A survey study on the use of veterinary acupuncture in the UK and Europe

To investigate the current use and attitude towards veterinary acupuncture among veterinarians in the UK and Europe.

A prospective cross-sectional online survey study.

General practitioners, advanced practitioners and board-certified specialists across the UK and Europe practicing veterinary acupuncture.

A link to an electronic survey was distributed via personal email invitations and through both veterinary acupuncture associations mail lists/websites and social media. Both the study and the questionnaire were designed following the CHERRIES guidelines; the questionnaire comprised 22 questions covering different aspects of veterinary acupuncture including approaches, techniques, indications, treatment protocols and perceptions on efficacy and safety. Descriptive statistics, analysis of proportions and Cochrane alpha statistics were used for data analysis.

Entries from 104 participants were included in the study. Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) was the most practised acupuncture approach (37%), followed by Western acupuncture (31%) and integrative acupuncture, defined as a combination of both (30%). Most acupuncturists reportedly preferred manual acupuncture and case-specific treatment protocols. Overall, acupuncture was primarily used as a complementary therapy for managing chronic pain, mostly in dogs and cats. The proportion of participants using acupuncture for treating gastrointestinal, respiratory and allergic conditions was higher among veterinarians practicing TCM than in those using the Western approach (p < 0.001). The side effect perceived as most likely to occur was lethargy/sedation, followed by pain on needle insertion.

The findings of this study suggest that the practice of veterinary acupuncture in the UK and Europe varies based on preferred approach and patient factors. Its use as complementary therapy for treatment of chronic pain seems to be common across different countries, acupuncture styles and qualifications of the participants. This variability may be the result of a lack of consensus about the standard of practice.