Peer-reviewed veterinary case report
Oral joint supplement versus carprofen for hip arthritis in working
By Alves, João Carlos et al.·Published in Topics in companion animal medicine·2017·Divisã·View original on PubMed →
PetCaseFinder translated the abstract of this peer-reviewed paper into plain English so pet owners can read it. We do not publish original research — every detail traces back to the citation above. How we work →
Original publication title: Effect of an Oral Joint Supplement When Compared to Carprofen in the Management of Hip Osteoarthritis in Working Dogs.
- Species:
- dog
Plain-English summary
A group of working dogs with hip osteoarthritis was treated with either an oral joint supplement or carprofen, a common pain medication, to see which worked better for their joint pain. After 70 days of treatment, both groups showed some individual improvements in pain scores, but overall, neither treatment was significantly better than the other. About 30% of dogs on the joint supplement and 25% on carprofen showed successful results. This suggests that while both treatments may help some dogs, they might not be enough on their own to fully manage the pain and demands of working dogs with joint issues.
People also search for: dog hip osteoarthritis treatment · joint supplement for dogs · carprofen for dogs arthritis
Abstract
The goal of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of an oral joint supplement in working dogs with hip osteoarthritis compared with a positive control group (CG). Fifteen animals were divided in treatment group (TG, n = 10) and CG (n = 5). To TG a commercially available joint supplement, containing glucosamine HCl, chondroitin sulphate, and hyaluronic acid was given for 40 days and a 70-day course of a placebo, to be administered as if it was carprofen. The CG received carprofen for 70 days, and a placebo to be administered as the joint supplement. Response to treatment, measured by the canine brief pain inventory (CBPI) and the Hudson visual analog scale, was evaluated before treatment (T0), after 15 days (T1) and 1 (T2), 2 (T3), 3 (T4), 4 (T5), and 5 (T6) months. With CBPI, no differences were found in pain interference score and pain severity score between TG and CG throughout or when comparing results within groups. Individual results were considered successful in a maximal of three dogs of the TG by T3 (30%) and 1 in CG (25%). With Hudson visual analog scale, improvements where registered with individual results, for 40%-50% of the animals in TG and 60%-80% of cases in CG. The oral joint supplement and carprofen produced some improvements in individual scores but where unable to do so when overall results were considered. Each of these options may not be able, by itself, to fully address the demands of a working dog with joint disease and related pain.
Find similar cases for your pet
PetCaseFinder finds other peer-reviewed reports of pets with the same symptoms, plus a plain-English summary of what was tried across them.
Search related cases →Original publication on PubMed: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29525231/