Forms of Workplace Violence in Veterinary Organisations in Slovenia

Background/Objectives: Workplace violence is a recognised psychosocial risk across many professions but remains insufficiently investigated in veterinary practice. Evidence on workplace violence among veterinary employees in Slovenia is limited. This study aimed to examine reported exposure to different forms of workplace violence involving animal owners, co-workers, and supervisors among employees of veterinary organisations in Slovenia and to assess associated emotional responses. Methods: A cross-sectional online survey was conducted between December 2024 and April 2025 among employees of all 182 registered veterinary practices and clinics in Slovenia. Of 1351 eligible employees, 178 completed the questionnaire (overall response rate: 13.17%), including 155 of 873 eligible veterinarians (veterinarian response rate: 17.75%). Respondents rated their agreement with statements describing verbal, physical, and psychological violence involving animal owners, co-workers, and supervisors, as well as associated negative emotional responses. Data were analysed using one-sample and paired-samples t-tests, principal component analysis, and multiple linear regression. Results: Respondents reported exposure to workplace violence involving animal owners, co-workers, and supervisors, with verbal and psychological forms particularly evident in interactions with animal owners. Fear, helplessness, and uncertainty were prominent emotional responses associated with violence involving animal owners, while violence involving co-workers and supervisors was also associated with negative emotional responses. Greater work experience was significantly associated with less intense negative emotional responses across all three perpetrator groups. Higher education and male gender were additionally associated with less intense emotional responses to violence involving animal owners. Conclusions: Workplace violence represents an important psychosocial concern in Slovenian veterinary organisations and may originate from both external and internal sources. Training, written protocols, and organisational and psychological support may warrant consideration as potential preventive measures; however, their effectiveness was not evaluated in this study and requires further investigation. The low response rate and potential non-response and self-selection bias limit the generalisability of the findings. Further research using validated event-based measures and stronger recruitment strategies is warranted.