Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40234960›Full record

ArticlePorcine health management2025

Two restraining devices in connection to surgical castration with or without local anesthesia: effects on piglet stress.

Ann-Helena Hokkanen, Mathilde Coutant, Mari Heinonen, Marianna Norring, Magdy Adam, Claudio Oliviero, Tiina Bergqvist, Anna Valros

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Porcine health management, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Ann-Helena HokkanenDepartment of Production Animal Medicine, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland. ann-helena.hokkanen@helsinki.fi.
Mathilde CoutantDepartment of Animal and Veterinary Sciences, Aarhus University, Tjele, Denmark.
Mari HeinonenDepartment of Production Animal Medicine, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.
Marianna NorringDepartment of Production Animal Medicine, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.
Magdy AdamDepartment of Production Animal Medicine, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.
Claudio OlivieroDepartment of Production Animal Medicine, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.
Tiina BergqvistDepartment of Production Animal Medicine, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.
Anna ValrosDepartment of Production Animal Medicine, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSurgical castration causes severe pain to young piglets. In addition, piglets experience intense stress from handling and restraining during the procedure. Furthermore, piglets must be restrained twice when receiving local anesthesia before castration, and the injections are painful. Unfortunately, strategies to reduce piglets' stress during handling, local anesthetic injections, and painful procedures are limited and poorly understood. Thus, we randomized 179 male piglets aged 3 to 4 days to be restrained with either a commonly used commercial tubular bench with a dorsal restraining posture or a custom-made castration rack with a vertical restraining posture. Piglets received local anesthetic or sham injections (mimicking local anesthesia but without skin penetration) 10 min before castration. We then compared the effect of these devices on the piglets' behavioral reactions, vocalizations, and body temperatures at the following four times: when restrained for the first time, when given local anesthetic injections or receiving sham injections, during the second time restrained, and during castration.

resultsPiglets were given higher mean reaction scores when restrained in the tubular bench than the castration rack. Piglets showed differing vocalization patterns in the two devices, with more grunts and screams in the castration rack and more squeals in the tubular bench. Moreover, local anesthetic injections resulted in higher mean reaction scores and longer vocalizations than sham injections during the injections/sham injections but reduced these measures during castration. After castration, the skin temperature was higher in sham-injected piglets than in piglets castrated with local anesthesia, irrespective of the restraining device used.

conclusionsLocal anesthesia reduced piglets' reaction scores and vocalizations during castration. However, receiving local anesthesia was painful. Based on piglet behavior, restraining in a tubular bench was more aversive than in the castration rack. However, the devices affected the proportions of the different vocalization types during local anesthetic injections and castration in a manner we cannot fully explain. As the restraining method affects piglets' behavior, it may influence pain assessment during local anesthetic injections and evaluation of local anesthesia efficacy during castration. Thus, less stressful methods to handle piglets are needed.

Indexed as

Animal welfareBehavioral reactionsCastrationCastration benchHandlingManagementPainPigletsProcaine with epinephrineSus scrofa

Identifiers

PMID40234960
PMCPMC12001485

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.