How Stress-Reducing Handling Is Making Veterinary Clinics Safer for Staff
Injuries are, unfortunately, part of the job for many veterinary professionals. Bites, scratches, bruises, and back strain come with the territory when handling anxious or fearful animals. But a new study suggests that how we handle our patients — and how well we’re trained to do so — might significantly reduce those risks.
A recent survey of small animal practices across the U.S. and Canada found that clinics where all staff members were certified in a stress-reducing patient care program saw significantly fewer staff injuries. In fact, those practices were 3.5 times less likely to experience animal-inflicted injuries more than once a month compared to practices with only partial or no certification.
A Closer Look at the Study
The study, published in the Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association, surveyed 113 veterinary practices and focused on two things:
How often staff were injured by patients
What types of handling methods and certifications those clinics used
Respondents included practice owners, associate vets, technicians, and managers — all of whom were familiar with daily patient handling routines and staff injury records.
Among the practices surveyed:
16.8% had 100% of staff certified in a stress-reducing care program (e.g., Fear Free, Low Stress Handling, or Cat Friendly Practice).
40.7% had no certified staff at all.
And the results were clear: the more comprehensive the training, the lower the injury rate.
The Human Cost of Injuries
Most veterinary professionals already know the numbers are high, but they’re still startling:
In one study, 93% of Canadian vets reported at least one injury from an animal in the past five years.
In another, nearly half of veterinary staff injuries were caused by cats.
These aren’t just scrapes and bruises. Injuries can lead to missed work, medical expenses, and burnout — something the veterinary field is already battling at crisis levels. Workers' compensation claims related to animal injuries cost the industry millions every year.
Veterinary assistants and technicians bear the brunt of these risks. According to the study, they were the most likely to be injured — not surprising, given they often handle patients during exams and procedures without the same level of training or authority as doctors.
Why Certification Makes a Difference
So, why does certification help?
It’s not just about knowing which tools to use. It’s about changing the clinic’s culture. When every team member is trained in low-stress handling, expectations are clear. There’s consistency. Staff are more likely to recognize early warning signs of fear or aggression — and more empowered to respond appropriately.
Fully certified clinics reported:
More frequent use of treats, pheromones, and towels/blankets for gentle restraint
Less reliance on tools like muzzles, nets, or rabies poles
Greater use of pre-visit medications to calm pets before they even arrive
Interestingly, no single handling technique was directly tied to lower injury rates. Instead, it seems that having everyone on the same page — using the same language, tools, and approach — is what makes the real difference.
Restraint Still a Risk
The survey also found that the most dangerous moments — regardless of certification — were during restraint for exams and procedures like blood draws. That makes sense. Pain, or even the anticipation of pain, can quickly trigger a fear-based reaction in animals.
And while medications like sedatives and anxiolytics are often recommended, their use didn’t show a significant impact on injury rates in this particular study. That said, clinics that weren’t fully certified were actually more likely to rely on in-clinic sedation, which might suggest that staff are reaching for chemical restraint when behavioral techniques aren’t working.
What About Postinjury Care?
Perhaps one of the more concerning findings was the inconsistency in how injuries are treated afterward. While most clinics had basic wound-cleaning protocols, only about 70% recommended or required a visit to a human medical facility.
Some respondents even said supervisors made the call about whether care was needed — or that staff were given antibiotics from the clinic's own pharmacy. That’s not only risky from a health standpoint, but it may raise legal and ethical questions, particularly around antimicrobial stewardship and employee safety.
Cats: The Silent Offenders
Though dogs visit the vet more often, cats were nearly as likely — or more likely — to cause injury, according to respondents. That lines up with earlier studies and supports the growing push for cat-specific handling training. Programs like Cat Friendly Practice don’t just reduce injuries; they’ve also been shown to increase client satisfaction and improve feline wellness outcomes.
The Bottom Line
This study reinforces something many in the veterinary field have long suspected: how we handle our patients matters — not just for their wellbeing, but for our own safety.
When entire teams are trained in stress-reducing techniques, injury rates drop. Staff feel more confident. Patients experience less fear. And everyone benefits.
For practice owners and managers, the message is clear: investing in full-team certification isn’t just good medicine — it’s smart business. It can reduce lost work time, lower insurance claims, and help retain skilled staff in an industry that can’t afford to lose them.
Key Takeaways:
Clinics where 100% of staff were certified in stress-reducing care had significantly fewer injuries.
Veterinary assistants and technicians are at the highest risk.
Most injuries occur during restraint for exams and procedures.
No single tool or technique reduced injury risk — but teamwide consistency did.
Postinjury care protocols vary widely and may need more standardization.
Veterinary medicine will never be injury-free. But with the right training and clinic culture, we can make it safer — for our staff, our patients, and our profession.
Citation:
Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association, 2025; DOI: Read the original article here