# PennHip vs OFA and why are we still preferring OFA



## sclaybaker (Dec 12, 2013)

I'm just curious as I have been doing much research here lately; BUT why as a society are we still almost exclusively using OFA for labs especially when PennHip is scientifically proven vs OFA that is based on judgement. And depending on how one person may feel that day could mean the difference between an excellent or good or good/fair. I bring this up as I will be selling a young dog as he is younger than two the sire's hips were tested by OFA but the dam's were not. ALSO PennHip can be done when a pup is four months where as OFA permanent results cannot be done until two years old. This really makes no sense to me as PennHip is peer reviewed research and not based on three persons judgements for that particular day. Also, we do know that, by breeding higher graded hips based on PennHip the hips will tend to get better and better. Whereas a dog that may be good bred to a good and both of the parents could have been on the verge of fair grading rather on the verge of excellent so in all likelihood could be going backwards rather than bettering the breed(s). So how as a society do we change this standard?


----------



## Last Frontier Labs (Jan 3, 2003)

I started out doing Penn Hip about 15 years ago as it was recommended by a friend who was a vet tech. I found most puppy buyers and other breeders were firmly entrenched in OFA, so I started doing both. Penn Hip for me and OFA for everyone else. I am really happy to see that Penn Hip scores can now be added on the OFA site. I might actually just go back to solely doing Penn Hip, but OFA Elbows still have to be done.


----------



## FOM (Jan 17, 2003)

The other thing to consider with PennHIP is that the score you get is based on the number of dogs in the particular breed that has been tested - so I think many looked at that also.

I do PennHIP for me personally prior to send a dog off to basics for peace of mind that I have a physically sound dog as possible, then OFA at 2 years. I also think a lot can change from a 6 month old to a 2 year old physically, so I prefer to have the OFA done at 2 when the dog is more fully grown.


----------



## Swack (Nov 23, 2011)

FOM said:


> The other thing to consider with PennHIP is that the score you get is based on the number of dogs in the particular breed that has been tested - so I think many looked at that also.


FOM,

I'm not sure you worded the statement above as clearly as you may have intended. 

Penn Hip scores are Distraction Indices (DI) and have no relation to the number of dogs who have been tested in that breed. They are measurable and do not change regardless of the number of dogs that have been rated. If you're referring to the Percentile ratings that a dog is assigned based on his DI's, that value isn't directly related to the number of dogs that have been rated for that breed, but indicate in what percentile your dog's score ranks when compared to the scores of other dogs examined within that breed. The percentile isn't based on the number of dogs rated, but the percentile rankings may change as the population of dogs within that breed increase because the averages may change.

I'm pretty sure you understood these things, but I wanted to try clarify things for those who are reading this thread and may not be familiar with the PennHip scoring system.

Regarding the OP's question, I think old habits die hard. Also, the OFA rating system is easy for people to understand even if it's not as good a method to predict the value of a dog's hips in a breeding program. I agree that's it's hard to understand why people are willing to spend countless hours studying a training program, but may be unwilling to take 30 minutes to study a superior method of rating hip joint conformation.

Swack


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

OFA is more traditional and more people are familiar with it. So if you want to be involved in breeding, you are probably going to need OFA certification. In addition, PennHip is more expensive, as you must have a PH certified radiologist perform the necessary work. That being said, I think PH gives you more and more objective data than OFA. I have done PH with two young dogs at 6 months, before deciding whether to send them off for professional training. Based on PH results, one went off, one did not.


----------



## mwk56 (May 12, 2009)

Much harder to find Pen Hip docs than OFA docs and it is already hard to find OFA docs. 

Meredith


----------



## Bridget Bodine (Mar 4, 2008)

Same with me.... 5 generations later my latest dog done came back greater than 90%, .26, .26


Last Frontier Labs said:


> I started out doing Penn Hip about 15 years ago as it was recommended by a friend who was a vet tech. I found most puppy buyers and other breeders were firmly entrenched in OFA, so I started doing both. Penn Hip for me and OFA for everyone else. I am really happy to see that Penn Hip scores can now be added on the OFA site. I might actually just go back to solely doing Penn Hip, but OFA Elbows still have to be done.


----------



## sclaybaker (Dec 12, 2013)

I do find it is harder to find a vet that does PennHip but find it is pretty easy to find one that does OFA but I guess more so than that my original question. Is based more towards the fact that even if PennHip is more expensive why do we as breeders not use it more often than OFA SINCE it is scientifically proven to be a better analysis of hip tightness and likelyhood of developing dyplasia AND on top of that by breeding dogs that say are .30 and .32 it has been shown that you are going to develop puppies that have tighter and tighter hips. Also as a breeder if I choose in the future to quit doing OFA(I have always done OFA in the past) why would it not be of greater benefit and quit "wasting money" on OFA as I potentially see it?


----------



## ErinsEdge (Feb 14, 2003)

> I'm just curious as I have been doing much research here lately; BUT why as a society are we still almost exclusively using OFA for labs especially when PennHip is scientifically proven vs OFA that is based on judgement. And depending on how one person may feel that day could mean the difference between an excellent or good or good/fair. I bring this up as I will be selling a young dog as he is younger than two the sire's hips were tested by OFA but the dam's were not. ALSO PennHip can be done when a pup is four months where as OFA permanent results cannot be done until two years old. This really makes no sense to me as PennHip is peer reviewed research and not based on three persons judgements for that particular day. Also, we do know that, by breeding higher graded hips based on PennHip the hips will tend to get better and better. Whereas a dog that may be good bred to a good and both of the parents could have been on the verge of fair grading rather on the verge of excellent so in all likelihood could be going backwards rather than bettering the breed(s). So how as a society do we change this standard?


It's not going to change anytime soon. Some of your information is not entirely true. 1. Some people just don't think it is the end all for hips. In other words, knocking a dog out and doing the distraction. Those that do Penn-hip say it is, but does joint laxity correlate to the physical findings in old age? 2. Even Penn-Hip back-pedaled on the 4 months as being accurate. 3. OFA has worked very well for many (most?) long time breeders so why switch? For some in the beginning the findings were not correct and decisions were made on those results. Those don't believe in it. 4. OFA is more accurate when done by vets who know how to position the dogs rather than read wrong by the readers. 5. Many people don't like to knock their dogs out. 6. it's expensive. 7. Sometimes, maybe rarely, people fail OFA so they do Penn-Hip hoping people don't understand the reading, so there is a degree of distrust, but they understand OFA. I would have to count generations, but I have had excellents that have begat excellents and so on for 6-7 generations so it works for me. My vets read the xrays and also write down the results. If anything, the excellent can be a very good and get dropped to a good. Not a big deal. Most Field dogs have OFA done so most buyers want OFA readings when they buy pups. Many people do prelims before they send their dogs for training but I have been told to wait until 7-8 months.


----------



## NateB (Sep 25, 2003)

OFA has not shown to improve the breed. Statistically a greater percent of dogs are getting GOOD and better ratings, but that does not take into account the number of dogs that were Xrayed and then they decided not to send in the films as they obviously were not going to pass. If you have your dog examined by PennHip, those films will be evaluated, they must be sent in. So in my opinion it is a more inclusive database. The study has to be done by a Pennhip approved DVM, but does not have to be a radiologist.

2 OFA excellent dogs can still produce dysplasia affected pups, because laxity has not been detected. Just the way we do OFA X-rays, rotating the legs medially will drive the head of the femur into the socket of the pelvis.
Joint laxity is the most significant concern toward the development of degenerative arthritis. In OFA films they will discuss subluxation in a joint and that is essentially the same as laxity. I do not have access to the data but I would doubt if there has been very many dogs that failed OFA but had a passing PennHip score. But there has been several cases of dogs getting good or excellent OFA ratings that showed joint laxity on PennHip. 

For young dogs, OFA type studies do not predict future outcomes, thus the 24 month minimum age, so doing OFA prelims will not tell you much. But PennHip done early is predictive of future outcomes. 

I have done both studies on my dogs, since one of the PennHip views is the same as the OFA we double that view and send them both in.

I do believe that if we really are more concerned with improving the breed and not just selling "passed" puppies then we need to get breeders and buyer more educated.


----------



## sclaybaker (Dec 12, 2013)

Nate I love your input and EELabs. You do have to realize though that you still have to put a dog under for OFA so that risk is still there. And no at 4 months thugs may not be the best as a pup is still growing but if we look across the pond they look at dogs much differently and from my experience most NOT all but most dogs are done growing by 1 yr old. Across the pond in the KC dogs hips can be checked at 1 yr. and also with OFA as you stated a good knowledgable vet can correctly position a dog for OFA X-rays BUT any vet or tech could potentially have a bad day as well as readers could disagree and you get a excellent excellent good which results in a good readings rather than excellent. As well you could get a good, good, fair which would result in a fair reading. But by taking a scientifically peer reviewed method wouldn't you want to better the breed by a method that takes most human error out of the equation. Now I do understand that scientific methods are always changing and we discover new things constantly. I read peer reviewed articles on the same subjects often that often have different outcomes or a new discovery was made that changed an outcome. Or a peer reviewed study was actually done on a subject that historically has been "common thought" but actually turned out there is no scientific evidence whatsoever. But many hours have been put into this and it is shown to be a far superior method. I just brought this up as I figured it should lead to a good debate and maybe get many breeders thinking about where to go next.


----------



## copterdoc (Mar 26, 2006)

sclaybaker said:


> .....You do have to realize though that you still have to put a dog under for OFA so that risk is still there......


 No you do not.


----------



## ErinsEdge (Feb 14, 2003)

> You do have to realize though that you still have to put a dog under for OFA so that risk is still there.


I only had one dog put under and I was told she would not pass. I went to the very experienced vet that does not put them under, (who also was an OFA reader at one time) and he said she had classic OFA excellent hips. I learned a real lesson. The rest of my dogs have all been done awake. I don't think we can quantitate if the Labs have improved or not, because the xrays are not sent in if they look bad, but it seems to me that we don't hear about as many really bad hips as we used to 30+ years ago, but more borderline OFA's. All my prelim OFA's have been the same as the 2 year ones, but I prelim later as I was told by the vet that did my OFA's.


----------



## sclaybaker (Dec 12, 2013)

Ok I did not realize that you do not have to put a dog under to do OFA. EVERY vet I have ever talked to has put them under and said they put them under. Have not found one that doesn't put them under. Just out curiosity and Im guessing it does but does it affect the price of getting it done and if so how much cheaper are you looking at?


----------



## ErinsEdge (Feb 14, 2003)

I don't think this list is updated because I know some changes.
http://devinefarm.net/health/ofavets.htm.
Can't tell you about pricing since I never put them under. I would if I had to but I never do. The vets that don't put them under are usually very experienced at positioning.


----------



## 2tall (Oct 11, 2006)

Anyone know of an OFA Vet in central NC thT does not put them "out"?


----------



## FOM (Jan 17, 2003)

So I have to ask - those who say the Vet puts the dogs under are you referring to completely knocked out? My Vet will give my knuckleheads a sedative so they don't fight as much, they are big, strong dogs after all, but they aren't completely out, just a little mellow.


----------



## kennel maiden (Jun 11, 2012)

Here in the UK our KC/BVA accepts hip Xrays at 12 months onwards, so we usually get them done then. Our system is much the same as OFA. But I recently went to a seminar on PennHip and also the gene testing that is being pioneered to predict the gene markers for hip dysplasia. They have identified 9 markers so far which give an indication of the dog's likelihood to develop hip dysplasia. When the vet explained about what causes poor hips, it did seem to me that the Pennhip system made much more sense and can be done so much earlier to give an indication. But there are very few vets here in the UK that do it, and it really isn't widely known or understood, so we have to continue using the BVA Xray panel.


----------



## Mn John (Aug 26, 2008)

One advantage to OFA, that has not been mentioned, is the database of the results of all dogs submitted to OFA for evaluation. The database is a great resource that allows one to not only look up a given dog, but also that dogs sire, dam, siblings, half-siblings, and offspring. A dog that is OFA GOOD with mostly excellent and a few goods in its pedigree, has a higher likelihood of producing good or better hips than a dog that is also OFA GOOD but has only a few excellent and many goods and fairs in it's pedigree.

While Penn Hip maybe a more accurate tool, is that accuracy functional in making breeding decisions? The OFA database provides a great deal on functionality to a tool that is accurate enough, given all the other variables that go into a breeding decision.

John


----------



## sclaybaker (Dec 12, 2013)

Mn John if what I read is what your saying and correct me if I'm wrong but the OFA has a database which mind you now we can enter in PennHip data as well to that database but for example if you look up and say every sibling of that dog has dysplastic hips and that particular dog has excellent hips which I'm sure is highly unlikely but just for purposes here then you would not want to breed that dog? I would still consider breeding that dog even though siblings are no good because it's based on that dog alone. And PennHip gives a joint tightness and it has been shown that by breeding dogs with tighter and tighter hips the pups inevitably get better and better hip joints. This method takes human error out of poor placement, a bad attitude or reader that day, a misguided vet tech placing the dog or any other faulty factors that could knock a dogs rating down or even potentially up for that matter. Who is to say just for potential possibility that a vet knows enough about OFA that they could make a fair hipped dog manage to look good by the way they manage to position the dog in the X-ray. His could in turn lead to poorer hips down the road rather than better hips. Just a though in the mind of Devils advocate.


----------



## sclaybaker (Dec 12, 2013)

Oh and FOM yes every vet I've ever had do OFA has knocked them out. I don't know if quite to the point of say a spay/neuter surgery where are pumping oxygen to the dog to breath but I normally drop them off and pick them up that afternoon once they wake up. So evidently I need to look into seeing if a vet near me will do it without knocking them out.


----------



## Rainmaker (Feb 27, 2005)

My local vet will only do OFA with full anesthesia, he runs close to $300, haven't used him for OFA in a long time. Every other vet I know or use will only sedate if the dog isn't cooperative. Rough price range is couple hundred for hips/elbows and add on sedation if needed. I do have PennHip in reasonable driving distance, the prices range around $500-600 including sending a copy of the one view to OFA. Does not include elbows, so add on another film charge there too. 

My main beef with PennHip is no database. I can't research relatives like I can with OFA. If there is a database, I can't find it. Yes, it's awesome that PennHip requires all films be sent, unlike OFA, which is skewed by the fact that many don't send in films if they don't look like they'll pass. But without a public database, how do I access all that info when researching a dog? Yes, I do take into account if a dog has sired/whelped pups, what they are throwing, what their siblings, parents, grandparents, etc, have done in the hip and elbow dept. Just knowing one dog's results is a little scary to me to make a breeding decision on. OFA itself suggests looking at the whole picture. A fair-rated dog with multiple close relatives having good/excellent hips may be the better choice vs an excellent-rated dog that has dysplastic close relatives or no OFA history at all. 

I do OFA prelims on hips/elbows at 6-8 months, when depends on when or if they are going off to trainer but 6 months minimum. In 16 years and many Labs, I've had 3 prelims change at finals, two went up a grade, one went down, none have been dysplastic on final films. I have had one pup I bought in the last couple years be moderately, bilaterally dysplastic on prelim and the 2nd and 3rd Labs I ever bought were dysplastic on prelim. Given their films & age at the time, I doubt PennHip would have given them a very low DI either. I did have one person with a pup with unilateral hip mild subluxation per OFA, so no OFA number, while PennHip gave it a .40 and .32, no DJD present. 

I think there are benefits and problems with both PennHip and OFA, hips aren't easy or simple, neither are elbows. You're going to have dysplasia sometimes, regardless of all the clearances. Xrays are a screening tool, not a guarantee.


----------



## Mn John (Aug 26, 2008)

sclaybaker wrote:



> but for example if you look up and say every sibling of that dog has dysplastic hips and that particular dog has excellent hips which I'm sure is highly unlikely but just for purposes here then you would not want to breed that dog? I would still consider breeding that dog even though siblings are no good because it's based on that dog alone.


No I would not breed to that dog. Both Penn Hip and OFA evaluate only what we can see, it's phenotype. The evaluation of it's close relatives gives us some insight into the genotype, and it is the genes that get pasted on to the next generation. the dog in the example above, that is excellent with many close relatives that are fair and dysplastic indicate there is a higher probability that family of dogs has hip problems. The excellent dog just happen to end up with the right combinations of genes for good hips, beating the probabilities, but also that the less desirable genes are still there just not expressed.


----------



## Swack (Nov 23, 2011)

Mn John said:


> No I would not breed to that dog. Both Penn Hip and OFA evaluate only what we can see, it's phenotype. The evaluation of it's close relatives gives us some insight into the genotype, and it is the genes that get pasted on to the next generation. the dog in the example above, that is excellent with many close relatives that are fair and dysplastic indicate there is a higher probability that family of dogs has hip problems. The excellent dog just happen to end up with the right combinations of genes for good hips, beating the probabilities, but also that the less desirable genes are still there just not expressed.


Mn John,

You are correct in stating that we're only seeing the phenotype in viewing x-rays of a hip joint. It seems to me since we've been able to test for things like EIC, CNM, & PRA, which are caused by simple autosomal recessive genes, many people think hip conformation should be as simple and is controlled exclusively by genetics, but that's not the case. Estimates are that the heritability of hip joint conformation is about 35%. Therefore the remaining 65% of hip joint structure is due to non-additive genetics and the dog's environment, which would include things like nutrition, exercise, and living conditions. Therefore, we can't expect hip scores to tell the entire story of a dog's potential to produce good hip structure. Ideal environmental conditions might mask poor genotype, while good genetics could be masked by a dog being raised in an inferior environment.

Since OFA has the tools we can use to research the OFA hip scores of a dog's relatives and they also accept PennHip scores, why doesn't OFA modify their software so it includes both OFA and PennHip data on the vertical pedigree data for a dog?

Swack


----------



## Back77 (Mar 9, 2009)

I just did both test on my dog. The OFA statistics are way off because not every dog that is x-ray'd is submitted to OFA to be graded. Most Vet's can tell if the dog is going to certify or not. If not they will tell them not to waste there money in sending in the picture. So most of the bad ones are never sent in to be graded. Penn has a rule that once the test has begun then they have to be submitted even if the vet can tell they are bad. OFA cost me under $200 and my dog was just lightly sedated and the Penn was $500 and the dog was out!


----------



## Hunt'EmUp (Sep 30, 2010)

Just had 2 done, the OFA vet, has never knocked them out. We go in she takes them back less than 20 mins, they walk the dog back out, we go in to look at the films (computer ones these days), and vet discusses what she see's - with most likely rating. ~$200 for hips and elbow. Not sure I'd be as willing to sign the dog up for OFA at any particular clinic; if they had to knock them out; I don't like to put a dog out if I can possibly avoid it. Why would you need to knock them out for a simple x-raying; when 90% of the time your dealing with very well trained and cooperative dogs?

I've never done Penn-hip, as some have said it's hard enough to find a qualified OFA vet; OFA's are what the community uses; it has the data-base going back generations. Pennhip=extra cost; and most have no idea what it is; could it be better? Perhaps, but you'd have to do OFA anyways, and unless you are a hard-core breeder; producing several litters and watching lines for multiple generations; penn-hip most likely is not worth the extra cost.


----------



## Mn John (Aug 26, 2008)

Back77 wrote:



> The OFA statistics are way off because not every dog that is x-ray'd is submitted to OFA to be graded. Most Vet's can tell if the dog is going to certify or not. If not they will tell them not to waste there money in sending in the picture. So most of the bad ones are never sent in to be graded. Penn has a rule that once the test has begun then they have to be submitted even if the vet can tell they are bad.


For me the OFA statistics while interesting provide little in the way of useful information regarding breeding decisions. So not having dogs included that clearly would be at the bottom of the rankings doesn't provide any added value. As I said before I look at the rating of the close relatives. The ratings of unrelated or distantly related dogs have little use to me. While Penn Hip tells you where your dogs ranks in the breed, that data point is still just about that one dogs evaluation of it's phenotype. Penn Hip may be a better tool but it lacks the database to make it most useful.

John


----------



## duckdawg27 (Apr 30, 2007)

What Ted said.......no access to certified radiologist. I've had to train my last two vets on OFA as it is. Luckily the one I'm using now has digital equipment so he can shoot 10 views if he needs to at no extra expense.


----------

