ArticleBMC veterinary research2023
Pet feeding habits and the microbiological contamination of dog food bowls: effect of feed type, cleaning method and bowl material.
Article in BMC veterinary research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- Impact of Combined Botanical Functional Ingredients on the Canine Gut Microbiome.Veterinary sciences · 2026Article
- Seed-extracted ZnO nanoparticles fromOpen veterinary journal · 2026Article
- Effects of a Novel Prebiotic and Postbiotic Dietary Supplement on Gut Microbiota, Intestinal Barrier Markers, and Inflammation in Healthy Dogs.Veterinary sciences · 2026Article
- PUFA-rich oil supplement improves hair condition of cats and dogs.Open veterinary journal · 2026Article
- Innovative discovery and validation of ACE-inhibitory peptides from eggshell membrane keratin byproducts: An integrated computational andCurrent research in food science · 2026Article
- An exploratory study of behavioral, cognitive, physiological, and microbiota profiles in senior dogs.Frontiers in behavioral neuroscience · 2026Article
- Article
- Attitudes and Preferences of Cat and Dog Owners Towards Pet Food Quality Attributes in Türkiye.Veterinary sciences · 2025Article
- Effects of Poultry By-Product Composition and Processing on Nutrient Digestibility and Fecal Characteristics of High-Protein Dry Dog Food.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025Article
- Effects of hemp-based polyunsaturated fatty acid supplementation on membrane lipid profiles and reproductive performance in Martina Franca jacks.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2025Article
- QRS complex configurations in 12-lead electrocardiograms of dogs with monomorphic ventricular tachycardia or complete bundle branch block.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2025Article
- Dog Owners' Perceptions of the Convenience and Value of Chewable Oclacitinib: Quantitative Survey Data from an International Survey.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2024Article
- Evidence Supporting Oral Hygiene Management by Owners through a Genetic Analysis of Dental Plaque Bacteria in Dogs.Veterinary sciences · 2024Article
- Shiitake mushroom powder supplementation increase antioxidative activity in dogs.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSafe pet feeding practices and food bowl hygiene measures are important for minimising the risk of microbiological contaminations in the domestic environment. This study compares the practices reported by dog and cat caregivers, and investigates whether cleaning method, feed type or bowl material affects the microbiological contamination of dog food bowls.
resultsData from 351 dog caregivers and 186 cat caregivers were collected via an online survey. The majority of dogs (70.7%) were fed twice daily, whereas cats (43%) were mostly fed ad libitum. The most common material for dog food bowls was metal (67.1%) versus plastic (38.1%) and metal (37.6%) for cats. Dog food bowls were most frequently cleaned after each meal (35.7%); whereas for cats, 21.5% were cleaned after each meal, 22.7% once a day and 19.3% 2-3 times a week. Total mesophilic aerobic bacteria counts (TMABc), Enterobacteriaceae counts and pathogenic bacteria (Salmonella spp., Campylobacter spp., Verotoxigenic E. coli [VTEC]) were assessed for 96 dog food bowls. TMABc were higher in metal vs. plastic bowls (p < 0.001) and in those used for wet food vs. dry food (p = 0.0397). Enterobacteriaceae counts were higher in bowls washed by hand vs. dishwasher (p = 0.0515), whereas no differences were found between hand washing vs. dry wiping. Salmonella spp., Campylobacter spp. or E. coli VTEC contaminations were not detected.
conclusionsThe surveyed Italian dog and cat caregivers reported different habits concerning feeding frequency, food bowl material and cleaning frequency. Wet food and metal bowls were associated with higher levels of microbiological contamination of dog food bowls. Furthermore, in relation to wet washing methods, contaminations were likely to be greater following hand washing than they were following the use of a dishwasher. Practical guidelines for safe feeding practices and hygiene measures are needed to minimise the risk of microbiological contaminations in domestic environments.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.