@article{wagner_nixon_robles_baynes_coetzee_pairis-garcia_2021, title={Non-Steroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs: Pharmacokinetics and Mitigation of Procedural-Pain in Cattle}, volume={11}, ISSN={["2076-2615"]}, url={https://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/11/2/282}, DOI={10.3390/ani11020282}, abstractNote={Common routine management practices in cattle, such as castration and disbudding, are recognized as being painful. In the United States (U.S.), these procedures are frequently performed without pain mitigation and there are currently no drugs federally approved for such use. Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, such as meloxicam, flunixin meglumine and aspirin, are the most commonly used analgesics in U.S. food-animal production systems. However, the body of research investigating the effectiveness of these pharmaceuticals to control pain in cattle at castration and disbudding has not been comprehensively evaluated. Therefore, this review examined existing literature to summarize meloxicam, flunixin and aspirin (1) pharmacokinetics (PK) and (2) administration outcome in regard to pain control during castration and disbudding procedures, in cattle. Following systematic searches and screening, 47 PK and 44 publications were extracted for data and are presented. The sample size contained notable variability and a general deficiency of validated and replicated methodologies for assessing pain in cattle remain substantial challenges within this research area. Future research should prioritize replication of pain assessment methodologies across different experimental conditions to close knowledge gaps identified by the present study and facilitate examination of analgesic efficacy.}, number={2}, journal={ANIMALS}, publisher={MDPI AG}, author={Wagner, Brooklyn K. and Nixon, Emma and Robles, Ivelisse and Baynes, Ronald E. and Coetzee, Johann F. and Pairis-Garcia, Monique D.}, year={2021}, month={Feb} }
 @article{robles_arruda_nixon_johnstone_wagner_edwards-callaway_baynes_coetzee_pairis-garcia_2021, title={Producer and Veterinarian Perspectives towards Pain Management Practices in the US Cattle Industry}, volume={11}, ISSN={["2076-2615"]}, url={https://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/11/1/209}, DOI={10.3390/ani11010209}, abstractNote={Producers and veterinarians are considered responsible for improving animal welfare, as they are responsible for implementing practices that directly impact the animal’s well-being. Most husbandry procedures performed in cattle do not include pain mitigation, and understanding challenges faced by these stakeholders to use analgesics is key in improving on-farm pain management strategies. Therefore, the objectives of this study were to explore producer and veterinarian perspectives on pain management practices by (1) exploring inquires received by Food Animal Residue Avoidance Databank (FARAD) regarding analgesic use in cattle and (2) using a survey instrument to identify factors that impact pain management implementation in the US cattle industry. Albeit analgesia use increased in the past ten years for some producers and the majority of veterinarians, administering analgesics for pain management on US cattle farms remains a challenge. From a producer perspective, drug cost, availability and logistics for administration. From a veterinarian perspective, lack of Food and Drug Administration (FDA) products hinders the support of on-farm protocols requiring extra-label drug use. Future steps to improve analgesic use on-farm include identifying and approving drugs that demonstrate efficacy for managing pain in cattle and disseminating educational resources to support stakeholders in both the implementation and drug withdrawal process.}, number={1}, journal={ANIMALS}, author={Robles, Ivelisse and Arruda, Andreia G. and Nixon, Emma and Johnstone, Elizabeth and Wagner, Brooklyn and Edwards-Callaway, Lily and Baynes, Ronald and Coetzee, Johann and Pairis-Garcia, Monique}, year={2021}, month={Jan} }
 @article{robles_park_cramer_wagner_moraes_viscardi_coetzee_pairis-garcia_2021, title={Technical contribution: use of continuous recording video monitoring of maintenance and pain behaviors in piglets after surgical castration to validate six continuous time sampling periods for behavior scoring}, volume={99}, ISSN={["1525-3163"]}, DOI={10.1093/jas/skab310}, abstractNote={Abstract Castration is a painful procedure routinely performed on piglets. Specific periods relative to castration and time sampling rules are used widely to quantify deviations in piglet’s behavior associated with castration rather than assessing behavior for the entire trial period. However, very limited work has evaluated time sampling recording rules to quantify behavioral changes to piglets undergoing castration. Therefore, the objective of this study was to validate the accuracy of six continuous time sampling periods (5, 10, 15, 20, 30, and 45 min), to quantify piglet behavior post-castration when compared with a full 60-min observation period. Sixteen Yorkshire-Landrace x Duroc piglets were surgically castrated. Data were collected using continuous observation (recording rule) of each individual male piglet per litter for 60-min post-castration. The 60-min continuous behavioral data set was then subdivided into six data subsets for each defined continuous time sampling period (5, 10, 15, 20, 30, and 45 min). Data from each continuous time sampling period and the full period data were analyzed using both a generalized linear mixed model and linear regression analysis. For the generalized linear mixed model, 30- and 45-min continuous time sampling periods were not different (P > 0.05) when compared with the full observation period data for all behaviors. For the linear regression analysis, affiliative interaction, sitting, walking, huddled up, prostrated, scratching, spasms, and trembling behaviors met the pairwise comparison accuracy criteria: [1) the coefficient of determination (R2) was > 0.90, 2) the intercept did not differ from 0 (P > 0.05), and 3) the slope did not differ from 1 (P > 0.05)] at the 45-min continuous time sampling period compared to full observation period. Results from this study suggest that a 45-min continuous time sampling period would be necessary to accurately investigate piglet behavior during the acute pain sensitivity time post-castration when considering both maintenance and pain-associated behaviors.}, number={11}, journal={JOURNAL OF ANIMAL SCIENCE}, author={Robles, Ivelisse and Park, Rachel M. and Cramer, Catie M. and Wagner, Brooklyn K. and Moraes, Luis E. and Viscardi, Abbie V. and Coetzee, Johann F. and Pairis-Garcia, Monique D.}, year={2021}, month={Nov} }
 @article{pairis-garcia_robles_2021, title={Timely Euthanasia on Farm; Dairy Cattle and Swine}, volume={99}, ISSN={["1525-3163"]}, DOI={10.1093/jas/skab054.016}, abstractNote={Abstract Euthanasia of mature swine and cattle can be challenging. On-farm euthanasia should be used as a tool to eliminate pain and suffering. However, clear guidelines regarding making euthanasia decisions and alternative euthanasia techniques available for use is limited in the United States (US). In order to prevent prolonged suffering and pain in compromised animals, science-based recommendations are needed to ensure timely and humane euthanasia can be performed when needed on-farm. This presentation will focus on two euthanasia challenges currently faced in swine and dairy cattle systems in the US today: 1) Swine: Validating alternative euthanasia techniques for use in mature breeding stock and 2) Dairy Cattle: Identifying producer barriers preventing timely euthanasia decision-making using surveys and focus groups. The swine study evaluated the effectiveness of two penetrating captive bolt gun styles (cylinder or pistol) using a frontal, temporal and behind-the-ear placement. Four treatments were 100% effective in achieving cardiac arrest and death. The cylinder style captive bolt gun resulted in greater brain trauma and death compared to a pistol style gun and behind-the-ear and temporal placement showed promise as an alternative placement site for euthanizing mature pigs. In the dairy cattle study, dairy producers were recruited to participate in a survey and focus group. Survey results indicated that farm owners were most commonly responsible for on-farm euthanasia and most respondents would treat and monitor compromised cattle for a majority of health conditions, regardless of condition severity. Participants in focus groups focused primarily on animal welfare as the most important factor influencing the decision to euthanize and the desire to eliminate animal suffering by using euthanasia as a tool. This work highlights the complicated challenges that arise when euthanizing livestock and the importance of not only identifying appropriate techniques to humanely euthanize livestock but address the emotional and animal welfare factors that influence these decisions.}, journal={JOURNAL OF ANIMAL SCIENCE}, author={Pairis-Garcia, Monique and Robles, Ivelisse}, year={2021}, month={May}, pages={10–10} }
 @article{kramer_wagner_robles_moeller_bowman_kieffer_arruda_cressman_pairis-garcia_2021, title={Validating the effectiveness of alternative euthanasia techniques using penetrating captive bolt guns in mature swine (Sus scrofa domesticus)}, volume={99}, ISSN={["1525-3163"]}, DOI={10.1093/jas/skab052}, abstractNote={Abstract Euthanasia of mature swine is challenging. Temporal and behind-the-ear locations are two sites that have been identified as alternatives to the more commonly used frontal placement. In stage one, the effectiveness of two penetrating captive bolt gun styles (cylinder or pistol) was evaluated using frontal, temporal, and behind-the-ear placement in anesthetized mature swine (n = 36; weight: 267 ± 41 kg). For stage one, when evaluating treatment efficacy by sex, the cylinder-style equipment was 100% effective in achieving death when applied to all cranial locations (frontal, temporal, and behind-the-ear) for sows; however, the pistol-style equipment was only 100% effective when applied at the behind-the-ear location for sows. For boars, the cylinder-style equipment was 100% effective when applied to the frontal and behind-the-ear location, but the pistol-style equipment was not effective for any cranial location in boars. Therefore, the pistol–frontal, pistol–temporal, pistol–behind-the-ear, and cylinder–temporal were not included for boars, and pistol–frontal and pistol–temporal were not included for sows in stage two. In stage two, commercial, mixed-breed, mature swine (n = 42; weight: 292 +/− 56 kg) were randomly assigned to one of four treatments based on the inclusion criteria described in stage one. A three-point traumatic brain injury (TBI) score (0 = normal; 1 = some abnormalities; 2 = grossly abnormal, unrecognizable) was used to evaluate six neuroanatomical structures (cerebral cortex, cerebellum, hypothalamus, thalamus, pons, and brain stem), and the presence of hemorrhage was also noted. All treatments were 100% effective in stage two. A significant interaction between gun style and placement was determined on predicting total TBI as the cylinder style produced a higher total TBI score compared with the pistol type of the magnitude of +2.8 (P < 0.01). The cylinder style tended to produce a greater TBI score than the pistol in the temporal location (+1.2; P = 0.08). No difference was noted for TBI score behind-the-ear between the cylinder- and pistol-style gun (P > 0.05). TBI tended to be less in boars compared with sows (−0.6; P = 0.08). Hemorrhage was observed in frontal, parietal, occipital, and temporal lobes. This study demonstrated that the cylinder-style captive bolt gun more effectively resulted in brain trauma and death compared with a pistol-style gun and the behind-the-ear and temporal placement showed promise as an alternative placement site for euthanizing mature pigs on-farm.}, number={3}, journal={JOURNAL OF ANIMAL SCIENCE}, author={Kramer, Scott A. and Wagner, Brooklyn K. and Robles, Ivelisse and Moeller, Steve J. and Bowman, Andrew S. and Kieffer, Justin D. and Arruda, Andreia Goncalves and Cressman, Michael D. and Pairis-Garcia, Monique D.}, year={2021}, month={Mar} }