Niamh Lewis, Jannie Spanner, Peter Daels, Juan Cuervo Arango, Monica Morganti, Pouya Dini, Kate Allen, Siobhan Mullan
These results demonstrate differences in perception of ethical acceptability of OPU-ICSI between veterinarians and breeders with and without direct experience of OPU-ICSI. Despite these differences, mare welfare was consistently prioritised across all respondent groups, highlighting the importance of further research to better characterise the mare experience during OPU and to support evidence-based guidance for clinical and breeding practice.
BACKGROUND: There is an ethical debate about the application of ovum pick-up (OPU) and intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) in mares.
OBJECTIVES: To survey the opinions of equine veterinarians and breeders of sport horses on the ethics of using OPU-ICSI in mares.
STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional descriptive study.
METHODS: Three surveys were distributed. The first targeted breeders ('Breeder Survey') who were actively involved in sport horse breeding. The second targeted veterinarians performing OPU ('OPU-Reprovets Survey'). The third targeted general equine practitioners ('Practitioner Survey'). There were six questions common to all surveys, and, for analyses, respondents were categorised into four groups: equine veterinarians not performing OPU (VET), equine veterinarians performing OPU (OPUVET), breeders not using OPU in their breeding programme (BREEDER), and those using OPU in their breeding programme (OPUBREEDER).
RESULTS: A total of 225, 92 and 112 responses were returned from the Breeders, OPU-Reprovets and Practitioner surveys, respectively. Differences emerged between groups in how ethically challenging the procedure was perceived to be. A greater proportion of veterinarians not performing OPU (VET; 58.8%) and breeders not using the technology (BREEDER; 55.2%) rated OPU-ICSI as ethically challenging (scores 4-5 on a 5-point scale), compared with veterinarians performing OPU (OPUVET; 35.2%) and breeders using the technology (OPUBREEDER; 19.6%). Across all groups, mare welfare was the main theme when considering the use of OPU-ICSI, and for BREEDER and OPUBREEDER this was closely followed by Genetic diversity and overuse.
MAIN LIMITATIONS: Potential for motivational and response bias.
CONCLUSIONS: These results demonstrate differences in perception of ethical acceptability of OPU-ICSI between veterinarians and breeders with and without direct experience of OPU-ICSI. Despite these differences, mare welfare was consistently prioritised across all respondent groups, highlighting the importance of further research to better characterise the mare experience during OPU and to support evidence-based guidance for clinical and breeding practice.