Yerramareddy Roopa1, Rajesh Kasrija2, H.K. Verma and S K Kansal3
1M.V.Sc Student, 2Asstt. Prof, 3Professor, Department of Veterinary and Animal Husbandry Extension Education,
College of Veterinay & Animal Science, GADVASU, Ludhiana (Punjab), India.
[Received: 30.7.2018; Accepted: 15.4.2019]
The present study was conducted in Teaching Veterinary clinical complex, College of Veterinary & Animal
Science, GADVASU Ludhiana and in different districts of Punjab on randomly selected 200 dog owners i.e., 100 from
urban (Group I) and 100 from rural (Group II) background with the help of pretested interview schedule. There is a
significant (P<0.05) difference between Group I and Group II knowledge score about health and management practices.
The Knowledge level of Group I and Group II dog owners fall under medium and low category respectively. The
knowledge index about health and management practices is significantly (P<0.01) correlated with extension contact,
social participation and mass media exposure. The present study highlights the scope of effective communication
systems in enhancing the knowledge level of dog owners about correct health and management practices. The study
also emphasises on assessing the background of beneficiaries before executing any extension programme.
Keywords: Awareness, Communication, Dog, Health and management practices.
Dog has been associated with mankind since ages. Also, during the last decade, the interest of human population has increased towards keeping of companion animals like dog (Kumar et al., 2004). This increased interest has also supported the welfare of pet population (Gujar, 2016). Responsible ownership means to rear a healthy dog and to identifying the health problems in dogs well in time. According to Kollataj et al., 2012, negligence in hygiene
and veterinary care of dogs; increases the potential risk of spreading zoonotic parasite diseases. Bingham et al., 2010 reported that most of the respondents lacked knowledge and awareness about zoonotic diseases form
dogs. A study was planned to document knowledge level of urban and rural dog owners of Punjab state and for assessment of extension contact, social participation and mass media exposure for augmenting knowledge regarding health and management practices.
Materials and Methods
The present study was conducted in Teaching Veterinary Clinical complex, College of Veterinary & Animal Science,
GADVASU Ludhiana and in different districts of Punjab. A total of 200 dog owners i.e., 100 from urban (Group I) and 100 from rural (Group II) were randomly selected. Initially, 18 items (questions) related to health
and management practices were selected after consultation with Subject matter experts, scrutinising research journals and surfing internet. The interview schedule was pretested on 50 dog owners. After pretesting,
17 items fulfilled the criterion of difficulty index 25-75 and discrimination index > 0.20 and were kept in final interview schedule. Group I and Group II dog owners were personally interviewed with the help of this
pre-tested interview schedule. The dog owners were categorized in to low, medium and high knowledge level for Health and management practices with knowledge scores 0-≤5, >5 to 12 and more than 12 respectively.
The Knowledge index was calculated by dividing the obtained score of dog owner by the maximum possible score and multiplying the result with 100.
The extension contacts of dog owners with Veterinary officer/University/Breeder were measured on two point continuum – no (score 0) and yes (score 1). So, the maximum score for extension contacts could be 6. The
social participations of dog owner in Dog shows, Livestock championship, Pashu Palan Melas or Kisan Melas and Animal welfare camps were measured on two point continuum – yes (score 1) and no (score 0). So, the maximum score for social participation could be 8. The mass media exposure of dog owners with television, radio, newspaper, dog magazines, internet, phone and books were measured on two point continuum i.e. Yes (score 1) and no (score 0). So, the maximum score for mass media exposure could be 14. The collected data was tabulated and analysed with the help of SAS 9.3 system Carry N C, USA.
Results and Discussion
A perusal of Table-1 indicates that only 26% of Group II dog owners were aware about vaccination schedule, 35 % aware about DHPPiL vaccine and 29% were aware about deworming schedule. In rural areas, negligence concern veterinary care, dewormings and dog hygiene. Nowadays, veterinary practices and the media have the
important responsibility of educating dog owners about the potential risk of zoonotic parasites. Very few Group II dog owners have knowledge about Corona viral disease, common diseases and Zoonotic diseases. Therefore, it is more important to find the methods for providing information to public to correct this deficiency.
Group I dog owners were more aware of the practices like exercise, combing, bathing, ear cleaning, face cleaning, nail trimming and record keeping than Group II. 81% of Group II dog owners were not aware of dog daily routine. Figure-1 depicts that Awareness mean percentage of Group I was more than their counter parts, Group II about
Health and management practices.
It is clear from Table-2 and Figure-2 that there is a significant (P<0.05) difference between Group I and Group II dog owners with respect to Health and management knowledge score. The Knowledge level of Group I and Group II dog owners fall under medium and low category respectively. It indicates that there is dire need of
strengthening the existing extension education system and to devise newer strategies for educating the dog owners about health and management aspects. Also, the
knowledge score of Group I and Group II are significantly different. It highlight that respondents’ background (urban or rural) should be taken in to consideration, while formulating an extension programme.
Table-3 indicate the distribution of dog owners according to communication profile. It is clear from the table that majority of dog owner’s fall under low and medium category with all communication profiles. So,
it indicates that there should be reframing of current extension education system for more dissemination of knowledge to dog owners and for more participation in extension activities.
Table-4 indicates that there is a significant positive (P<0.01) correlation of health and management knowledge index of dog owners with extension contact, social participation and mass media exposure. More
the communication profile parameters, more will be the knowledge to dog owners regarding health and management practices. This shows that communication profile plays an important role for improving knowledge
level of dog owners. In agreement to our study, Raval et al. (2015) have also reported that the extension contact, exposure to extension mass-media, management orientation and innovation proneness among dog owners of 3 urban cities of Gujarat state had significant relationship with knowledge of dog owners. So, various communication
parameters such as extension contacts, social participation and mass media exposure should be strengthened for augmenting the knowledge level of dog owners.
Bingham, G.M., Budke, C.M. and Slater, M.R. (2010). Knowledge and perceptions of dog associated zoonoses: Brazos Country, Texas, USA. Prev. Vet. Med., 93(2-3): 211–221.
Gujar, B. (2016). Socio-economic profile and knowledge of dog owners about various canine practices. Indian J. Social Res., 57(2): 203-207.
Kollataj, W., Milczak, A., Kollataj, B., Karwat, I.D., Sygit, M. and Sygit, K. (2012). Risk factors for the spread of
parasitic zoonoses among dog owners and their families in rural areas. Ann. Agric.
Environ. Med., 19(1): 84.
Kumar, P.V., Francis, X. and Anil, L. (2004). Socioeconomic profile, selection, training and constraints of dog keeping in central Kerala. Indian J. Ani. Prod. Manage., 20(1-4): 52-56.
Raval, H.S., Nayak, J.B., Patel, B.M. and Bhadesiya, C.M. (2015). Zoonotic importance of canine scabies and
dermatophytosis in relation to knowledge level of dog owners. Vet. World, 8(6): 765-766.