Cat grooming ranges from a cat’s daily self-cleaning to brushing, nail clipping, dental care, and professional services. Available figures show that grooming habits vary by household income, coat type, geography, and whether care is provided at home, by a veterinarian, or through a grooming service.
Contents
- Owner access and professional grooming
- Grooming by household income
- Home grooming and routine cat care in New Zealand
- What ASPCA service data shows
- How cats spend time grooming
- Longhair and shorthair grooming behavior
- Grooming, swallowed hair, and digestibility
Owner access and professional grooming
In the U.S. figures reported in the Frontiers 2022 grooming-related concerns study, 32% of cat owners said they did not have a brush or another grooming tool for their cat. The same study, citing APPA data, reported that 17% of U.S. cat owners said their pet had been groomed professionally during the previous 12 months.
That distinction matters when interpreting grooming statistics. A cat can receive some care without visiting a professional, while a household may own grooming equipment without using a professional service. The 17% figure measures reported professional grooming in the prior year; it does not measure every brushing or nail-trimming session performed at home.
The APPA 2024 Dog and Cat Owner Insight Report also describes a wider pattern of hands-on pet care and pet-related activity. In 2024, 46% of cat owners used training aids, compared with 34% in 2018. Leash ownership reached 31%, up from 21% in 2018, while harness ownership reached 23%, up from 13% in 2018. These figures are not grooming measures, but they help place grooming in the broader context of cat ownership equipment and care routines.
Other 2024 APPA measures show that 32% of cat owners gave their pets a vitamin or supplement, up from 20% in 2018, and 28% gave prebiotic or probiotic supplements, up from 21% in 2022. These products are not grooming tools, so they should not be counted as grooming participation. They do show that owner-reported care behavior can include several distinct categories that should remain separate.
Grooming by household income
The Frontiers 2022 grooming-related concerns study, citing APPA data, reported different rates of cat grooming during the previous 12 months across household-income groups. The measure is the share of households in each income band that reported having had their cat groomed during that period.
| Household income | Cat groomed in previous 12 months |
|---|---|
| Under $25,000 | 13% |
| $25,000–$44,900 | 14% |
| $45,000–$74,900 | 13% |
| $75,000–$124,900 | 19% |
| $125,000 or more | 23% |
The reported rate was 13% among households earning under $25,000, 14% among households earning $25,000–$44,900, and 13% among those earning $45,000–$74,900. It rose to 19% for households earning $75,000–$124,900 and 23% for households earning $125,000 or more.
The figures describe reported grooming in a 12-month period, not the price of grooming, the number of appointments, or the quality of care. They also do not establish why the rates differ. Income can coexist with differences in access, household preferences, coat type, location, and the ability to use professional services, but the supplied study figures do not quantify those explanations.
The same source reported that 32% of U.S. cat owners lacked a brush or other grooming tool. That equipment figure covers cat owners overall, while the income figures divide reported grooming by household income. They are related measures, but they should not be treated as two parts of one survey percentage.
Home grooming and routine cat care in New Zealand
The report Pet Ownership in Aotearoa New Zealand, 2023 surveyed 1,536 owners who answered the cat-care section. In that survey, 33.3% reported that their cat was groomed regularly by brushing or clipping, and 27.3% reported occasional grooming by brushing or clipping. The report therefore records both regular and occasional owner-reported grooming as separate responses.
Other routine-care figures from the same New Zealand survey provide useful context:
- 35.5% reported that their cat’s nails were clipped when needed.
- 44.1% reported that their cat’s teeth were cleaned by a veterinarian when needed.
- 8.9% reported cleaning their cat’s teeth themselves when needed.
- 90.4% reported flea treatment according to product instructions.
- 90.4% reported worming according to product instructions.
- 76.3% reported that their cat’s vaccinations were up to date.
- 97.0% reported that their cat was desexed.
- 18.4% reported that their cat had caused them financial stress.
The counts behind those percentages were also reported. Of the 1,536 respondents, 512 said their cat was groomed regularly, 420 said grooming was occasional, and 546 said nails were clipped when needed. A total of 677 reported veterinary dental cleaning when needed, while 137 reported cleaning their cat’s teeth themselves when needed. The flea-treatment count was 1,389, the worming count was 1,388, the up-to-date vaccination count was 1,172, and 1,490 respondents said their cat was desexed. The report recorded 282 respondents who said their cat had caused financial stress.
The same New Zealand report included subgroup comparisons. Ninety percent of cat owners overall reported flea treatment according to product instructions, compared with 86% among respondents with a rural upbringing and 92% among town or city dwellers. The report also stated that 77% of rural-upbringing respondents said their cat’s vaccinations were up to date, versus 73% for another subgroup reported in the study text.
For dental and nail care, one comparison showed 47% of one subgroup and 40% of another reporting veterinary dental cleaning when needed. Another comparison reported that 37% of town or city dwellers said their cat’s nails were clipped when needed, versus 31% for a comparison subgroup. A separate comparison reported veterinary dental cleaning at 46% for town or city dwellers and 40% for a comparison subgroup. Self-cleaning of teeth was reported by 12% of rural-upbringing respondents and 8% of a comparison subgroup.
Because the report presents these subgroup results in relation to rural upbringing and current residence, the comparisons should be read as survey subgroup measures rather than universal differences between all rural and urban cat owners.
What ASPCA service data shows
The Frontiers 2022 grooming-related concerns study analyzed several ASPCA service datasets. In ASPCA Animal Hospital data, 6% of 19,327 appointments involved medically necessary grooming or nail trims, totaling 1,230 appointments. Of those 1,230 appointments, 858 were for dogs and 372 were for cats.
Within the ASPCA Animal Hospital grooming appointments, 809 of the 1,230 services were nail trims and 421 were medical grooming services. Long-haired breed types accounted for 77% of the 421 medical grooming services, or about 324 services. These figures describe the composition of recorded hospital services; they are not estimates of all grooming performed by cat owners or groomers.
In ASPCA Community Medicine data, 4% of 31,047 appointments involved grooming-related observations or service provision, totaling 1,266 appointments. Cats accounted for 252 of those appointments. Eighteen percent of the 252 cats were identified as long-haired breed types, or about 46 cats.
The study also reported 6% of 2,154 appointments, or 119 appointments, involving grooming-related observations or service provision in ASPCA One ASPCA Fund data. In ASPCA-NYPD Partnership data, 13% of 981 cruelty cases involved hair-matting concerns or strangulating hair-mat wounds, totaling 127 cases. In ASPCA Community Engagement data, 5% of 1,652 cases received grooming-related supplies, totaling 79 cases.
At ASPCA Community Veterinary Center and vaccine events, 204 grooming appointments were provided and all available appointments were filled. Thirteen of those appointments were for cats and 191 were for dogs. This is an event-service measure, so it reflects the appointments made available and used in that setting rather than the prevalence of grooming needs among all cats.
How cats spend time grooming
Kim and colleagues’ 2019 grooming-behavior study measured grooming as part of a 24-hour time budget. Cats spent 2.29% of the day oral-grooming and 0.18% scratch-grooming. In the same study, sleep and rest accounted for 69.97% of the 24-hour budget, while general activity accounted for 25.82%.
The study reported that oral grooming represented 91.81% of total grooming time and scratch grooming represented 8.19%. Within grooming time, face washing was the largest recorded category at 52.13%. The other reported shares were 13.97% for the side and back, 8.66% for the hindlimb, 7.56% for the neck and chest, 4.06% for the anogenital region, 3.44% for the ear, 3.17% for the neck, 2.79% for the tail, 2.65% for the abdomen, and 1.58% for the chin.
These observations describe feline self-grooming behavior, not brushing or clipping performed by people. A cat’s time spent washing itself therefore should not be added to owner-reported regular grooming or professional grooming rates.
Longhair and shorthair grooming behavior
The Kim et al. 2019 study also separated reported behavior by coat type. Longhair cats spent 2.64% of the day oral-grooming, compared with 1.94% for shorthair cats. Longhair cats spent 0.24% of the day scratch-grooming, compared with 0.12% for shorthair cats.
| Coat type | Oral grooming | Scratch-grooming |
|---|---|---|
| Longhair cats | 2.64% of the day | 0.24% of the day |
| Shorthair cats | 1.94% of the day | 0.12% of the day |
The same study’s overall time-budget figures were 2.29% for oral grooming and 0.18% for scratch-grooming. The coat-type results indicate different observed self-grooming shares within that study, while the ASPCA service data separately showed that long-haired types represented about 77% of medical grooming services in one hospital subset and 18% of cat grooming-related community-medicine appointments. Those service datasets are not directly comparable with the behavioral time budget because they measure different populations and outcomes.
Grooming, swallowed hair, and digestibility
Kim et al. 2019 also examined fecal digestibility with hair included and with hair removed. For dry matter, digestibility was 80.18% when hair was removed from feces and 74.12% when hair was included. The study reported a 6.06-percentage-point difference and estimated that digestibility had been underestimated by about 6% when hair was included.
For crude protein, digestibility was 82.34% with hair removed and 75.35% with hair included. The difference was 6.99 percentage points, and the study estimated an underestimation of about 7% when hair was included. For crude ash, the corresponding figures were 37.33% and 22.51%, a 14.82-point difference and an estimated underestimation of about 14%.
The study also reported 69.63% digestibility for ADF with hair removed versus 57.97% with hair included, a difference of 11.66 points and an estimated underestimation of about 12%. For NDF, digestibility was 78.47% with hair removed and 68.92% with hair included, a difference of 9.55 points and an estimated underestimation of about 10%.
These are laboratory or study measurements of digestibility conditions, not a clinical diagnosis or a measure of hairball frequency. They show why the study treated ingested hair as a factor in interpreting fecal digestibility results, while the owner and service statistics describe grooming behavior and care provision.