Factors affecting mechanical nociceptive thresholds in healthy sows. (15th October 2015)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Nalon, Elena; Maes, Dominiek; Piepers, Sofie; Taylor, Polly; van Riet, Miriam MJ; Janssens, Geert PJ; Millet, Sam; Tuyttens, Frank AM
• Is Part Of: Veterinary anaesthesia and analgesia. Volume 43:Number 3(2016:May)
• Page Start: 343
• Page End: 355
• Publication Date: 2015-10-15
• Subjects: measurement -- mechanical nociceptive threshold -- pain -- pig -- variability; Veterinary anesthesia -- Periodicals; 636.089
• DOI: 10.1111/vaa.12313
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1467-2987

Abstract

Abstract: Objective: To describe anatomical and methodological factors influencing mechanical nociceptive thresholds (MNTs) and intra‐site variability in healthy sows. Study design: Prospective, randomized validation. Animals: Eight pregnant, healthy, mixed‐parity sows (176–269 kg). Methods: Repeated MNT measurements were taken: 1) with a hand‐held probe and a limb‐mounted actuator connected to a digital algometer; 2) at nine landmarks on the limbs and tail; and 3) at 1 and 3 minute intervals. Data were analysed using linear mixed regression models. Results: The MNTs (±SEM) of the limbs were lower with the probe (14.7 ± 1.2 N) than with the actuator (21.3 ± 1.2 N; p < 0.001), in the pelvic versus the thoracic limbs (16.7 ± 1.2 versus 19.2 ± 1.2 N; p < 0.001), and in the lateral versus the dorsal metatarsi and metacarpi (17.6 ± 1.2 versus 18.4 ± 1.2 N; p = 0.002). MNTs were higher in all subsequent measurements compared with the first ( p < 0.001) and in the morning compared with the afternoon ( p = 0.04). We found no evidence of MNT differences based on interval between consecutive measurements (1 versus 3 minutes). Variability was lower in the thoracic limbs [mean back‐transformed log10 coefficient of variation (CV) ± SE = 25.5 ± 1.5% versus 30.6 ± 1.5% in the pelvic limbs; p < 0.001], with the actuator (22.7 ± 1.5% versus 33.4 ± 1.5% with the probe; p < 0.001), and on the left (CV = 26.9 ± 1.5% versus 29.3 ± 1.5% on the right; p = 0.01). Tail data (probe only) were analysed separately: mean MNT (± SE) was 11.7 (±1.8); MNT increased in days 3–6 of testing compared with day 1 ( p < 0.001). The mean CV (±SE) was 38.9% (±1.1%). Conclusions and clinical relevance: MNTs and intra‐site variability in healthy sows were affected by several factors, indicating that this methodology requires considerable attention to detail.