Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To describe how veterinarians utilise and perform urinalyses for dogs and cats. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A survey, developed and distributed through the Veterinary Information Network, enlisted veterinarians who perform urinalyses for dogs and cats. Participants were directed to question banks based on whether urinalyses were performed in-house, by an outside diagnostic laboratory, or using an in-house automated instrument. Participants using multiple methods were directed to questions that related to the chosen methods. RESULTS: A total of 1059 predominantly first-opinion clinicians from the USA and Canada completed the survey. Participants performed urinalyses much less frequently than blood work during a routine examination. The most common factors preventing participants from performing a urinalysis with blood work included clients' financial constraints, difficulty obtaining urine and lack of perceived diagnostic need. The most common reasons for submission to a diagnostic laboratory included efficiency, more trusted results and convenience. Speed of obtaining results was the most common reason for performing urinalyses in-house. Of the participants who performed in-house urinalyses, fewer always performed a manual sediment examination (79%) as compared with urine-specific gravity (99%) and manual dipstick (87%). CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: This survey documents that urinalysis is often not used in senior patients as recommended by recent clinical guidelines for dogs and cats which can result in decreased diagnosis and impaired management of subclinical disease. There is significant variability in urinalysis methods despite veterinary guidelines promoting standardisation, and this could lead to inaccurate results.