| Literature DB >> 36118345 |
Kashif Kamran1, Ali Akbar2, Mahrukh Naseem1, Abdul Samad3, Jahangir Khan Achakzai4, Zia Ur Rehman5, Muhammad Sohail Sajid6,7, Abid Ali8.
Abstract
In spite of the significant importance of the donkeys (Equus ascinus) as draft animal in resource-poor countries like Pakistan, they are equines not receiving the appropriate care. They face challenges including injuries, diseases, lack of basic environment and mismanagement by their owners. The present study aims to provide a brief update on the current status of management of healthcare and the welfare of domestic donkeys using participatory epidemiological tools. These tools can help to provide better strategies for improving their productivity and inclusion in human society. This study was mainly focused only on donkeys and horses, mules and ponies were excluded from the study. We carried out a systematic review of the relevant available published literature and shortlisted 50 articles reporting on the different health related characteristics of donkeys. A comprehensive questionnaire was completed by 191 donkey owners, including nine farriers (all men, average age = 38.24 ± 12.43) over a time span from October 2021 to March 2022. Multivariate Odds Ratios (MORs) and 95% confidence intervals were used to assess the predictions of health management and welfare measures for the surveyed donkeys. The most common observed medical problems in donkey health were hyperlipaemia (28.06%), lameness (16.33%) and dental (20.41%) problems. One-third (34.31%) of the donkeys were underweight. The dull donkey with poor appetite needs a clinical emergency owing to a high risk of developing hyperlipemia, which may be life-threatening. These findings are quite useful for the improvement of healthcare management and the welfare of donkeys.Entities:
Keywords: Balochistan; Equus ascinus; donkey; donkey owner; healthcare; participatory epidemiology
Year: 2022 PMID: 36118345 PMCID: PMC9478909 DOI: 10.3389/fvets.2022.1005079
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Vet Sci ISSN: 2297-1769
Figure 1Map of the selected districts of Balochistan province. (Left) The gray area represents the selected districts. (Right) The altitude map of Balochistan [source: Author mapped using the data retrieved from ArcGIS® ArcMap software by Esri (ESRI, CA, USA), accessed on 15 September 2021].
Figure 2Flow chart representing the selection of studies for inclusion criteria for the systematic review of donkeys and their welfare and healthcare management strategies.
Sociodemographic breakdown of survey respondents.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age of the respondent | 18–30 years | 47 | 23.98 | 0.009 |
| 31–40 years | 91 | 46.43 | ||
| Above 40 years | 58 | 29.59 | ||
| Urbanicity of donkey owner | Urban | 144 | 73.46 | 0.25 |
| Rural | 52 | 25.87 | ||
| Marital status | Single | 28 | 14.29 | 0.47 |
| Married | 159 | 81.12 | ||
| Divorced | 6 | 3.06 | ||
| Other/Prefer not to answer | 3 | 1.53 | ||
| Educational status | College 2 years | 0 | 0 | 0.27 |
| Secondary education | 7 | 3.57 | ||
| Primary education | 67 | 34.18 | ||
| Never attended school | 122 | 62.24 | ||
| Donkey ownership | Yes | 175 | 89.29 | 0.49 |
| No | 21 | 10.71 | ||
| Donkey care experience | 3–5 years | 32 | 16.33 | 0.04 |
| 6–10 years | 43 | 21.94 | ||
| More than 10 years | 121 | 61.73 | ||
| Average monthly income (US $1 = PKR 178) | <$250 | 141 | 71.94 | 0.28 |
| $250–300 | 32 | 16.33 | ||
| >$300 | 23 | 11.73 |
The respondents under “Never attended school” were considered “Illiterate,” while the rest were considered “Literate” in the analyses.
Knowledge of donkey owners.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Are you aware of zoonotic disease? | Yes | 36 | 18.37 | 0.49 |
| No | 160 | 81.63 | ||
| Knowledge about the external parasite treatment (ticks, lice, or fleas) | Yes | 31 | 15.82 | 0.00 |
| No | 129 | 65.82 | ||
| Never examined | 36 | 18.37 | ||
| Availability of shelter for donkeys in market/house | Yes | 31 | 15.82 | 0.25 |
| No | 165 | 84.18 | ||
| Weight reduction in donkey due to ticks | Yes | 100 | 51.02 | 0.00 |
| No | 96 | 48.98 | ||
| Availability of first aid to injured donkey | Yes | 118 | 60.20 | 0.03 |
| No | 78 | 39.80 | ||
| Provision of rest for sick donkey | Yes | 150 | 76.53 | 0.05 |
| No | 46 | 23.47 | ||
| Knowledge of any acarological and parasitological survey by the government | Yes | 16 | 8.16 | 0.54 |
| No | 180 | 91.84 | ||
| Knowledge of any treatment centers | Yes | 135 | 68.88 | 0.03 |
| No | 61 | 31.12 | ||
| Medical and technical support by government | Yes | 64 | 32.65 | 0.33 |
| No | 132 | 67.35 | ||
| Language and the ethnic barrier issues faced by veterinary officers | Present | 152 | 77.55 | 0.05 |
| Absent | 44 | 22.45 | ||
| Availability of licensed veterinary vaccine for influenza and tetanus | Yes | 18 | 9.18 | 0.05 |
| No | 115 | 58.67 | ||
| Don't know | 63 | 32.14 | ||
| Health problems in donkeys ( | Ocular | 16 | 8.16 | 0.001 |
| Wound | 18 | 9.18 | ||
| Gastric (colic) | 13 | 6.63 | ||
| Lameness | 32 | 16.33 | ||
| Dermal (skin or hair) | 22 | 11.22 | ||
| Hyperlipaemia | 55 | 28.06 | ||
| Dental diseases | 40 | 20.41 |
1No-response was not considered.
Figure 3(Left) The most observed lesions – back sore/bruises on the donkey: at the survey site, (Right) Donkeys for sale in the market; note that there is lack of shelter, water or feed (Photo credit: Kashif Kamran). Photo permission for inclusion was obtained from the people shown in the picture.
Attitude of donkey owners.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Donkey (s) kept with other animals | No | 123 | 62.76 | 0.05 |
| With one animal | 48 | 24.49 | ||
| With more than one animal | 25 | 12.76 | ||
| Adopted personal protective measures while in contact with other livestock animals (e.g., sheep, cattle, goats, etc.) | Yes | 20 | 10.20 | 0.35 |
| No | 173 | 88.27 | ||
| Sometimes | 3 | 1.53 | ||
| Participated in the free training conducted by Animal Husbandry Department | Yes | 7 | 3.57 | 0.54 |
| No | 189 | 96.43 | ||
| Details of feeding methods | Field grazing | 64 | 32.65 | 0.003 |
| Hand grazing | 132 | 67.35 | ||
| Feeding frequency in a day | Any one time | 12 | 6.12 | 0.17 |
| Two-times | 135 | 68.88 | ||
| Three-times | 49 | 25.00 | ||
| Cleaning frequency of donkey | Daily | 176 | 89.80 | 0.17 |
| Weekly | 11 | 5.61 | ||
| Monthly | 8 | 4.08 | ||
| Means used for drinking water | Automatic drinker | 4 | 2.04 | 0.61 |
| Bucket | 192 | 97.96 | ||
| Consulted a veterinarian for the treatment of infested animals | Yes | 78 | 39.80 | 0.00 |
| No | 118 | 60.20 | ||
| Whipping frequency per day | One time | 18 | 9.18 | 0.32 |
| Multiple times | 9 | 4.59 | ||
| Not using | 169 | 86.22 | ||
| Awareness about microchip usage | Yes | 185 | 94.39 | 0.54 |
| No | 8 | 4.08 | ||
| Do not know | 3 | 1.53 |
Practice of surveyed donkey owners.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Use of acaricides against tick infestation | Yes | 28 | 14.29 | 0.25 |
| No | 168 | 85.71 | ||
| Period of farriery services | 1–2 weeks | 29 | 14.80 | 0.00 |
| 2–3 weeks | 116 | 59.18 | ||
| Seasonal | 51 | 26.02 | ||
| Reason for acquiring farrier services | Good relation with a farrier | 142 | 72.45 | 0.009 |
| Farrier's location | 19 | 9.69 | ||
| Cost and skill | 35 | 17.86 | ||
| Killing of donkeys without any reason | Yes | 0 | 0.00 | 0.63 |
| No | 196 | 100.00 | ||
| Support by local donkey welfare society | Yes | 23 | 11.73 | 0.33 |
| No | 173 | 88.27 | ||
| Nature of load carried by donkeys | Waste disposal | 21 | 10.71 | 0.11 |
| Building materials (e.g., bricks and cement making) | 129 | 65.82 | ||
| Agriculture produce | 31 | 15.82 | ||
| Transportation of firewood and water | 15 | 7.65 | ||
| Daily weight carried by a donkey | <100 Kg | 14 | 7.14 | 0.00 |
| >100 Kg | 39 | 19.90 | ||
| >150 Kg | 54 | 27.55 | ||
| >200 Kg | 89 | 45.41 | ||
| Daily working hours of donkey | <5 | 21 | 10.71 | 0.47 |
| 5 | 23 | 11.73 | ||
| > 6 | 152 | 77.55 |
For an average donkey with a weight of 160 kg, the normal load carried is 50 kg (25).
Donkeys are usually allowed to work 6 days per week with one full day rest and can work up to 6 to 9 h per day (26).
Figure 4Precipitation of risk factors i.e., knowledge, attitudes and practices.
Predictionary model for donkey health management.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nature of housing floor | Grass | 121 | 9 | 1 | 0.00 |
| Cemented | 48 | 18 | |||
| Regular cleaning of floor | Yes | 143 | 25 | 1 | 0.00 |
| No | 17 | 11 | |||
| Good feeding (corelated with body condition score) | Yes | 112 | 21 | 1 | 0.03 |
| No | 46 | 17 | 1.97 (0.95–4.0) | ||
| Working more than 8 h | Yes | 132 | 11 | 1 | 0.00 |
| No | 37 | 16 | 5.18 (2.21–12.13) | ||
| Regular checkup by veterinarians | Yes | 86 | 15 | 1 | 0.14 |
| No | 72 | 23 | 1.83 (0.88–3.76) | ||
| Donkey survival i.e., alive / dead during the study | Alive | 182 | 10 | 1 | 0.20 |
| Dead | 3 | 1 | 6.06 (0.57–63.67) | ||
| Body condition score of donkeys | Underweight | 37 | 5 | 1 | 0.00 |
| Normal | 121 | 7 | |||
| Overweight | 15 | 11 |
Model was designed following the guidelines within the framework of the Pakistan Agriculture Research Council.
OR, Odds Ratio or Risk Ratio; Cl, lower and upper 95% confidence interval.
Total number of donkeys that died during the study period (October 2021 to March 2022).
Accurate body condition scoring is a hands-on process for feeling the amount of muscle and fat that are covering the donkey's bones. Careful assessment of all areas was made and combine to obtained body score.
It includes donkey owners who treat their animals with home remedies.
Figure 5Conceptual models of various characters and working groups for healthcare management and welfare of donkeys. Left: Donkey assisted by collaborating in the practice model shows work overlapping of different communities. The center of the diagram depicts the donkey - the circle begins with the leading role of the government and NGOs in donkey welfare (such as providing legal assistance to improve donkey carriers and chart equipment, adjusting the price for the sale of the individual donkey, traffic police guidelines to run the donkey carts along with vehicles and provision of effective veterinary services) - while individuals who have their role in the co-operative animal project are increasing their participation by moving toward the center. Right: The collective model focuses on mutual engagement, centralized decision-making and collaborative approach to improve donkey policy, develop the relevant manuals, protocols adoption, etc. Each donkey owner treats his donkey from a different point of view such as theoretical and perspective approaches.