Low-stress care gains traction as a safety strategy for vet teams

CURRENT FULL VERSION: Low-stress veterinary care is getting a stronger evidence base as a staff safety tool, not just a patient comfort initiative. A 2025 JAVMA study, spotlighted in AVMA’s Veterinary Vertex episode “Calmer Pets, Safer Vets: The Power of Low-Stress Care,” found lower rates of patient-inflicted injuries in small animal general practices where all staff members were certified in a stress-reducing care method or program. The podcast frames that finding in operational terms for clinics: calmer visits can mean fewer bites, fewer scratches, and a safer workplace. It also adds useful context from lead author Ellen Everett, a small animal general practitioner and University of Georgia community practice faculty member, who said the project started with a simple observation from practice life: some hospitals seemed to have many more bite incidents than others, and she wondered whether differences in staff training might help explain that variation. (pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov)

The idea itself isn’t new. For years, veterinary behavior and handling guidance has argued that fear, anxiety, and stress interfere with both welfare and medicine. AAHA’s behavior management guidance has promoted low-stress handling as a core competency, and feline-focused guidelines from AAFP and ISFM similarly stress environmental modification, cooperative handling, and appropriate use of anxiolytics or chemical restraint when needed. In other words, the profession has long had the theory; what’s notable here is newer data tying practice-wide implementation to occupational injury outcomes. The podcast reinforces that practical divide by contrasting clinics where many staff had Fear Free or Low Stress Handling training with others that still leaned more heavily on traditional handling techniques. (jaaha.kglmeridian.com)

According to the PubMed record for the JAVMA paper, the study used a cross-sectional online survey of convenience-sample data from small animal general practices in the U.S. and Canada, collected in October and November 2023. Among 113 eligible responses, injury rates were lower in practices where 100% of veterinary staff were certified in a stress-reducing care method or program. The authors also examined post-injury care protocols, suggesting the paper looks beyond handling philosophy alone and into how clinics respond when injuries occur. Because the study is survey-based and cross-sectional, it supports an association rather than proving causation, but it still offers rare practice-level data on an issue most veterinary teams know firsthand. In the podcast, Everett said that even “badly” getting bitten or scratched can ruin a staff member’s day, while more severe injuries can be life-threatening or career-ending, underscoring why the question matters beyond patient experience alone. (pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov)

That matters because occupational injury remains a persistent problem in companion animal practice. Earlier research on certified veterinary technicians in Minnesota found high annual injury rates, with bites, cuts, lacerations, scratches, bruises, and abrasions among the most common injuries, and many occurring during restraint or treatment. Other literature has described low-stress handling as important not only for patient welfare, but also for staff safety. The new JAVMA study builds on that foundation by suggesting that the strongest signal may come when training is embedded across the whole hospital rather than left to isolated team members. (pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov)

Industry and expert commentary around low-stress care has generally moved in the same direction. AAHA resources note that practices can pursue formal certification through programs such as Fear Free and Low Stress Handling, while dvm360 coverage has described low-stress handling as a way to reduce fear, improve care quality, and lower the chance of injury to team members. AVMA has also elevated leaders in veterinary behavior medicine, including 2025 Bustad award recipient Dr. Carlo Siracusa, for advancing low-stress handling approaches in clinical practice. Together, that suggests the conversation is shifting from whether these methods are worthwhile to how broadly and consistently they can be implemented. (aaha.org)

Why it matters: For veterinary professionals, this story sits at the intersection of welfare, workforce retention, and clinic operations. A calmer patient is more likely to tolerate exams, venipuncture, nail trims, imaging, and rechecks with less escalation. That can improve efficiency, reduce the need for forceful restraint, and make it easier to preserve trust with pet parents who are increasingly attentive to how their animals are handled in clinic. It also gives practice leaders a concrete frame for investment: low-stress care may support safer teams, fewer injury-related disruptions, and more consistent care standards across doctors, technicians, assistants, and client-facing staff. The podcast’s origin story makes that especially clear: this was not an abstract academic exercise, but a question that emerged from everyday general practice and visible differences in injury patterns between clinics. (pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov)

There are still practical questions. Certification programs cost time and money, staff turnover can erode consistency, and emergency settings won’t always allow ideal handling conditions. Some frontline discussion in the profession has also distinguished between branded certification programs and the broader principles of low-stress handling, with many clinicians supportive of the techniques even when they disagree on the best training model. That makes implementation, not just ideology, the next challenge for practices trying to translate the concept into safer daily workflows. This is partly an inference from the broader coverage and professional discussion, but it fits the direction of the evidence. (cattledogpublishing.com)

What to watch: The next step is whether more clinics formalize whole-team standards, including onboarding, continuing education, pre-visit pharmaceuticals, environmental modifications, and injury-reporting protocols, and whether future studies can show which specific interventions drive the biggest reduction in staff injuries and patient stress. (pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov)