Evaluation of Commercial Paw Traction Products for Dogs

Introduction: A paucity of research is available on commercially available dog paw traction enhancing products (TEP). Our objective was to evaluate traction in two TEPs on different flooring and at different simulated body weights. Our hypothesis was that there would be a significant difference in traction between surfaces and weight.

Materials and Methods: A dog paw analog (DPA) and phantom limb (PL) were constructed. The coefficient of traction (CoT) was measured with the DPA, the DPA+rubberized-membrane (pA), and the DPA+rubberized-granules (pB). Testing occurred on five surfaces (tile, hardwood, granule-epoxy, cement, and carpet) using three simulated limb weights. Normalized values were used for comparison (p <0.05).

Results: There was a significant difference between the CoT of DPA+pA and DPA+pB on all surfaces for each weight. On flooring with less texture, DPA+pA improved traction and DPA+pB reduced it. On flooring with more texture, DPA+pA reduced traction and DPA+pB improved it. Weight changes affected the CoT of DPA+pA and DPA+pB.

Discussion/Conclusion: The Results of this study support our hypothesis that CoT would differ between products on various surfaces and with different weights. Overall, this study demonstrated that paw traction or “grip” may be improved or reduced by the application of the TEPs and that traction varies by surface. These findings highlight deficiencies in our understanding of TEP and the importance of considering product–surface interaction. Further investigation into the clinical impact of commercially available TEPs is warranted.

Acknowledgements: There was no propriety interest and funding for this project was provided by a Phi Zeta Research Grant.

No conflict of interest has been declared by the author(s).

Publication History

Article published online:
26 October 2022