O'Connor Annette, Totton Sarah Ceridwen, Hernandez Michelle, Meyers Emily, Meyers Kelley, Abreu Hilda Mejia, Spofford Nathaniel, Morrison JoAnn
Department of Large Animal Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan, United States of America.
Private Consultant, Guelph, Ontario, Canada.
PLoS One. 2025 May 30;20(5):e0325455. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0325455. eCollection 2025.
Barriers to accessing veterinary care can be challenging for companion-animal caregivers and may lead to preventable health conditions or even death of pets.
We conducted a scoping review to: 1) catalog the definitions of access to veterinary care (A2VC) used by researchers, 2) identify risk factors for and consequences of A2VC, and 3) map the risk factors onto dimensions of access to care (affordability, availability, accessibility, accommodation, acceptability).
Primary research on companion animals not involved in commercial enterprises (e.g., horse racing) examining consequences of and/or risk factors for A2VC for which the full text was available in English.
PubMed (1996-6 July 2023) and CAB Abstracts (1973-13 July 2023, Web of ScienceTM) were searched. Additionally, a topic expert (KM) identified relevant references. Two reviewers independently screened titles/abstracts and full texts of potentially relevant references. Forward and backward citation searches were also conducted on all eligible studies using Citation Chaser.
Risk factors were categorized and mapped to the five dimensions of access to care. An evidence gap map was created using the risk factor studies.
Fifty-one references describing fifty-two relevant studies were included. Forty-one studied risk factors associated with A2VC, and twelve studied consequences of A2VC. (One study examined both risk factors and consequences.) The majority of risk factors examined were demographic. The majority of outcomes measured were pet-centric. No relevant studies focused on pet horses, representing a gap in the literature.
Consensus needs to be reached on how A2VC is defined and measured to help reduce research wastage and strengthen impact of future studies on improving A2VC. Future studies of risk factors for A2VC should focus on creating a risk-mapping framework specific for A2VC, distinguishing factors that are susceptible to change and those which are not.
对于伴侣动物照料者而言,获得兽医护理存在诸多障碍,这些障碍可能会给宠物带来可预防的健康问题,甚至导致宠物死亡。
我们进行了一项范围综述,以:1)梳理研究人员使用的获得兽医护理(A2VC)的定义;2)识别A2VC的风险因素和后果;3)将风险因素映射到护理可及性的维度(可负担性、可获得性、可达性、适应性、可接受性)。
关于不参与商业活动(如赛马)的伴侣动物的原始研究,研究A2VC的后果和/或风险因素,且全文为英文。
检索了PubMed(1996年至2023年7月6日)和CAB文摘数据库(1973年至2023年7月13日,科学网™)。此外,一位主题专家(KM)确定了相关参考文献。两名评审员独立筛选潜在相关参考文献的标题/摘要和全文。还使用文献追踪器对所有符合条件的研究进行了正向和反向引文检索。
对风险因素进行分类,并映射到护理可及性的五个维度。利用风险因素研究创建了一个证据缺口图。
纳入了51篇参考文献,描述了52项相关研究。41项研究了与A2VC相关的风险因素,12项研究了A2VC的后果。(一项研究同时考察了风险因素和后果。)所研究的大多数风险因素是人口统计学方面的。所测量的大多数结果是以宠物为中心的。没有相关研究关注宠物马,这是文献中的一个空白。
需要就如何定义和衡量A2VC达成共识,以帮助减少研究浪费,并加强未来研究对改善A2VC的影响。未来关于A2VC风险因素的研究应侧重于创建一个专门针对A2VC的风险映射框架,区分易变因素和不变因素。