consumerism | 6.25 ± 1.12 | 1.00 | 7.00 |
|
|
|
|
.
Relationship between the owner's personal cannabinoid (CBD) use and use in dogs and cats.
|
| ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
| ||
| Use of CBDs in the animal | NO | 186 (79%) | 65 (38%) | 251 (62%) |
| YES | 50 (21%) | 107 (62%) | 157 (38%) | |
| TOTAL | 236 (58%) | 172 (42%) | 408 (100%) | |
Hierarchical multiple regression for predicting the first use of cannabinoids (CBDs).
|
| |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
| ||||
|
|
|
|
| ||
| Step 1: | Constant | 3.02 [2.05, 3.98] | −1.24 [−2.27, −0.21] | ||
| Gender | 0.26 [−0.15, 0.66] | 0.08 | 0.05 [−0.24, 0.34] | 0.02 | |
| Age | 0.01 [−0.00, 0.02] | 0.11 | 0.00 [−0.01, 0.01] | 0.03 | |
| Education level | −0.09 [−0.17, −0.01] | −0.13* | 0.00 [−0.06, 0.07] | 0.00 | |
| Step 2: | Attitudes toward CBDs | 1.27 [1.08, 1.45] | 0.72** | ||
| Postmodern health values | −0.5 [−0.22, 0.12] | −0.03 | |||
|
| 0.03 | 0.47** | |||
|
| 0.02 | 0.49** | |||
|
| 2.55 | 114.38 | |||
CI = confidence interval. The coding for gender: 0—female, 1—male.
B is the rate of change per unit. β is the correlation coefficient ranging from 0 to ±1.
R
The F-statistic compares a model with zero predictor variables or the previous model and decides whether the added coefficients improved the model.
*p < 0.05, **p < 0.001.
Hierarchical multiple regression for predicting re-use of cannabinoids (CBDs).
|
| |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
| |||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
| Step 1: | Constant | 4.76 [3.51, 6.01] | 0.56 [−0.40, 1.51] | −0.69 [−1.84, 0.45] | |||
| Gender | −0.07 [−0.64, 0.49] | −0.02 | 0.06 [−0.29, 0.42] | 0.02 | −0.06 [−0.39, 0.26] | −0.02 | |
| Age | 0.00 [−0.02, 0.02] | −0.00 | 0.01 [−0.00, 0.02] | 0.09 | 0.01 [−0.00, 0.02] | 0.06 | |
| Education level | 0.07 [−0.17, 0.04] | −0.01 | 0.01 [−0.06, 0.08] | 0.01 | 0.03 [−0.03, 0.09] | 0.05 | |
| Step 2: | Efficacy of CBDs | 0.82 [0.71, 0.92] | 0.79* | 0.58 [0.45, 0,70] | 0.59* | ||
| Step 3: | Attitudes toward CBDs | 0.76 [0.52, 1.01] | 0.41* | ||||
| Postmodern health values | −0.16 [−0.32, 0.01] | −0.10 | |||||
|
| 0.01 | 0.61* | 0.08* | ||||
|
| −0.01 | 0.60* | 0.68* | ||||
|
| 0.59 | 233.91 | 18.82 | ||||
CI = confidence interval. The coding for gender: 0—female, 1—male.
B is the rate of change per unit. β is the correlation coefficient ranging from 0 to ±1.
R
The F-statistic compares a model with zero predictor variables or the previous model and decides whether the added coefficients improved the model.
*p < 0.001.