Assessing animal pain and emotional expression is an important aspect of veterinary care. A recent study investigated the abilities of different observer groups, including dog owners, veterinary students, and veterinarians, to recognize pain-related emotions in dogs using the Free Choice Profiling (FCP) methodology. FCP allows observers to qualitatively assess animal behavior using their own vocabulary, which can provide valuable insights into the animal’s emotional state.

Observers used FCP to describe emotional expressions

The study involved 20 dogs, ten of which were healthy (“healthy”) and ten that were showing clinical signs of pain (“pain”). The dogs were filmed, and the resulting footage was shown to the three observer groups, who were not aware of the pain-related nature of the study. The observers used FCP to describe and score the animals’ emotional expressions. The veterinary students and veterinarians in the study also scored the dogs using the Glasgow Composite Pain Scale-Short Form (GCPS-SF), a semi-quantitative pain assessment tool.

Findings showed reliable observations

The results of the study were quite interesting. Each observer group reached a significant (p < 0.001) consensus profile, indicating they were able to reliably assess the dogs’ emotional expressions. The “healthy” dogs were mainly described as “quiet” and “lively,” while the majority of “pain” dogs were considered “in pain” and “suffering.”

The correlation among the FCP scores was high between the different observer groups, suggesting consistent assessments. For example, the correlation between the dog owners’ DIM1 (the first dimension of the FCP) and the veterinary students’ DIM1 was -0.86, and the correlation between the dog owners’ DIM2 and the students’ DIM2 was 0.72. Additionally, the correlation between the students’ DIM2 and the veterinarians’ DIM1 was 0.70.

Using FCP in veterinary practice 

The study also found a strong correlation between GCPS-SF scores and FCP scores, particularly for the veterinary students’ DIM2 (? = 0.77) and the veterinarians’ DIM1 (? = 0.92). This suggests that qualitative methods like FCP could be used in conjunction with semi-quantitative methods like GCPS-SF to evaluate the effect of pain on an animal’s emotional expression.

Importantly, the study found that the observers’ cultural background and personal experiences did not substantially affect their qualitative behavioral assessment of dogs with acute somatic pain. This is a significant finding, as it suggests FCP could be a reliable tool for pain assessment in veterinary practice, regardless of the observer’s background.

The results of this study provide valuable insights into the use of FCP for assessing pain-related emotions in dogs. The high correlation between the FCP scores and the semi-quantitative pain assessment tool, as well as the consistency among the different observer groups, suggests that FCP could be a valuable addition to the veterinary pain assessment toolkit.