Prevalence and Cost of Colic Cases in Sport Horses in Turkey

Abstract views: 213 / PDF downloads: 188


  • Cenk Er
  • Pınar Ayvazoğlu Demir
  • Mahmut OK


Colic, economics, horse, prevalence, Turkey


One of the most common diseases in horse breeding is colic. Colic cases are the leading cause of horse loss and economic loss in Turkey as well as the whole world. Failure to the effective management of colic is a major obstacle in obtaining the desired yield of sport horses in Turkey and it is thought that most people are away from horse breeding and equestrian sports due to this reason. The objectives of this study are to set forth the prevalence and cost of colic cases in sport horses for two years and, present the rate of recurrent colic cases in the same period respectively. Throughout the study, economical and some technical parameters related to the course of the disease were obtained between January 2017 and December 2018. Interviews and data collection were conducted from 984 sport horses in all ages and gender for 24 months. The collected data were recorded and processed in the database created via MS Excel 2010 and IBM SPSS 22 for Windows. The average cost of colic management for a 4-day treatment in 2018 was $215.60. The rate of recurrent colic cases was 48,2% and the development of laminitis was 11,9% in a year following the treatment. As a result, it was estimated that the average annual economic loss of colic in 984 horses was $36.806 in addition to horse losses. Horses that survived spontaneously, without any invasive treatment, and suffering from different disorders other than colic, were removed from the study. It is concluded that reduction of cost in colic cases and prevention of recurrent colic cases and post-colic diseases, such as laminitis, would increase horse welfare and yield from horses in Turkey.




How to Cite

Er, C., Ayvazoğlu Demir, P., & OK, M. (2020). Prevalence and Cost of Colic Cases in Sport Horses in Turkey. International Journal of Veterinary and Animal Research (IJVAR), 3(2), 29–33. Retrieved from



Research Articles