Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 5

In cooperation with

Timely Topics in Nutrition


Attitudes of pet owners toward pet foods
and feeding management of cats and dogs

Kathryn E. Michel, dvm, ms, dacvn; Kristina N. Willoughby, vmd; Sarah K. Abood, dvm, phd;
Andrea J. Fascetti vmd, phd, dacvn, dacvim; Linda M. Fleeman, bvsc, phd;
Lisa M. Freeman, dvm, phd, dacvn; Dorothy P. Laflamme, dvm, phd, dacvn;
Cassondra Bauer, dvm, ms; Brona L. E. Kemp, bvsc; Janine R. Van Doren, dvm

P et owners necessarily play an active role in deter-


mining their pets diet, and their nutritional choices
are likely to be influenced by numerous factors, includ-
Significant differences have been found be-
tween cats and dogs regarding types of food that
are fed and some aspects of feeding management. 4
ing their knowledge of the nutritional needs of their In that study, investigators found that a greater
pets; their perceptions regarding the nutritional value, percentage of cats (98.8%) were fed at least half
wholesomeness, and safety of feed ingredients; their of their diet as a commercial pet food, compared
thoughts about the pet food industry; and their sourc- with the percentage of dogs (93.2%) receiving at
es of information regarding the dietary management least half of their diet as a commercial pet food;
of their pets. Communicating effectively with owners hence, significantly more dogs than cats received
about nutrition and dietary management of companion noncommercial foods, including table scraps, left-
animals can be difficult, particularly when the goal is to overs, or home-prepared foods, as part of their diet.
persuade a pet owner to alter feeding practices. Circum- Cats were more likely to receive at least half of
stances frequently arise in which a change in feeding their diet as canned commercial pet food and were
management may be in the best interests of a pet (eg, more likely to be fed ad libitum but were less likely
when a patient with organ failure could benefit from to receive treats, compared with results for dogs.
a diet restricted in certain nutrients or when a pet is On the basis of these findings, it may be discerned
receiving an unbalanced home-prepared diet). Under- that the attitudes held by pet owners regarding the
standing how and what people choose to feed their pets, proper nutrition and feeding management of com-
as well as behaviors and attitudes that may influence panion animals reflect differences among cat and
these choices, could facilitate better communication dog owners.
with clients regarding dietary choices for their pets. It is important to gain a better understanding of
Studies14 have indicated that > 90% of cats and dogs attitudes regarding nutrition for companion animals
in the United States and Australia consume commercial because they are an integral part of feeding behaviors
pet food for at least half their intake. However, noncom- of pet owners and of successful communication with
mercial foods, such as table scraps, home-prepared diets, owners regarding nutrition. Therefore, the objective
or bones and raw food, are fed as part of the main diet to of the study reported here was to investigate attitudes
a substantial number of pets (13.1% of cats and 30.4% of regarding pet foods and feeding practices held by cat
dogs).4 and dog owners.

From the Department of Clinical Studies, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104 (Michel, Wil-
loughby); Department of Small Animal Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI 48824
(Abood, Bauer); Department of Molecular Biosciences, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of California, Davis, CA 95616 (Fascetti, Van
Doren); School of Veterinary Science, University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia (Fleeman, Kemp); Department of Clinical Sciences,
Cummings School of Veterinary Medicine, Tufts University, North Grafton, MA 01536 (Freeman); and Nestl Purina PetCare Research, Check-
erboard Square, St Louis, MO 63164 (Laflamme). Dr. Willoughbys present address is The Animal Medical Center, 510 E 62nd St, New York,
NY 10065. Dr. Fleemans present address is Faculty of Veterinary Science, University of Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia. Dr. Laflammes present
address is Nestl Purina PetCare Research, 473 Grandmas Place, Floyd, VA 24091. Dr. Bauers present address is Southwest National Primate
Center, PO Box 760549, San Antonio, TX 78245. Dr. Kemps present address is Mandeville Veterinary Services, 131 Carlton Ave East, Wembly
HA9 8PN, England. Dr. Van Dorens present address is Laguna Creek Veterinary Hospital, 5060 Laguna Blvd, Ste 129, Elk Grove, CA 95758.
Supported by Nestl Purina PetCare Research.
Presented in part in abstract form at the Nestl Purina Nutrition Forum, St Louis, October 2004, and the Annual Meeting of the American
Academy of Veterinary Nutrition, Baltimore, June 2005.
Dr. Laflamme is employed by the Nestl Purina PetCare Company, and Drs. Michel, Abood, and Freeman serve on an expert advisory council
for the Nestl Purina PetCare Company.
Address correspondence to Dr. Michel.

JAVMA, Vol 233, No. 11, December 1, 2008 Vet Med Today: Timely Topics in Nutrition 1699
Materials and Methods sources of information about pet care, the survey par-
ticipants were read 26 statements related to the pet food
The study reported here was part of a larger survey industry and the pet health-care profession and asked
conducted to obtain information about pet feeding hab- to indicate the extent to which they agreed with each
its, pet-owner interactions, and owner attitudes toward statement. Respondents had the following options for
their pets and pet care. When required by an institu- each statement: 1, strongly agree; 2, mildly agree; 3, no
tion, the experimental protocol was reviewed and ap- opinion or not sure; 4, mildly disagree; or 5, strongly
proved by the respective institutional review board. disagree. Data from all 5 study locations were pooled
ProceduresA telephone survey was conducted for analysis.
by veterinary medical students from the University of Respondents were classified as a commercial feed-
California, Davis, Michigan State University, the Uni- er when 75% of their pets diet was in the form of
versity of Pennsylvania, Tufts University, and the Uni- commercial pet foods or as a noncommercial feeder
versity of Queensland between May and August 2004, when 50% of their pets diet was from foods other
as described elsewhere.4,5 Potential participants were than commercial pet foods, such as home-prepared di-
selected from local telephone books by use of a pre- ets, table scraps, or other foods prepared for human
determined randomization process. The survey was consumption.
administered to individuals who were the owner and
primary caregiver of 1 or more cats or dogs. For par- Statistical analysisAn ANOVA was used to de-
ticipants who owned both cats and dogs, a computer- tect differences in attitudes between owners feeding
generated, 2-treatment randomization list was used to methods (ie, commercial vs noncommercial feeders)
determine which species would be the subject of the and between species of pet as well as to find interac-
survey. When an owner had > 1 animal in a species, the tions between these factors. Because the responses were
owner was asked to identify only 1 animal that was to based on a limited noncontinuous scale of 1 to 5, a
be the subject of the questionnaire, and all subsequent nonparametric analysis also was performed by use of
questions pertained to that specific pet. the Kruskal-Wallis ANOVA on ranks. Results for both
Students conducting the interviews identified ANOVAs were identical, so the former analysis was
themselves as veterinary medical students from their used. Data were reported are mean SD. Differences
respective institutions and stated that they were con- were considered significant at values of P < 0.05. All
ducting a survey of pet owners. In addition to questions analyses were performed by use of commercially avail-
regarding signalment, activities, feeding behavior, and able software.a

Table 1Mean SD scores* for pet owners about statements reflecting attitudes toward pet care on the basis of feeding practices
and species of pet.

Feeding practice Species of pet


Commercial Noncommercial Cat Dog
Statement (n = 968) (n = 74) P value (n = 449) (n = 621) P value
I want to provide my pet with the 1.18 0.01 1.19 0.05 0.934 1.22 0.02 1.16 0.02 0.011
best care possible.
I trust my veterinarian's advice 1.26 0.02 1.36 0.06 0.122 1.28 0.03 1.25 0.02 0.441
regarding health care for my pet.
I want to provide my pet with the 1.26 0.02 1.17 0.06 0.117 1.28 0.02 1.24 0.02 0.114
best nutrition possible.
I do not trust veterinarians to 4.60 0.03 4.15 0.09 0.001 4.62 0.04 4.53 0.03 0.074
provide sound nutritional advice.

*Respondents had the following options for each statement: 1, strongly agree; 2, mildly agree; 3, no opinion or not sure; 4, mildly disagree; and
5, strongly disagree. Respondents were classified as a commercial feeder when 75% of their pets diet was in the form of commercial pet foods
or as a noncommercial feeder when 50% of their pets diet was from foods other than commercial pet foods, such as home-prepared diets, table
scraps, or other foods prepared for human consumption. Values were considered to differ significantly at P 0.05.

Table 2Mean SD scores* for pet owners about statements reflecting attitudes toward feed ingredients.

Feeding practice Species of pet


Commercial Noncommercial Cat Dog
Statement (n = 968) (n = 74) P value (n = 449) (n = 621) P value
The quality of ingredients used for 1.44 0.02 1.37 0.08 0.421 1.43 0.03 1.43 0.03 0.992
my pet's diet is important to me.
Dogs (or cats) are carnivores so 2.38 0.04 1.93 0.13 0.001 2.30 0.05 2.35 0.05 0.470
they need a meat-based diet.
Whole wheat, corn, and other 2.60 0.03 2.77 0.10 0.114 2.65 0.04 2.59 0.04 0.290
grains are good sources of
nutrition for dogs (or cats).
Dogs (or cats) need a variety 2.64 0.04 1.57 0.14 0.001 2.61 0.06 2.50 0.05 0.152
of different foods.

See Table 1 for key.

1700 Vet Med Today: Timely Topics in Nutrition JAVMA, Vol 233, No. 11, December 1, 2008
Results ing 20 (3.2%) dog owners did not meet the criterion
for either feeder category. There was a significant dif-
A total of 18,194 telephone calls were made from the ference in the feeding practice between cat and dog
5 study sites; 1,104 (6.1%) owners representing 469 cats owners (P < 0.001). The proportion of commercial
and 635 dogs completed the survey. At least 200 surveys feeders was greater among cat owners, whereas the
were completed for each site. Owners of 17 (3.6%) cats proportion of noncommercial feeders was greater
and 11 (1.7%) dogs reported that their pets were fed among dog owners.
therapeutic diets. Additional data were not collected for Statements were grouped into 5 broad categories
these pets; thus, responses to the statements were from reflecting attitudes regarding pet care (Table 1), feed
owners of pets fed nontherapeutic diets. An additional 3 ingredients (Table 2), food processing (Table 3), com-
cats and 3 dogs were removed from the data set because mercial pet foods (Table 4), and raw and home-prepared
of incomplete data. Thus, data from 449 cat owners and diets (Table 5). Significant differences were found be-
621 dog owners were included in the study. tween commercial and noncommercial feeders for 19 of
Among cat owners, 429 (95.5%) met the criterion 26 statements. The responses of noncommercial feeders
for a commercial feeder and 12 (2.7%) met the cri- reflected greater mistrust of commercial pet foods and
terion for a noncommercial feeder; the remaining 8 food processing than responses of the commercial feed-
(1.8%) cat owners did not meet the criterion for ei- ers. The noncommercial feeders also were more posi-
ther feeder category. Among dog owners, 539 (86.8%) tive in their responses to the statements regarding raw
were classified as commercial feeders and 62 (10.0%) and home-prepared diets, compared with responses for
were classified as noncommercial feeders; the remain- the commercial feeders.

Table 3Mean SD scores* for pet owners about statements reflecting attitudes toward food processing.

Feeding practice Species of pet


Commercial Noncommercial Cat Dog
Statement (n = 968) (n = 74) P value (n = 449) (n = 621) P value
Processed foods for pets are 3.01 0.04 2.45 0.13 0.001 2.98 0.05 2.98 0.05 0.966
unhealthy.
Cooking destroys nutrients 3.25 0.03 2.76 0.12 0.001 3.25 0.05 3.18 0.04 0.235
in pet foods.
Genetically modified foods and 2.90 0.04 3.34 0.13 0.001 2.89 0.05 2.97 0.04 0.222
ingredients are safe to use.
Processed foods for people are 2.46 0.04 2.30 0.14 0.258 2.47 0.06 2.43 0.05 0.650
unhealthy.
Organic foods are safer and 2.80 0.04 2.32 0.13 0.001 2.78 0.05 2.75 0.05 0.677
healthier than other foods.

See Table 1 for key.

Table 4Mean SD scores* for pet owners about statements reflecting attitudes toward commercial pet foods.

Feeding practice Species of pet


Commercial Noncommercial Cat Dog
Statement (n = 968) (n = 74) P value (n = 449) (n = 621) P value
Information on pet food labels is 2.59 0.04 2.83 0.13 0.079 2.58 0.05 2.64 0.05 0.332
easy to understand.
I trust pet food manufacturers to 2.25 0.03 3.01 0.12 0.001 2.22 0.05 2.38 0.04 0.012
provide nutritionally sound,
quality products.
Dogs (or cats) need more meat 3.20 0.03 2.33 0.12 0.001 3.18 0.05 3.09 0.04 0.179
than provided in commercial
pet foods.
Ingredients used in commercial 2.41 0.03 3.37 0.11 0.001 2.36 0.05 2.57 0.04 0.001
pet foods are wholesome
and nutritious.
Information on pet food labels 3.22 0.03 2.75 0.11 0.001 3.22 0.04 3.16 0.04 0.294
is misleading.
Additives used in pet foods have 3.04 0.03 2.45 0.11 0.001 3.02 0.04 2.97 0.04 0.358
unhealthy side effects.
Pets are living longer today, 2.34 0.03 3.18 0.11 0.001 2.35 0.05 2.45 0.04 0.079
in part, because of the good
nutrition provided by
commercial pet foods.
Good-quality commercial pet 2.08 0.03 2.78 0.11 0.001 2.02 0.05 2.23 0.04 0.001
foods contain all the nutrition
my pet needs.
Most pet food companies place 2.25 0.03 3.05 0.12 0.001 2.17 0.05 2.42 0.04 0.001
a high priority on pet health
and well-being.

See Table 1 for key.

JAVMA, Vol 233, No. 11, December 1, 2008 Vet Med Today: Timely Topics in Nutrition 1701
Table 5Mean SD scores* for pet owners about statements reflecting attitudes toward raw and home-prepared diets.

Feeding practice Species of pet


Commercial Noncommercial Cat Dog
Statement (n = 968) (n = 74) P value (n = 449) (n = 621) P value
Raw bones can safely be fed 3.62 0.04 2.64 0.15 0.001 3.80 0.06 3.32 0.05 0.001
to pets.
I enjoy preparing foods for my pet. 3.10 0.04 1.95 0.14 0.001 3.14 0.06 2.91 0.05 0.003
Raw meat provides better 3.68 0.04 2.57 0.13 0.001 3.64 0.06 3.53 0.05 0.167
nutrition than cooked foods.
Foods sold for human consumption 3.79 0.03 2.78 0.12 0.001 3.79 0.05 3.65 0.04 0.029
provide better nutrition for pets
than commercial pet foods.

See Table 1 for key.

An interaction between feeding practice and spe- for veterinary health-care professionals with regard to
cies was detected for only 2 statements. In 1 situation (I being able to communicate effectively on these topics.
do not trust veterinarians to provide sound nutritional Frequently, circumstances arise in which a change in
advice), there were significant differences between com- diet or feeding practices will be recommended for a pa-
mercial and noncommercial feeders when the responses tient. To succeed in persuading a pet owner to adhere
of cat owners and dog owners were analyzed separate- to those recommendations, it is necessary to obtain in-
ly. Both dog owners and cat owners who fed primarily formation regarding how the pet is currently fed and
commercial foods were more likely to disagree with this develop an understanding of the rationale for those
statement. The mean SD value for owners who fed practices.
their cats commercial foods (4.64 0.04) was signifi- Analysis of results of the study reported here sug-
cantly (P < 0.001) higher, compared with the mean val- gested that there is an association between concerns of
ue for owners who fed their cats noncommercial foods pet owners about commercial pet foods and the prac-
(3.75 0.23). For dogs, the mean value for owners who tice of feeding substantial amounts of noncommercial
fed commercial foods (4.57 0.03) differed significantly or home-prepared foods. In general, owners who fed
(P = 0.001), compared with the mean value for owners noncommercial foods as 50% of their pets diet had
who fed noncommercial foods (4.23 0.10). For the more concerns and misgivings about commercial pet
second statement (Good-quality commercial pet foods food, food processing, and the pet food industry than
contain all the nutrition my pet needs), dog owners who did owners who fed commercial pet food as 75% of
primarily fed commercial foods were significantly (P < their pets diet. They were also more positive in their at-
0.001) more likely to agree with the statement (2.13 titudes toward raw and home-prepared diets in contrast
0.04) than were the noncommercial feeders (2.95 to the attitudes of commercial feeders. Although there
0.12). However, there were no significant (P = 0.73) were some differences between cat and dog owners,
differences between cat owners who were commercial clear-cut differences in responses to the survey were
(2.01 0.05) or noncommercial (1.92 0.28) feeders. found much more frequently between commercial and
When responses to the statements from cat owners noncommercial feeders. One possible reason an owner
were compared with those from dog owners, significant may have for feeding a noncommercial diet is the en-
differences were found for 8 of 26 statements. However, joyment gained from preparing food for the pet, and
for only 1 statement (I want to provide my pet with the having this perspective could potentially influence the
best care possible) could the difference clearly be attrib- responses for statements about variety and quality of
uted to pet species rather than feeding practice. Further- ingredients in commercial pet foods.
more, although the difference in response was signifi- On the basis of these findings, veterinary health-
cant, both dog and cat owners were in strong agreement care professionals should be prepared to discuss con-
with the statement (Table 1). For the other 7 statements, cerns owners may have about commercial pet foods, es-
there were significant differences in responses based on pecially when a dietary history reveals that the pets are
feeding practice as well as type of pet owned. Responses fed alternatives to conventional pet foods. Pet owners
were more divergent when respondents were categorized were queried in this survey regarding how they obtained
on the basis of feeding practice than when categorized information about pet nutrition, and 71 (15.8%) and
on the basis of species of pet owned. The responses of 105 (16.9%) of cat and dog owners, respectively, cited
dog owners reflected greater mistrust of commercial pet the Internet and other media as their primary sources of
foods and food processing than did responses of cat own- information, as has been reported elsewhere.4 The qual-
ers. Dog owners also were more positive in their respons- ity of information from such sources is quite variable
es to statements regarding raw and home-prepared diets, and can be strongly biased toward a specific feeding
compared with responses of cat owners. practice. Correcting misperceptions or directing own-
ers to reliable sources of information regarding com-
Discussion panion animal nutrition can help to allay concerns and
aid in negotiating any dietary modifications, whether
Recognition of how perceptions about proper diet they be a recommendation to switch to a commercial
and feeding management of companion animals can pet food or to a properly balanced home-prepared diet.
differ among pet owners is an important consideration The necessity for veterinary health-care professionals to

1702 Vet Med Today: Timely Topics in Nutrition JAVMA, Vol 233, No. 11, December 1, 2008
have the capability and confidence to converse knowl- Clinical Summary
edgeably on such subjects underscores the importance
of nutrition education in the veterinary curriculum and The objective of the study reported here was to in-
after graduation. vestigate attitudes regarding diets for companion ani-
Only a small subset of owners classified as non- mals and feeding practices held by cat and dog owners,
commercial feeders (< 3%) were exclusively feeding and it was designed as part of a larger survey conducted
home-prepared foods. Because others in this category to obtain information about feeding habits for pets and
fed commercial pet foods for a variable portion of up to pet-owner interactions. The study was conducted as
50% of the diet, it is curious that noncommercial feed- a telephone survey during which cat and dog owners
ers often had significantly different attitudes toward were contacted in 5 geographic areas (4 in the United
feeding management of companion animals, compared States and 1 in Australia). Data were pooled, and pet
with attitudes for owners who were commercial feed- owners were categorized as commercial feeders or non-
ers. In this survey, we did not collect information about commercial feeders on the basis of their practices for
the specific brands of pet foods being used by the re- feeding their pets.
spondents; however, it could be speculated that some of Owners representing 469 cats and 635 dogs com-
the noncommercial feeders were more likely to be feed- pleted the survey. Attitudes of owners who fed their
ing commercial pet foods that were marketed as alter- pets 50% of the diet as home-prepared foods (non-
natives to mainstream products (eg, commercial foods commercial feeders) reflected greater mistrust of com-
marketed as natural, organic, or holistic). mercial pet foods, food processing, and the pet food
The pets represented in this survey appeared to be industry and were more positive toward raw and home-
typical of the general pet population because the signal- prepared diets, compared with attitudes of owners who
ment characteristics of the study sample resembled those fed their pets 75% of the diet as commercial pet foods
of patients at primary care veterinary clinics.4,6 However, (commercial feeders). These data suggest that there
there may have been factors related to the likelihood of is an association between pet owners concerns about
an owner agreeing to participate in the survey that could commercial pet foods and the practice of feeding sub-
have introduced bias with regard to attitudes toward the stantial amounts of home-prepared foods to cats and
feeding management of companion animals. For exam- dogs. Veterinary health-care professionals need the ca-
ple, the students who conducted the interviews identi- pability and confidence to address issues of pet owners
fied themselves as veterinary medical students from their related to proper diet and feeding management of com-
respective institutions. This information may have made panion animals, including concerns about commercial
some owners more or less willing to participate, and pet foods, especially when a dietary history reveals that
it is conceivable that some owners may have provided the pets are fed alternatives to conventional pet foods.
different responses to an interviewer who was not affili- a. SAS, version 9.1, SAS Institute Inc, Cary, NC.
ated with the veterinary profession. Another limitation
of the study was that the number of cat owners in the References
noncommercial feeder category was small. It is possible
that in situations in which responses to a statement dif- 1. Robertson ID. The influence of diet and other factors on owner-
fered both by feeding practice and species of pet owned, perceived obesity in privately owned cats from metropolitan
Perth, Western Australia. Prev Vet Med 1999;40:7585.
the difference between cat and dog owners was driven by 2. American Pet Products Manufacturers Association Inc. The
the greater percentage of dog owners who were noncom- 20012002 APPMA national pet owners survey. Greenwich,
mercial feeders. Conn: American Pet Products Manufacturers Association Inc,
Analysis of the results of this survey suggests that 2002.
there is an association between pet owners concerns 3. Robertson ID. The association of exercise, diet and other fac-
about commercial pet foods and the practice of feeding tors with owner-perceived obesity in privately owned dogs from
metropolitan Perth, WA. Prev Vet Med 2003;58:7583.
substantial amounts of home-prepared foods to cats and 4. Laflamme DP, Abood SK, Fascetti AJ, et al. Pet feeding practices
dogs. Veterinary health-care professionals need training in of dog and cat owners in the United States and Australia. J Am
nutrition and access to reliable sources of information to Vet Med Assoc 2008;232:687694.
be able to address issues related to proper diets and feeding 5. Freeman LM, Abood SK, Fascetti AJ, et al. Disease prevalence
management of companion animals, including concerns among dogs and cats in the United States and Australia and
about commercial pet foods. Communicating effectively proportions of dogs and cats that receive therapeutic diets or
dietary supplements. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2006;229:531534.
with pet owners about these matters and directing them to 6. Lund EM, Armstrong PJ, Kirk CA, et al. Health status and
factual and unbiased sources of information are of particu- population characteristics of dogs and cats examined at private
lar importance when a dietary history reveals that the pets veterinary practices in the United States. J Am Vet Med Assoc
are being fed alternatives to conventional pet foods. 1999;214:13361341.

JAVMA, Vol 233, No. 11, December 1, 2008 Vet Med Today: Timely Topics in Nutrition 1703

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi