Prevalence of proprioception deficits in dogs visiting veterinary clinics for non-neurologic reasons: a cross-sectional study.

Authors

Audrey Tam, Patrick Carney, Yael Merbl

Published in

Journal of veterinary internal medicine. Volume 40. Issue 5. Sep 01, 2026.

Abstract

General proprioception deficits (GPD) detected during neurological exams aid in neurologic assessment and steer practitioners to consider neurological differential diagnoses. However, prevalence of GPD in without clinical signs of neurologic disease is limited.
That elderly dogs have GPD that might be undetected in dogs not presenting for neurologic concerns and to determine GPD prevalence in dogs presented to a veterinary teaching hospital.
The study included 277 client-owned dogs presenting to the Cornell University without neurologic complaints.
Cross-sectional study with prospective data collection involved neurological assessment of dogs. Two hundred seventy-seven dogs met the inclusion criteria. For statistical analysis, ages were categorized into fractional lifespan (FL) groups: Group A (adult, ≤ 0.5), Group B (middle-aged, 0.5-0.75), and Group C (senior, >0.75). Dogs were scored based on hopping and paw replacement performance as normal, mildly, or severely affected.
Seventy-two (26.0%; 95% CI, 20.9-31.7) exhibited GPD while 205 (74.0%) did not. Age distribution revealed 102 dogs (36.8%) in FL category 1 (≤0.5), 70 dogs (25.3%) in category 2 (>0.5 to ≤ 0.75), and 105 dogs (37.9%) in category 3 (>0.75). Both age (odds ratio [OR] 1.22, 95% CI, 1.13-1.33) and FL (OR 1.31, 95% CI, 1.18-1.46) were significantly positively associated with GPD (P < .0001).
The prevalence of incidental GPD in dogs with no known neurological disease increases with age and is not influenced by sex or chondrodystrophic status. Awareness of this finding might aid general practitioners' decision-making, especially in aging dogs without overt acute neurologic disease.

PMID:
42855435
Bibliographic data and abstract were imported from PubMed on 10 Oct 2026.

Read full publication at:
Please sign in to see all details.

Stats

1-terrible, 9-excellent. How would you rate this publication? Sign in in to submit your rating.

Post a comment

You need to be signed in to post comments. You can sign in here.

Comments

There are no comments yet.