Table 1 - uploaded by Mark James Farnworth
Content may be subject to copyright.
Source publication
This study aimed to identify behaviours that could be used to assess post-operative pain and analgesic efficacy in male rabbits. In consideration of the 'Three Rs', behavioural data were collected on seven male New Zealand White rabbits in an ethically approved experiment requiring abdominal implantation of a telemetric device for purposes other th...
Contexts in source publication
Context 1
... this, relatively little is known about their behavioural responses to pain. A recent study by Leach et al (2009) has identified a number of behaviours of interest in female rabbits undergoing ovario- hysterectomy and housed in floor pens (see Table 1). Leach et al (2009) used the behaviours identified as indicative of pain to create a composite scoring system to assess pain in rabbits. ...
Context 2
... avoid missing situation-specific changes in behaviour caused by differences in housing, pilot observations of rabbits within this study were also conducted. Behaviours identified as indicating pain by Leach et al (2009) with descriptors which were considered explicit and therefore a risk in relation to observer bias were renamed (eg 'wince' became 'drawing back') (see Table 1). Behavioural data were assessed using Statistical Package for the Social Sciences version 17 (SPSS v17). ...
Context 3
... were analysed relative to either median duration or median frequency. Frequency of behaviour was used only for those which were not recorded as durations (Table 1). ...
Context 4
... occurrence of previously unidentified postures following surgery, such as tight huddle, can be found in literature pertaining to other species (dogs: Holton et al 2001;piglets: Moya et al 2008) and have been identified as reducing pressure on the site of injury. In tight huddle, the arched back (for full description see Table 1) is likely to reduce tension around the abdominal wound site and this specific component of the behaviour has been identified in other species, specifically after abdominal surgery (rats: ...
Citations
... For example, heart rate, respiratory rate and temperature are useful physiological measures, but are also influenced by infection, stress and positive arousal [10]. Therefore, behavioural changes such as reduced appetite, faecal output, and exploratory movement are generally considered more reliable [11,12]. ...
Background
Rabbits are popular family pets. They are prey species and so have evolved to hide signs of illness and pain. Recent research has developed robust pain scales for use in a clinical setting, but to date none has examined rabbit owners’ ability to recognise pain in their animals. This study investigated how owners identify pain in their pet rabbits and their ability to correctly identify different levels of pain, in order to determine any need for owner education in this area.
Methods
Owners were recruited via Facebook and a two-part online survey was distributed. Part one collected data on demographics, owners’ knowledge of pain signs and beliefs about pain in rabbits. Part two asked respondents to pain score eight videos of rabbits in different levels of pain for comparison to pain scores made by three experts. We used a simplified version of the Bristol Rabbit Pain Score (BRPS) which involved a single 0 to 3 scale. We explored the number of pain signs each respondent could list, the total score given to the videos, and their deviation from the experts’ scores.
Results
A total of 500 respondents completed part one of the survey and 345 additionally completed Part two. Respondents were on average able to state five signs of pain (range 0–12), but females stated significantly more (p = 0.018), as did those who worked with rabbits (p = 0.004) and those with experience of their rabbit having an operation (p = 0.01). Overall, 98.6% of respondents thought rabbits felt pain as much or more that dogs and cats. In Part two, respondents more frequently agreed with the experts when identifying rabbits in no pain (88.8%) and severe pain (65.2%), but there was lower agreement when identifying mild (28.4%) and moderate pain (43.2%). Respondents overall rated pain lower than experts with an average total pain score of 11.9 compared to 18 given by the experts.
Conclusions
Most rabbit owners are able to list numerous pain signs and are generally able to identify pain-free rabbits and those in severe pain. Owners’ ability to differentiate between mild and moderate pain is more limited and could benefit from training in the subtler signs of pain. Veterinary professionals are well placed to educate owners about signs of pain in rabbits and should be aware of areas where owners’ knowledge can be improved.
... Measures have been validated for pain assessment in laboratory rabbits, based on changes in behaviour, facial expressions and body temperature (Leach et al., 2009;Farnworth et al., 2011;Keating et al., 2012). These could also be utilised for farmed rabbits. ...
... These could also be utilised for farmed rabbits. Behavioural changes include reduced feeding and drinking, tight huddle posture (sitting with their back arched and fore and hind limbs drawn in tightly), locomotory changes including shuffle (walking at a very slow pace) and partial hop movements (forward extension of forelimbs as if to hop, without movement of hind limbs) (Farnworth et al., 2011). General grooming is also reduced, although sites of injury may receive increased grooming (Farnworth et al., 2011). ...
... Behavioural changes include reduced feeding and drinking, tight huddle posture (sitting with their back arched and fore and hind limbs drawn in tightly), locomotory changes including shuffle (walking at a very slow pace) and partial hop movements (forward extension of forelimbs as if to hop, without movement of hind limbs) (Farnworth et al., 2011). General grooming is also reduced, although sites of injury may receive increased grooming (Farnworth et al., 2011). EFSA (2005) noted that although rabbits are normally silent animals, they may squeal loudly if in severe pain or distress; they may also grind the teeth in cases of more chronic pain. ...
This opinion, produced upon a request from the European Commission, focuses on transport of domestic birds and rabbits in containers (e.g. any crate, box, receptacle or other rigid structure used for the transport of animals, but not the means of transport itself). It describes and assesses current transport practices in the EU, based on data from literature, Member States and expert opinion. The species and categories of domestic birds assessed were mainly chickens for meat (broilers), end-of-lay hens and day-old chicks. They included to a lesser extent pullets, turkeys, ducks, geese, quails and game birds, due to limited scientific evidence. The opinion focuses on road transport to slaughterhouses or to production sites. For day-old chicks, air transport is also addressed. The relevant stages of transport considered are preparation, loading, journey, arrival and uncrating. Welfare consequences associated with current transport practices were identified for each stage. For loading and uncrating, the highly relevant welfare consequences identified are handling stress, injuries, restriction of movement and sensory overstimulation. For the journey and arrival, injuries, restriction of movement, sensory overstimulation, motion stress, heat stress, cold stress, prolonged hunger and prolonged thirst are identified as highly relevant. For each welfare consequence, animal-based measures (ABMs) and hazards were identified and assessed, and both preventive and corrective or mitigative measures proposed. Recommendations on quantitative criteria to prevent or mitigate welfare consequences are provided for microclimatic conditions, space allowances and journey times for all categories of animals, where scientific evidence and expert opinion support such outcomes.
... Elaboration of the pain scale. The scale was based on behaviours identified in previous studies, considered important to assess pain in rabbits [11,12,18,[29][30][31][32][33][34]. ...
... The original selection of behaviours in the scale was based on the ethogram [12], literature [11,12,18,[29][30][31][32][33][34], and judgment of an expert committee. This supports the instrument's content validity, which confirmed that the items reflect the phenomenon being evaluated, i.e., pain [50,56,58,59]. ...
Considering the widespread use of rabbits in research that potentially causes pain and discomfort and the limited number of pain assessment validated tools in this species, we aimed to develop and validate a scale of acute postoperative pain in rabbits (RPBS). Footage of 58 rabbits from previous studies were used, recorded at 'baseline' (before orthopaedic and soft tissue surgeries), 'pain' (after surgery), 'analgesia' (after analgesic), and '24h post' (24 hours after surgery). The videos were randomised and assessed twice by four evaluators, within one-month interval between evaluations. After content validation, RBPS was further refined using the criteria from the validation. According to the principal component analysis, RPBS was considered unidimensional. The intra-and inter-observer reliability was excellent (ICC>0.80) for all evaluators. There was a high Spearman's correlation of the RPBS with unidimensional scales (>0.80) and a moderate correlation with the Rabbit Grimace Scale (0.68), confirming criterion validity. According to the mixed linear model, the scale was responsive, shown by the increase in pain scores after surgery. Construct validity was confirmed by known-group approach and internal relationships among items. Adequate item-total correlation (>0.3) was observed for all items, except for the attention to the affected area (0.04). The internal consistency was very good (Cronbach's α coefficient = 0.78; Mcdo-nald's ω coefficient = 0.83). The cutoff score for rescue analgesia was �3, with an area under the curve >0.95, demonstrating a high discriminatory capacity of the instrument. Scores 3 and 4 were within the uncertainty diagnostic zone. Specificity was 87% and sensitivity was 90%. It was concluded that the RPBS presented content, criterion, and construct validities, responsiveness, and reliability to assess acute pain in rabbits submitted to PLOS ONE PLOS ONE | https://doi.
... However, prey species like rabbits tend to hide signs of pain and therefore can be challenging for a practitioner to describe their behaviours properly [14]. Behavioural observation of the animals may be used to confirm pain descriptors and to identify additional behaviours that a rabbit in pain might exhibit [22] and this can be carried out by observation of video clips of rabbits recorded during the perioperative period [22]. Another important aspect when developing any scale, is to test its internal consistency, which can be assessed using the Cronbach's alpha coefficient [23]. ...
... However, prey species like rabbits tend to hide signs of pain and therefore can be challenging for a practitioner to describe their behaviours properly [14]. Behavioural observation of the animals may be used to confirm pain descriptors and to identify additional behaviours that a rabbit in pain might exhibit [22] and this can be carried out by observation of video clips of rabbits recorded during the perioperative period [22]. Another important aspect when developing any scale, is to test its internal consistency, which can be assessed using the Cronbach's alpha coefficient [23]. ...
... Descriptors were not prioritised or rejected during this phase. During the second exercise, descriptors from other research studies that used behaviour-based measures to assess pain in cats, rabbits and guinea pigs [15,22,26] were shown to the participants. The participants were then asked to select the descriptors that best applied to a rabbit in pain and add them to the previous list. ...
A species-specific composite pain scale is a prerequisite for adequate pain assessment. The aim of this study was to develop a multidimensional pain scale specific to rabbits ( Oryctolagus cuniculus ) called the Bristol Rabbit Pain Scale (BRPS). The scale was developed over five phases using a unique combination of methods: focus groups and behavioural observation. The first two phases aimed at identifying descriptors to describe a rabbit in pain, and then reducing their number, both using focus groups. A total of 72 pain descriptors were grouped under six categories (Demeanour, Posture, Facial expression, Attention to the painful area, Audible and Other) and ‘No pain’ descriptors were added. The third phase aimed to confirm, through video observation of rabbits, the categories and descriptors previously described, to reject those terms that were ambiguous, and identify any new descriptors that had not been included in the previous list of descriptors. This led to the rejection of the categories Audible and Attention to the painful area and of 34 descriptors. Seven new descriptors were identified. The last two phases constructed the final format of the BRPS by refining the categories, ranking the descriptors on an ordinal scale and testing the internal reliability of the scale using Cronbach’s alpha test. This led to a composite pain scale of six categories (Demeanour, Posture, Locomotion, Ears, Eyes and Grooming) with four intensities of pain (0, 1, 2, and 3), a total score of 0–18, and a high Cronbach’s alpha coefficient (alpha = 0.843). This BRPS fills an important gap in the field of rabbit medicine and has the potential to improve the assessment and management of pain in rabbits providing veterinary professionals with a novel multidimensional pain assessment tool. Further studies will investigate the clinical utility, validity and reliability of the BRPS.
... Further, the absence of feces in the postoperative period also indicated disruption of normal digestive function. 20,21 In this study analgesic efficacy was assessed by facial expressions as a part of behavioral markers with five action units such as-orbital tightening, cheek flattening, nose pointing and downward whisker, folded and backward position of the ear (Grimace Scale-pain scoring system on facial expressions) 22 ...
... It might be due to the behavioral changes in the early postoperative period which were directly related to postsurgical pain and recovery from anesthesia. 21 Most of the postsurgical rabbits with greater body mass regained occlusal bite force within 7-10 days this finding correlates with other studies. 27 Facial changes consistent with graft's growth were favorable towards the growing rabbits though a significant difference was found in terms of occlusal change and range of jaw movement with adults. ...
Background: Costochondral graft has been used as a substitute for a growth center in the damaged Temporomandibular joint (TMJ) in the growing children. But the relapse of the TMJ ankylosis along with facial deformity is the most common outcome after the surgery for the resorption or overgrowth of the graft. While an exploration of the human Temporomandibular joint seems to be unethical after reconstruction with an autogenous costochondral graft for study purposes, therefore we sought to determine the growth potential of the graft by clinical evaluation.
Material and methods: An experimental study was done on 96 New Zealand white male rabbits, which were divided into batches. Each batch (total 2 batches) contained 24 experimental and 24 control rabbits of known ages and species; growing (3-4) and adult (12-18) months old. TMJ arthroplasty with a costochondral graft using either 1mm or 4 mm thickness of cartilaginous cap done in both age groups. Follow-up was done regularly in batches comparing with control up to 4th, 12th, and 24th weeks of surgery to find out any relationship of behavioral change, clinical presentation, and macroscopic growth of the graft.
Results: There was a relationship among the rabbits with their behavioral change, clinical presentation, and presence of growth center in the graft. Growth was found in 60% cases, 40% was growing, and 20% in adults.
Conclusions: Costochondral graft had a 60% growth potentiality. The failure rate of 40% may be due to some unknown factors. Grafts grew in a greater number of growing rabbits than adults. Long time follow-up had a strong role in the growth of the graft. In conclusion, clinical evaluation of the rabbit model provided a fair estimation of the growth process.
... In order to develop an ethogram to identify pain behaviours, one must compare behaviours present in situations that incur pain with behaviours present in a painfree state, usually before surgery [9,13]. Ethograms have only been developed in rabbits suffering soft tissue surgery [9,12,13,15], and to our knowledge, only activity levels, not behaviour, have been evaluated in rabbits undergoing orthopaedic surgery [8]. Orthopaedic pain is expected to induce more intense pain [16,17] and to be associated with specific behaviours (e.g. ...
... Orthopaedic pain is expected to induce more intense pain [16,17] and to be associated with specific behaviours (e.g. lameness) [18] in addition to those already observed [9,12,13,15]. The impact of orthopaedic surgery is of particular concern and requires investigation as rabbits are frequently submitted to this procedure both clinically as pets [17] and in research [16]. ...
... Changes in general behaviour that have been associated with pain in rabbits and can include: reductions in activity [8,9], moving around [9, 13, 15], hopping [9, 13], exploration [9,13], and interaction with objects and other animals [9] as well as increased lying posture [9,12]. Changes in behaviours considered to be more specific to abdominal pain have also been observed, such as, skin twitches, writhing and pressing the abdomen against the floor [9]. ...
Rabbits are widely used in studies focusing on pain. However, pain is undertreated in this species and one possible factor to explain this is the lack of evaluation methods. The objective of this study was to identify behaviours related to orthopaedic pain in rabbits and to evaluate the influence of the presence of an observer on these behaviours. Twenty-eight rabbits undergoing orthopaedic surgery and filmed 24 hours before surgery, and 1 hour (before rescue analgesia), 4 hours (3 hours after rescue analgesia), and 24 hours post-recovery were observed in the presence and absence of an observer. The frequency and/or duration of behaviours were compared over time and between the presence and absence of the observer using the Friedman and Wilcoxon tests respectively. Data are expressed as median and interquartile range and a significant difference was considered when p<0.05. At 1 hour post-recovery, the rabbits showed reduced activity, hopping, change posture, position in the cage, explore, and open eyes in both the presence and absence of the observer. In the absence of the observer, quadrupedal posture, interact with pinecone, and eat carrot also decreased, while wince behaviour increased. In the presence of the observer, before surgery, the rabbits were less active (Presence-280; 162-300, Absence-300; 300-300) and presented a lower duration of explore (Presence-3; 0-32, Absence-40; 4-63). Post-recovery the rabbits flinched less (Presence-0; 0-0, Absence-0; 0-1) and suspended the affected limb less (Presence-0; 0-0, Absence-0; 0-65). After rescue analgesia the rabbits put weight on and raised the affected limb less (Presence-0; 0-0, Absence-0; 0-2) and licked the affected area less (Presence-0; 0-0, Absence-0; 0-2). These findings demonstrate that the presence of the observer inhibited pain-free behaviours in the rabbits, leading to a false impression of pain, and after the surgery the rabbits masked some pain signs related to the affected area.
... Videos were coded by a single observer using instantaneous (30 second intervals for state behaviours) and all occurrence (for events) focal sampling. Additionally, the animal's location within the enclosure (Farnworth et al., 2011) and proximity to a conspecific (if they were within one body length of the largest rabbit present), was recorded. ...
The purpose of the study was to attempt to identify personality traits in domestic rabbits
(Oryctolagus cuniculus) and to evaluate a range of tools, suitable for use in a shelter
setting, that can be used to measure personality traits. A literature review highlighted
limited evaluation of reliability and validity in rabbit personality research published to
date. Additionally, there is a lack of clarity on what is being measured by some
behaviour tests that are currently employed in animal personality research and there
are limited tools available to measure domestic rabbit responses to humans.
Chapter three highlights several uses of rabbit behaviour and personality data in
United Kingdom (UK) shelters. Shelter staff reported uses for understanding the
behaviour of an individual rabbit to support the management of the individual while at
the shelter and to match the rabbit to the most suitable future home. Challenges facing
shelter staff to collect behavioural data for their rabbits centred around a lack of
resources, specifically time available for collecting behavioural data. An additional
challenge reported by shelter staff was inaccurate information being reported by the
person handing the rabbit into the shelter. To ensure any personality assessment tool
could be integrated into shelter routines, the tools would need to be relatively quick to
complete and should ideally include a range of data collection methods so that a full
picture can be available.
In Chapter four, the results of a behaviour rating survey that was distributed to a selfselected pool of rabbit owners or those that worked with rabbits, using social media
are reported. The survey was also completed by animal care technicians for rabbits
taking part in direct behavioural observations, including a suite of behaviour tests and
observations within the home cage. The use of an online survey enabled a large
number of participants to take part. Following examination of the reliability of the data (interrater) and dimension reduction statistics, three components were retained that
included 15 of the initial 47 items and accounted for 60.6% of the variance in the data
(n=1,234). However, sufficient thresholds for inter-rater reliability were not achieved.
As intended in the selection of survey items, the retained components accounted for
intraspecific social behaviour, human-rabbit interactions (avoidance of humans) and
boldness in relation to the environment. However, only the human-rabbit interaction
component had sufficient distribution of scores across the sample population to
consider this a personality trait.
Behavioural tests are commonly used as measures of an individual animal’s
personality; however, several tests have conflicting interpretations of the underlying
traits that may drive behaviour in these tests. In Chapter 5, a suite of tests were used,
reflecting three commonly used test paradigms for domestic rabbits; the open field test,
novel object test and a new human interaction test. Five human-interaction items
measured were reliable between raters and between tests and two items, location
during subtest 3 where the handler was sat inside the door of the enclosure and a
combined outcome score for subtest 3, 4 (stroke rabbit) and 5 (pick up rabbit) were
retained to create component 2 on the final solution of the principal component
analysis. From two variations of both the open field and novel object tests, two
components were also derived, reflecting exploration and curiosity in rabbits. These
three components were reliable between raters and between tests and accounted for
75.2% of the cumulative variance in the data. The component labelled ‘exploration’
comprising variables of activity in the open field tests were found to negatively correlate
with component 2 from the behaviour rating scale, reflecting avoidance of humans.
This is similar to past research in young rabbits where resistance to handling was
correlated with activity in the open field.
The use of behavioural observations in the home cage environment is rarely performed
for personality assessment in domestic animals due to how time consuming such
observations can be. As a requirement for the tools was to be able to be utilised by
shelter staff, where time constraints are an important factor, home cage behavioural
observations were designed to be quick to complete. Following a pilot test including
three hours of observations over the day, it was possible to determine the behaviours
that could be observed using video cameras positioned adjacent to or above rabbit
enclosures. Additionally, this pilot test revealed that within the times of day available
for testing, none were preferable over any other in terms of the range of behaviours
observed in 12 rabbits. The main study therefore utilised three five-minute sampling
points across the day with the refined ethogram and 30 second focal sampling. It was
not possible to complete dimension reductive statistics on the sample of 16 rabbits
used for this part of the study, although the behaviours observed in the relatively short
time frame did represent activity patterns observed in past research.
Two tools, the behaviour rating survey and suite of behaviour tests, are proposed to
be retained for future examination of the utility of these tests in a shelter setting to
measure rabbit behaviour and personality. These retained tests would provide
information on an individual rabbit’s social behaviour (intraspecific), response to
humans, boldness in relation to the environment, exploration and curiosity. Future
research is recommended to determine the suitability of these tests for use in shelters,
and to understand the predictive validity of these tools. That is to understand the
usefulness of rabbit personality assessments to identify aspects of behaviour that are
stable between different environmental contexts, such as between a shelter setting
and within a home following being rehomed.
http://nectar.northampton.ac.uk/13599/
... Some of the respondents reported using behavioural indicators to assess pain during the perioperative period, with teeth grinding, abnormal postures and decreased food intake being amongst the most common ones. These indicators have previously been described in both pet rabbits (Benato et al. 2020) and laboratory rabbits (Leach et al. 2009, Farnworth et al. 2011) and they can overall be considered reliable. However, individual changes to housing and surgical procedures should be taken into consideration during assessment (Farnworth et al. 2011). ...
... These indicators have previously been described in both pet rabbits (Benato et al. 2020) and laboratory rabbits (Leach et al. 2009, Farnworth et al. 2011) and they can overall be considered reliable. However, individual changes to housing and surgical procedures should be taken into consideration during assessment (Farnworth et al. 2011). It appears that overall pain scoring in rabbits is still considered challenging. ...
Objectives
To gain insight into veterinary nurse knowledge of pain recognition and control in rabbits.
Materials and Methods
We used a survey to establish current attitudes amongst veterinary nurses towards pain management in pet rabbits and factors that might shape those attitudes. The survey was advertised at national and international veterinary conferences, in veterinary publications and on social media.
Results
A total of 284 questionnaires (95% from the UK) were completed and analysed. The majority of respondents (78%) nursed 1–10 rabbits per month and 5.6% of the respondents reported regularly running a rabbit clinic. The respondents were regularly involved in nursing during common procedures such as castration and ovariohysterectomy. Responsibility for post‐operative pain assessment was reported to be by “nurses only” (50%), “nurses and vets” (42%) and occasionally by “vets only” (3%). The majority of respondents reported that they did not use a pain scale but often relied on behavioural indicators, while 20% used the Rabbit Grimace Scale. The majority of the respondents reported being “fairly confident” at recognising pain in rabbits.
Clinical Significance
Veterinary nurses are involved in many aspects of rabbit care, and they are generally confident at nursing this species. This survey also suggests the need for more data on the use of pain assessment tools in rabbits and the importance of teamwork between nurses and veterinarians.
... This may be due to the fact that there is more research evidence on potential behavioural indicators of pain in rabbits with some studies focusing specifically on the postoperative time and that physiological parameters such as heart rate and body temperature are routinely taken during hospitalisation. [16][17][18] While the general consensus is that physiological indicators are less reliable as they can also be affected by stress and infection, changes in the animal's behaviour are still widely used as a reliable and non-invasive method of pain assessment. 19 Which analgesic drugs are commonly prescribed during the perioperative time? ...
Background
In the last 20 years, two studies on the veterinary use of perioperative analgesia in small mammals reported a limited use of analgesics in rabbits but suggested an increasing use over the years. The aim of this study was to better understand how pain is treated and ameliorated in rabbits while under veterinary care.
Methods
An online survey of 60 questions was developed and advertised at national and international veterinary conferences, in veterinary publications and on social media.
Results
In total 94.3 per cent of the respondents routinely administered nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) to rabbits undergoing surgical procedures such as neutering, 71.4 per cent administered an opioid and 70.3 per cent routinely administered multimodal analgesia, although dosages do not always match current consensus opinion. Buprenorphine and meloxicam were the most common analgesic drugs prescribed by the respondents. The dosage of meloxicam administered both parenterally and orally varied widely.
Conclusion
Rabbit analgesia has improved over recent years similarly to the trend seen in other companion animals. However, overall it seems that pain assessment is still limited in rabbits. The lack of multimodal composite pain scales specific for rabbits makes this task even more challenging.
... There are few validated assessment tools for pain assessment in farmed rabbits, but there has been extensive research into pain assessment in laboratory rabbits and this knowledge can be applied in the context of rabbits farmed for meat. Laboratory research has validated changes in natural behaviour, facial expressions and body temperature for pain assessment (Farnworth et al., 2011;Leach et al., 2011;Keating et al., 2012). Behavioural changes include reduced feeding and drinking, tight huddle posture (sitting with their back arched and fore and hind limbs drawn in tightly), locomotory changes including shuffle (walking at a very slow pace) and partial hop movements (forward extension of forelimbs as if to hop, without movement of hind limbs) (Farnworth et al., 2011). ...
... Laboratory research has validated changes in natural behaviour, facial expressions and body temperature for pain assessment (Farnworth et al., 2011;Leach et al., 2011;Keating et al., 2012). Behavioural changes include reduced feeding and drinking, tight huddle posture (sitting with their back arched and fore and hind limbs drawn in tightly), locomotory changes including shuffle (walking at a very slow pace) and partial hop movements (forward extension of forelimbs as if to hop, without movement of hind limbs) (Farnworth et al., 2011). General grooming is also reduced, although sites of injury may receive increased grooming (Farnworth et al., 2011). ...
... Behavioural changes include reduced feeding and drinking, tight huddle posture (sitting with their back arched and fore and hind limbs drawn in tightly), locomotory changes including shuffle (walking at a very slow pace) and partial hop movements (forward extension of forelimbs as if to hop, without movement of hind limbs) (Farnworth et al., 2011). General grooming is also reduced, although sites of injury may receive increased grooming (Farnworth et al., 2011). EFSA (2005) noted that although rabbits are normally silent animals, they may squeal loudly if in severe pain or distress; they may also grind the teeth in cases of more chronic pain. ...
Abstract Rabbits of different ages may have to be killed on‐farm for purposes other than slaughter (where slaughter is defined as killing for human consumption) either individually or on a large scale (e.g. for production reasons or for disease control). The purpose of this opinion was to assess the risks associated to the on‐farm killing of rabbits. The processes during on‐farm killing that were assessed included handling, stunning and/or killing methods (including restraint). The latter were grouped into four categories: electrical methods, mechanical methods, controlled atmosphere method and lethal injection. In total, 14 hazards were identified and characterised, most of these related to stunning and/or killing. The staff was identified as the origin for all hazards, either due to lack of the appropriate skill sets needed to perform tasks or due to fatigue. Possible corrective and preventive measures were assessed: measures to correct hazards were identified for five hazards and the staff was shown to have a crucial role in prevention. Five welfare consequences of the welfare hazards to which rabbits can be exposed to during on‐farm killing were identified: not being dead, consciousness, pain, fear and distress. Welfare consequences and relevant animal‐based measures were described. Outcome tables linking hazards, welfare consequences, animal‐based measures, origins, preventive and corrective measures were developed for each process. Mitigation measures to minimise welfare consequences are proposed.
