Exploration of Client Experiences of Veterinary Care for Companion Animals (Dogs and Cats) and the Impact of Trauma-Informed Care on Client Outcomes
Simple Summary
Abstract
1. Introduction
- (1)
- Safety: Clients and staff are entitled to feeling physically and psychologically safe;
- (2)
- Trustworthiness and transparency: Operations and decisions are transparent to build trust among clients and staff;
- (3)
- Peer support: Peer support and mutual self-help are leveraged and lived experiences guide improvements in service delivery;
- (4)
- Collaboration and mutuality: Healing occurs through meaningful and inclusive relationships formed between clients and staff;
- (5)
- Empowerment, voice, and choice: Operations empower staff and clients. Client strengths are acknowledged and shared decision making is promoted;
- (6)
- Cultural, historical, and gender issues: Cultural biases and stereotypes are surpassed to address and recognize historical trauma.
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Study Design
2.2. Participants
2.3. Materials
2.4. Procedure
3. Results
3.1. Client Emotional Experiences
3.2. Perceived Pet Emotions
3.3. Associations Between Clients’ Emotional Experiences, Perceived Pet Emotions/Behaivors, and Reason for Vet Visit
3.4. Experiences of Trauma-Informed Care and Client Outcomes
3.5. Predicting Client Outcomes from Reason for Visit, Client Emotional Experiences, Perceived Pet Emotions/Behaviors, and Trauma-Informed Care Practices
4. Discussion
4.1. Client Emotional Experiences and Perceived Pet Emotions/Behaviors
4.2. Experiences of TIC and Client Outcomes
4.3. Limitations and Suggestions for Future Research
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. Practical Guide for Implementing a Trauma-Informed Approach; No. PEP23-06-05-005; SAMHSA Publication: Rockville, MD, USA, 2023.
- Briere, L.N.; Scott, C. Principles of Trauma Treatment: A Guide to Symptoms, Evaluation, and Treatment, 2nd ed.; SAGE: Los Angeles, CA, USA, 2015.
- Huang, L.N.; Flatow, R.; Biggs, T.; Afayee, S.; Smith, K.; Clark, T.; Blake, M. SAMHSA’s Concept of Truama and Guidance for a Trauma-Informed Approach; SAMHSA: Rockville, MD, USA, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Kessler, R.C.; Aguilar-Gaxiola, S.; Alonso, J.; Benjet, C.; Bromet, E.J.; Cardoso, G.; Degenhardt, L.; de Girolamo, G.; Dinolova, R.V.; Ferry, F.; et al. Trauma and PTSD in the WHO world mental health surveys. Eur. J. Psychotraumatol. 2017, 8, 1353383. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Valtolina, C. Triage of the trauma patient. In Proceedings of the World Small Animal Veterinary Association World Congress Proceedings, Cape Town, South Africa, 16–19 September 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Tateo, A.; Zappaterra, M.; Covella, A.; Padalino, B. Factors influencing stress and fear-related behaviour of cats during veterinary examinations. Ital. J. Anim. Sci. 2021, 20, 46–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Riemer, S.; Heritier, C.; Windschnurer, I.; Pratsch, L.; Arhant, C.; Affenzeller, N. A review on mitigating fear and aggression in dogs and cats in a veterinary setting. Animals 2021, 11, 158. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Edwards, P.T.; Smith, B.P.; McArthur, M.L.; Hazel, S.J. Fearful Fido: Investigating dog experience in the veterinary context in an effort to reduce distress. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2019, 213, 14–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Whipple, E.E. The Human–animal bond and grief and loss: Implications for social work practice. Fam. Soc. 2021, 102, 518–528. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Spitznagel, M.B.; Jacobson, D.M.; Cox, M.D.; Carlson, M.D. Caregiver burden in owners of a sick companion animal: A cross-sectional observational study. Vet. Rec. 2017, 181, 321. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Spitznagel, M.B.; Jacobson, D.M.; Cox, M.D.; Carlson, M.D. Predicting caregiver burden in general veterinary clients: Contribution of companion animal clinical signs and problem behaviors. Vet. J. 2018, 236, 23–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Spitznagel, M.B.; Gober, M.W.; Patrick, K. Caregiver burden in cat owners: A cross-sectional observational study. J. Feline Med. Surg. 2023, 25, 1098612X221145835. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kogan, L.R.; Wallace, J.E.; Hellyer, P.W.; Carr, E.C.J. Canine caregivers: Paradoxical challenges and rewards. Animals 2022, 12, 1074. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Shaevitz, M.H.; Tullius, J.A.; Callahan, R.T.; Fulkerson, C.M.; Spitznagel, M.B. Early caregiver burden in owners of pets with suspected cancer: Owner psychosocial outcomes, communication behavior, and treatment factors. J. Vet. Intern. Med. 2020, 34, 2636–2644. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Buller, K.; Ballantyne, K.C. Living with and loving a pet with behavioral problems: Pet owners’ experiences. J. Vet. Behav. 2020, 37, 41–47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Adams, J. Pet Death as Disenfranchised Loss: Examining Posttraumatic Growth and Attachment in College Students. Ph.D. Thesis, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, USA, 2021. [Google Scholar]
- Adrian, J.A.L.; Deliramich, A.N.; Frueh, B.C. Complicated grief and posttraumatic stress disorder in humans’ response to the death of pets/animals. Bull. Menn. Clin. 2009, 73, 176–187. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Adrian, J.A.L.; Stitt, A. Pet loss, complicated grief, and post-traumatic stress disorder in Hawaii. Anthrozoös 2017, 30, 123–133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brown, O.K.; Symons, D.K. “My pet has passed”: Relations of adult attachment styles and current feelings of grief and trauma after the event. Death Stud. 2016, 40, 247–255. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Ahn, J.; Lee, S.W.; Kim, K.; Jin, B.; Chung, U.S. The relationship between childhood trauma experience and complicated grief: The importance of psychological support for individuals coping with pet loss in Korea. J. Korean Med. Sci. 2023, 38, e305. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bergen-Cico, D.; Smith, Y.; Wolford, K.; Gooley, C.; Hannon, K.; Woodruff, R.; Spicer, M.; Gump, B. Dog ownership and training reduces post-traumatic stress symptoms and increases self-compassion among veterans: Results of a longitudinal control study. J. Altern. Complement. Med. 2018, 24, 1166–1175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lass-Hennemann, J.; Schäfer, S.K.; Sopp, M.R.; Michael, T. The relationship between attachment to pets and mental health: The shared link via attachment to humans. BMC Psychiatry 2022, 22, 586. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pohl, R.; Botscharow, J.; Böckelmann, I.; Thielmann, B. Stress and strain among veterinarians: A scoping review. Ir. Vet. J. 2022, 75, 15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rohlf, V.I.; Scotney, R.; Monaghan, H.; Bennett, P. Predictors of professional quality of life in veterinary professionals. J. Vet. Med. Educ. 2022, 49, 372–381. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Chapman, A.J.; Rohlf, V.I.; Moser, A.Y.; Bennett, P.C. Organizational factors affecting burnout in veterinary nurses: A systematic review. Anthrozoös 2024, 37, 651–686. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wojtacka, J.; Grudzień, W.; Wysok, B.; Szarek, J. Causes of stress and conflict in the veterinary professional workplace—A perspective from Poland. Ir. Vet. J. 2020, 73, 23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rogers, C.W.; Murphy, L.A.; Murphy, R.A.; Malouf, K.A.; Natsume, R.E.; Ward, B.D.; Tansey, C.; Nakamura, R.K. An analysis of client complaints and their effects on veterinary support staff. Vet. Med. Sci. 2022, 8, 925–934. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ballantyne, K.C.; Buller, K. Experiences of veterinarians in clinical behavior practice: A mixed-methods study. J. Vet. Behav. 2015, 10, 376–383. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Platt, B.; Hawton, K.; Simkin, S.; Mellanby, R.J. Suicidal behaviour and psychosocial problems in veterinary surgeons: A systematic review. Soc. Psychiatry Psychiatr. Epidemiol. 2012, 47, 223–240. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pun, J.K. An integrated review of the role of communication in veterinary clinical practice. BMC Vet. Res. 2020, 16, 394. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Mahon, D. Implementing trauma informed care in human services: An ecological scoping review. Behav. Sci. 2022, 12, 431. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Brown, T.; Ashworth, H.; Bass, M.; Rittenberg, E.; Levy-Carrick, N.; Grossman, S.; Lewis-O’Connor, A.; Stoklosa, H. Trauma-informed care interventions in emergency medicine: A systematic review. West. J. Emerg. Med. 2022, 23, 334–344. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Harris, M.E.; Fallot, R.D. Using Trauma Theory to Design Service Systems; Jossey-Bass/Wiley: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2001. [Google Scholar]
- Hopper, E.K.; Bassuk, E.L.; Olivet, J. Shelter from the storm: Trauma-informed care in homelessness services settings. Open Health Serv. Policy J. 2010, 3, 80–100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Scheer, J.R.; Poteat, V.P. Trauma-informed care and health among LGBTQ intimate partner violence survivors. J. Interpers. Violence 2021, 36, 6670–6692. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hales, T.W.; Green, S.A.; Bissonette, S.; Warden, A.; Diebold, J.; Koury, S.P.; Nochajski, T.H. Trauma-informed care outcome study. Res. Soc. Work. Pract. 2019, 29, 529–539. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ashby, B.D.; Ehmer, A.C.; Scott, S.M. Trauma-informed care in a patient-centered medical home for adolescent mothers and their children. Psychol. Serv. 2019, 16, 67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Treisman, K. Trauma-Informed Health Care: A Reflective Guide for Improving Care and Services; Jessica Kingsley Publishers: London, UK, 2024. [Google Scholar]
- Hales, T.W.; Nochajski, T.H.; Green, S.A.; Hitzel, H.K.; Woike-Ganga, E. An association between implementing trauma-informed care and staff satisfaction. Adv. Soc. Work. 2017, 18, 300–312. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Stevenson, R.; Morales, C. Trauma in animal protection and welfare work: The potential of trauma-informed practice. Animals 2022, 12, 852. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Corridan, C.L.; Dawson, S.E.; Mullan, S. Potential benefits of a ‘trauma-informed care’ approach to improve the assessment and management of dogs presented with anxiety disorders. Animals 2024, 14, 459. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Prolific. Available online: www.prolific.com (accessed on 1 August 2024).
- Kokokyi, S.; Klest, B.; Anstey, H. A patient-oriented research approach to assessing patients’ and primary care physicians’ opinions on trauma-informed care. PLoS ONE 2021, 16, e0254266. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- IBM Corp. IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows 29.0.2.0; IBM Corp.: Armonk, NY, USA, 2023. [Google Scholar]
- Tabachnick, B.G.; Fidell, L.S. Using Multivariate Statistics, 5th ed.; Allyn & Bacon/Pearson Education: Boston, MA, USA, 2007. [Google Scholar]
- DeVellis, R.F.; Thorpe, C.T. Scale Development: Theory and Applications; SAGE Publications: Newbury Park, CA, USA, 2021. [Google Scholar]
- Shaw, J.R.; Adams, C.L.; Bonnett, B.N.; Larson, S.; Roter, D.L. Veterinarian-client-patient communication during wellness appointments versus appointments related to a health problem in companion animal practice. J. Am. Vet. Med. Assoc. 2008, 233, 1576–1586. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schwabe, L.; Wolf, O.T. Learning under stress impairs memory formation. Neurobiol. Learn. Mem. 2010, 93, 183–188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Burke, A.; Heuer, F.; Reisberg, D. Remembering emotional events. Mem. Cogn. 1992, 20, 277–290. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sharot, T.; Delgado, M.R.; Phelps, E.A. How emotion enhances the feeling of remembering. Nat. Neurosci. 2004, 7, 1376–1380. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Nibblett, B.M.; Ketzis, J.K.; Grigg, E.K. Comparison of stress exhibited by cats examined in a clinic versus a home setting. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2015, 173, 68–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mariti, C.; Raspanti, E.; Zilocchi, M.; Carlone, B.; Gazzano, A. The assessment of dog welfare in the waiting room of a veterinary clinic. Anim. Welf. 2015, 24, 299–305. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Huber, A.; Barber, A.L.; Faragó, T.; Müller, C.A.; Huber, L. Investigating emotional contagion in dogs (Canis familiaris) to emotional sounds of humans and conspecifics. Anim. Cogn. 2017, 20, 703–715. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yong, M.H.; Ruffman, T. Emotional contagion: Dogs and humans show a similar physiological response to human infant crying. Behav. Process. 2014, 108, 155–165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dawson, L.; Dewey, C.; Stone, E.; Guerin, M.; Niel, L. A survey of animal welfare experts and practicing veterinarians to identify and explore key factors thought to influence canine and feline welfare in relation to veterinary care. Anim. Welf. 2016, 25, 125–134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Marsac, M.L.; Kassam-Adams, N.; Hildenbrand, A.K.; Nicholls, E.; Winston, F.K.; Leff, S.S.; Fein, J. Implementing a trauma-informed approach in pediatric health care networks. JAMA Pediatr. 2016, 170, 70–77. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Dolan, E.D.; Slater, M.R. Veterinarians’ self-reported behaviors and attitudes toward spectrum of care practices. Animals 2024, 14, 1416. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Abedzadeh-Kalahroudi, M.; Razi, E.; Sehat, M. The relationship between socioeconomic status and trauma outcomes. J. Public Health 2018, 40, e431–e439. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Colombo, D.; Suso-Ribera, C.; Fernández-Álvarez, J.; Cipresso, P.; Garcia-Palacios, A.; Riva, G.; Botella, C. Affect recall bias: Being resilient by distorting reality. Cogn. Ther. Res. 2020, 44, 906–918. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bargeman, M.; Abelson, J.; Mulvale, G.; Niec, A.; Theuer, A.; Moll, S. Understanding the conceptualization and operationalization of trauma-informed care within and across systems: A critical interpretive synthesis. Milbank Q. 2022, 100, 785–853. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Strand, E.B.; Brandt, J.; Rogers, K.; Fonken, L.; Chun, R.; Conlon, P.; Lord, L. Adverse childhood experiences among veterinary medical students: A multi-site study. J. Vet. Med. Educ. 2017, 44, 260–267. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Variable | n | % | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Client characteristics | Country of residence | Australia | 80 | 29.2 |
South Africa | 43 | 15.7 | ||
United States of America | 28 | 10.2 | ||
United Kingdom | 27 | 9.9 | ||
Poland | 24 | 8.8 | ||
Canada | 15 | 5.5 | ||
Other * | 57 | 20.7 | ||
Education | Primary | 1 | 0.4 | |
Lower secondary | 2 | 0.7 | ||
Higher secondary | 42 | 15.6 | ||
Postsecondary, non-tertiary | 35 | 13.0 | ||
Undergraduate tertiary degree | 135 | 50.2 | ||
Postgraduate tertiary degree | 54 | 20.1 | ||
Household income | Much less than average | 3 | 1.1 | |
Less than average | 33 | 12.2 | ||
Average | 135 | 50.0 | ||
Above average | 73 | 27.0 | ||
Much more than average | 19 | 7.0 | ||
Prefer not to say | 7 | 2.6 | ||
Pet characteristics | Type of animal | Dog | 182 | 67.4 |
Cat | 80 | 29.6 | ||
Small mammal (rabbit, guinea pig, rat, mouse) | 5 | 1.9 | ||
Other (bird, fish, alpaca) | 3 | 1.2 | ||
Sex of animal | Female desexed | 90 | 33.6 | |
Female not desexed | 37 | 13.7 | ||
Male desexed | 90 | 33.3 | ||
Male not desexed | 53 | 19.6 | ||
Age of pet | Under three months | 8 | 3.0 | |
Three to six months | 21 | 7.8 | ||
Six to twelve months | 35 | 13.0 | ||
One to seven years | 133 | 49.3 | ||
Over seven years | 73 | 27.0 | ||
Vet visit characteristics | Time of last visit | Within last week | 14 | 5.1 |
One to four weeks ago | 58 | 21.2 | ||
Four weeks to six months ago | 127 | 46.4 | ||
Six to twelve months ago | 75 | 27.4 | ||
Vet visit reason | Preventative healthcare | 116 | 42.5 | |
Minor medical concern | 78 | 28.6 | ||
Serious medical concern | 79 | 28.9 | ||
Pet outcome | Health not affected | 109 | 39.8 | |
Fully recovered | 90 | 32.8 | ||
Partially recovered | 28 | 10.2 | ||
Still receiving treatment | 24 | 8.8 | ||
Passed away | 23 | 8.4 |
Factor Loadings Following Rotation | Factor 1. Negative Affect— Worried | Factor 2. Positive Affect— Relaxed | Factor 3. Negative Affect— Frustrated |
---|---|---|---|
Worried for my pet | 0.956 | −0.010 | 0.101 |
Powerless | 0.783 | 0.061 | −0.182 |
Sad | 0.751 | −0.007 | 0.227 |
Anxious | 0.605 | −0.380 | 0.036 |
Calm | 0.085 | 0.941 | 0.064 |
Happy | −0.119 | 0.768 | −0.005 |
Confused | 0.047 | −0.017 | −0.873 |
Angry | −0.050 | −0.007 | −0.873 |
Frustrated | −0.086 | −0.037 | −0.792 |
Descriptive Statistics for Subscales | |||
Median | 2.25 | 2.50 | 1.33 |
Mean | 2.56 | 2.74 | 1.70 |
Standard deviation | 1.18 | 1.12 | 0.95 |
Possible range | 1–5 | 1–5 | 1–5 |
Actual range | 1–5 | 1–5 | 1–5 |
Cronbach’s alpha | 0.889 | 0.725 | 0.843 |
Factor Loadings Following Rotation | Factor 1. Negative Pet Emotion/Behavior—Agitated | Factor 2. Positive Pet Emotion/Behavior—Happy |
---|---|---|
Agitated | 0.817 | −0.015 |
Nervous | 0.813 | −0.150 |
Frightened | 0.776 | −0.178 |
Aggressive | 0.748 | 0.205 |
Anxious | 0.680 | −0.166 |
Happy | 0.068 | 0.927 |
Friendly | 0.068 | 0.828 |
Calm | −0.014 | 0.715 |
Descriptive Statistics for Subscales | ||
Median | 2.40 | 2.00 |
Mean | 2.56 | 2.36 |
Standard deviation | 0.98 | 1.00 |
Possible range | 1–5 | 1–5 |
Actual Range | 1–5 | 1–5 |
Cronbach’s alpha | 0.855 | 0.816 |
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. Pet happy | - | |||||
2. Pet agitated | −0.553 ** | - | ||||
3. Client frustrated | −0.065 | 0.347 ** | - | |||
4. Client worried | −0.255 | 0.457 ** | 0.687 ** | - | ||
5. Client relaxed | 0.495 ** | −0.290 ** | −0.458 ** | −0.642 ** | - | |
6. Seriousness of presenting issue | −0.185 ** | 0.248 ** | 0.436 ** | 0.534 ** | −0.451 ** | - |
Factor Loadings Following Rotation | Factor 1. Transparent and Client Centered Communication | Factor 2. Client Supports and Strengths | Factor 3. Emotional Safety and Empowerment | Factor 4. Physical Safety and Comfort | Factor 5 Informed Consent |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Staff responded inappropriately to my nonverbal communication (e.g., crying) b | 0.853 | 0.087 | 0.053 | 0.013 | 0.013 |
Staff treated me in a way that reminded me of a past negative experience where I felt disempowered or upset b | 0.832 | 0.042 | 0.002 | 0.049 | −0.050 |
Staff did not listen to me with genuine interest and did not adequately pay attention to my concerns b | 0.767 | 0.048 | 0.029 | −0.168 | −0.060 |
Staff did not communicate openly and failed to provide all relevant information about my pet’s medical issues b | 0.757 | −0.059 | −0.091 | 0.009 | 0.061 |
Staff did not adequately involve me in decisions surrounding my pet’s care b | 0.756 | −0.055 | 0.004 | 0.013 | −0.113 |
Staff did not clearly outline what treatment option would require from me b | 0.719 | −0.068 | −0.130 | −0.089 | 0.104 |
Staff appeared judgmental when I expressed my feelings or concerns b | 0.655 | 0.156 | −0.111 | −0.008 | −0.133 |
Staff were not respectful of my unique circumstances (e.g., cultural identity, sexuality) b | 0.606 | 0.079 | −0.135 | −0.077 | 0.055 |
Staff spoke to me in a patronizing manner, using negative language and criticism b | 0.579 | 0.219 | −0.033 | −0.167 | −0.169 |
Staff did not adequately help me identify my challenges and difficulties that may get in the way of treatment b | 0.551 | −0.399 | −0.020 | 0.005 | 0.036 |
Staff provided me with information about other service providers in my community that could help me and my pet (e.g., support groups, counseling services or social workers, pet rehabilitation services, pet care services, fear free groomers) | 0.131 | 0.732 | 0.023 | 0.101 | 0.133 |
Staff asked me about my cultural beliefs in relation to care for my pet and respected any cultural preferences for treatment | 0.270 | 0.671 | 0.151 | 0.027 | 0.014 |
Staff did not ask me about any negative/stressful experiences at a veterinary clinic in the past b | 0.113 | −0.667 | 0.216 | −0.117 | 0.037 |
Staff inquired about others who may be helpful to include in my pet’s care (e.g., family member) | −0.011 | 0.649 | 0.124 | −0.166 | 0.147 |
Staff helped me identify my strengths and skills that may facilitate management of my pet’s care | 0.045 | 0.611 | 0.320 | 0.041 | 0.089 |
Staff found out what was most pressing for me in a kind and caring manner | −0.123 | −0.091 | 0.784 | −0.140 | −0.095 |
Staff recognized and equalized power imbalances by understanding that I was relying on them for help | 0.086 | 0.108 | 0.653 | 0.124 | 0.047 |
Staff provided me with choices that fit my life circumstances for treatment preferences | −0.086 | 0.055 | 0.606 | 0.026 | 0.041 |
Staff empowered me by acknowledging that I know best about my pet and my situation | −0.109 | 0.164 | 0.601 | 0.021 | 0.050 |
Staff made me feel welcome by being warm and friendly (e.g., using a welcoming tone of voice) | −0.081 | −0.111 | 0.556 | 0.388 | 0.085 |
Staff explained everything in a way that I could understand by using plain language without jargon | −0.236 | −0.141 | 0.487 | 0.116 | 0.227 |
Staff made me feel emotionally safe by providing reassurances and validating my experiences | −0.065 | 0.031 | 0.454 | 0.205 | 0.194 |
Staff acknowledged and took responsibility for any miscommunication | 0.008 | 0.216 | 0.403 | −0.149 | .277 |
Staff responded in a caring manner if I disclosed any past stressful experiences a | −0.343 | 0.284 | 0.398 | −0.062 | −0.029 |
The physical space inside the clinic was comfortable for me and my pet (e.g., comfortable chairs, air conditioning) | 0.132 | 0.057 | 0.355 | 0.739 | 0.007 |
The physical space inside the clinic felt unsafe for me and my pet (e.g., no ability to separate nervous or agitated pets from other animals) b | 0.308 | −0.113 | 0.185 | −0.686 | −0.022 |
The physical space outside the clinic felt unsafe for me and my pet (e.g., inadequate parking, poor lighting, unsafe access) b | 0.404 | −0.077 | 0.177 | −0.587 | 0.074 |
Staff used statements (e.g., it is your decision, it is not for me to decide) that clearly explained my role in making decisions for my pet | 0.061 | −0.034 | −0.151 | −0.037 | 0.830 |
Staff checked for my understanding of information provided before proceeding | −0.101 | 0.101 | 0.168 | 0.135 | 0.668 |
Staff sought my permission prior to performing any medical activities (e.g., touching my pet or any medical examinations) | −0.194 | 0.217 | 0.128 | −0.081 | 0.486 |
Descriptive Statistics for Subscales | |||||
Median | 4.50 | 3.00 | 3.67 | 4.33 | 3.67 |
Mean | 4.39 | 2.96 | 3.83 | 4.21 | 3.65 |
Standard deviation | 0.63 | 0.89 | 0.58 | 0.72 | 0.76 |
Possible range | 1–5 | 1–5 | 1–5 | 1–5 | 1–5 |
Actual range | 1–5 | 1–5 | 1.88–5 | 1.33–5 | 1–5 |
Cronbach’s alpha | 0.909 | 0.775 | 0.826 | 0.729 | 0.593 |
Factor Loadings Following Rotation | Factor 1. Satisfaction with Quality of Veterinary Care | Factor 2. Dissatisfaction with General Treatment |
---|---|---|
Overall, I left the clinic feeling confident about the outcome(s) for my pet | 0.909 | 0.178 |
Overall, the level of care provided for my pet by staff was excellent | 0.808 | −0.133 |
Overall, the level of care provided for me by staff was excellent | 0.766 | −0.143 |
Overall, the outcome(s) for my pet was as good as possible, given the circumstances | 0.750 | −0.030 |
Overall, I would recommend this veterinary practice to others | 0.748 | −0.116 |
Overall, I would not return to this veterinary practice for future pet-related issues. | 0.026 | 0.936 |
Overall, I was disappointed with how my pet was treated | −0.002 | 0.906 |
Overall, I was disappointed with how I was treated | −0.009 | 0.896 |
Overall, I wish I had gone to a different veterinary clinic | −0.099 | 0.773 |
Descriptive Statistics for Subscales | ||
Median | 4.20 | 1.00 |
Mean | 4.21 | 1.49 |
Standard deviation | 0.66 | 0.71 |
Possible range | 1–5 | 1–5 |
Actual range | 1.60–5 | 1–5 |
Cronbach’s alpha | 0.879 | 0.913 |
Client Outcomes | |||
---|---|---|---|
Satisfaction | Disappointment | ||
Reasons for visit | Reason (1 = Preventative, 2 = Minor, 3 = Serious) | 0.025 | 0.032 |
Client emotional experiences | Worried | −0.093 | 0.039 |
Relaxed | 0.094 | −0.001 | |
Frustrated | −0.091 | 0.116 * | |
Perceived pet emotion/behaviors | Agitated | 0.118 * | −0.054 |
Happy | 0.031 | −0.020 | |
Trauma-informed care practice | Transparent and client centered communication | 0.194 *** | −0.7050 *** |
Client supports and strengths | 0.032 | −0.050 | |
Emotional safety and empowerment | 0.51 *** | −0.051 | |
Physical safety and comfort | 0.089 | −0.082 | |
Informed consent | 0.142 ** | −0.044 |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2025 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Rohlf, V.I.; Manfrenuzzi, N.; Rehman, N.; Bennett, P.C. Exploration of Client Experiences of Veterinary Care for Companion Animals (Dogs and Cats) and the Impact of Trauma-Informed Care on Client Outcomes. Vet. Sci. 2025, 12, 709. https://doi.org/10.3390/vetsci12080709
Rohlf VI, Manfrenuzzi N, Rehman N, Bennett PC. Exploration of Client Experiences of Veterinary Care for Companion Animals (Dogs and Cats) and the Impact of Trauma-Informed Care on Client Outcomes. Veterinary Sciences. 2025; 12(8):709. https://doi.org/10.3390/vetsci12080709
Chicago/Turabian StyleRohlf, Vanessa I., Nadia Manfrenuzzi, Neelofar Rehman, and Pauleen C. Bennett. 2025. "Exploration of Client Experiences of Veterinary Care for Companion Animals (Dogs and Cats) and the Impact of Trauma-Informed Care on Client Outcomes" Veterinary Sciences 12, no. 8: 709. https://doi.org/10.3390/vetsci12080709
APA StyleRohlf, V. I., Manfrenuzzi, N., Rehman, N., & Bennett, P. C. (2025). Exploration of Client Experiences of Veterinary Care for Companion Animals (Dogs and Cats) and the Impact of Trauma-Informed Care on Client Outcomes. Veterinary Sciences, 12(8), 709. https://doi.org/10.3390/vetsci12080709