Factors affecting veterinary perception of the prevalence of back pain and dysfunction in dogs and horses.

Introduction: The prevalence of back pain in humans has been extensively reported, but in dogs it is unknown. In horses, research on the prevalence of back pain exists, but with reports ranging from 1% to 94%, indicating a data deficiency. Methods: Veterinarians were surveyed about their perception of the prevalence of back pain and dysfunction in dogs and horses for 6 different clinical scenarios. The respondents' education background and physical examination techniques were recorded. Results and discussion: Perceptions of the prevalence of back pain and dysfunction varied widely both within and between education groups. Sports medicine and rehabilitation specialists, and veterinarians certified in either spinal manipulation therapy or acupuncture, were more likely to report the presence of back pain and dysfunction compared to other practitioners. Clinicians that examined individual vertebral motion segments, or palpated for myofascial trigger points, appreciated a greater prevalence of back pain and dysfunction than those who did not. Respondents' perception is that primary axial issues are a common cause of musculoskeletal pain, and can clinically present as unilateral limb lameness. Compared to appendicular lesions, primary axial lesions are more likely to be found in patients presented with a non-specific reduced athletic performance. Respondents report frequently detecting axial lesions in patients presented with no clinical history of pain, and as an additional finding in patients with a known primary limb lameness.The above findings are derived from the subjective opinion of self reporting respondents and do not necessarily represent true prevalence of back pain and dysfunction; further quantitative research using objective methods is required to make that determination. These results do underscore the need for improved veterinary education on how to assess back pain, myofascial tone, and spinal range of motion. Greater agreement between clinicians might also be achieved by developing a standardized reporting method that semi-quantifies the severity of pain and dysfunction individually. Additionally, standardizing and reporting spinal physical examination methodology may also facilitate consistent communication of clinical findings and greater agreement between clinicians.