Mike Brampton, inventor of the CAT Doppler blood pressure system and Managing Director of Thames Medical, is to start the 'Tour de Vet', a 1,300 mile tour of the UK during which he'll be stopping to give BP CPD and coaching to veterinary surgeons and nurses in return for a donation to the charity Canine Partners.
Mike says the CAT Doppler system is the most widely used in the UK. He also lectures at Nottingham Vet School and normally charges something in the order of £600 for talks and training sessions.
During the 'Tour de Vet', however, he'll be giving his talks free, in exchange for a donation to the charity of £250-£300.
Mike said: "At a recent BVNA Congress, 85% of nurses said they would like more skills and information in BP techniques. This is your chance to book some quality, certified, hands-on CPD at a massively reduced price, which will benefit not only your staff and practice but also help train a puppy for Canine Partners".
Mike's target is to raise £10,000.
The tour starts in Worthing on May 19th 2014. It ends three weeks and 1300 miles later at the Vettrust Conference in Stirling.
To book your blood pressure monitoring CPD or nurses' coaching, call Mike on 01903 522911 or email mike@thamesmedical.com.
Alternatively, if you just want to support his efforts, text 70070 with the code TDEV55 and your donation or visit http://www.justgiving.com/Tour-De-Vet
Hot on the heels of the new license claim for Prac-tic comes the news that Novartis has launched new tasty Milbemax for cats.
The new tablet is the same small size as the original, but is beef-flavoured to ensure high palatability. According to Novartis, trials show that 100 per cent of cats accept the treatment with wet food and 83 per cent with dry food.
To help promote worming the palatable way, Novartis is offering practices some tasty marketing tools to use including posters, client leaflets, worming reminder pads and even a sturdy cut-out cat for reception.
Novartis will also be running a ‘Name Our Cat' competition with the chance to win an iPod touch complete with an educational podcast; there are five to be won. Entry details can be obtained from Novartis Territory Managers.
For more information about new tasty Milbemax, please contact your Novartis Animal Health Territory Manager or call the Practice Support Line on 0800 854100.
Vets Now has produced a new set of guidelines for pet owners about how to deal with the top 10 emergency situations seen by the out-of-hours care provider.
The guidelines are presented as an infographic - which is free to download from the Vets Now website - which provides some basic steps to help owners deal with the more common emergency situations before being able to get their sick or injured pet to the vet.
Vets Now says it is hoping it will be deemed useful by other vets who are welcome to share the infographic on their social media sites and their websites, or display it in their waiting rooms.
Lisa Maxwell, Head of Client Care said: "Pet owners should always call a vet in an emergency and we promote that in the infographic. As emergency and critical care providers, we're used to dealing with owners who are scared, or in shock when they call us. What we hoped to achieve by creating the infographic, was to reassure pet owners that these situations happen all the time and to give them more sense of control of the situation. If more pet owners were aware of some of the basic actions they could perform at the scene, at the very least it could help owners cope more readily and keep their animals calm and, at best, it could save lives."
Lisa added: "These days, the fastest way to spread an important message seems to be through social media, so we've specifically designed this infographic to be shared on Facebook, Twitter, G+ etc, as well as practice websites.
"Our intention was to create a useful resource for practices across the UK - not just Vets Now clinics. If we all get behind this and make our clients aware, maybe we'll be going that extra mile by educating our clients and helping to save even more lives."
The infographic can be downloaded at www.vets-now.com/infographic
Dr De Armas Jimenez faced four charges against him, that:
On or around 22 April 2022 or 23 April 2022, in relation to a cat, he a) failed to obtain informed consent to sedate/anaesthetise the cat and/or did so without the owner’s consent (admitted), b) failed to take adequate steps when the cat required emergency attention (admitted), and c) failed to provide adequate details to the owner following the cat’s death (admitted).
On or around 22 April 2022 or 23 April 2022, he a) failed to record adequate clinical record details of the cat’s sedation/anaesthetic (admitted), b) recorded when the cat became cyanotic, that i) a tube had been passed in order to intubate (proved not to have occured) and ii) chest compressions had been given when this was not the case (not proved that it did not happen), and c) failed to make adequate clinical records in relation to differential diagnoses and proposed treatment plan (not proved).
That his conduct in relation to charge 2(a) and/or 2(b) was a) dishonest and/or b) misleading. (Admitted his conduct was both dishonest and misleading in relation to 2(a), and the Committee found proved that his conduct was dishonest and/or misleading in relation to 2(b)(i)).
Between 22 April 2022 and 23 April 2022, he failed to have any professional indemnity insurance in place (admitted).
Dr De Armas Jimenez admitted most of the charges again him.
The Committee found that his actions had breached a number of sections of the RCVS Code of Conduct for Veterinary Surgeons and amounted to serious professional misconduct.
In deciding on a sanction, the Committee took into account the aggravating factor that Dr De Armas Jimenez had caused actual harm to the animal.
Mitigating factors included that he had no previous disciplinary history, that he had been working for eight years as a veterinary surgeon in the UK without complaint, that he admitted most of the charges, that he'd made subsequent efforts to avoid repetition by no longer working night shifts or locuming, and finally that the incident related to one animal.
The Committee also noted that he'd shown appreciable insight and remorse, and took into account positive character references.
Paul Morris, chairing the Disciplinary Committee and speaking on its behalf, said: “Whilst the misconduct in this case involved breaches of the RCVS Code, caused serious harm to both the cat and the client, and involved dishonesty which was concealed, the Committee decided that a lengthy suspension could take account of the seriousness of these matters and meet the wider public interest.”
He added: “In deciding on this period of suspension, the Committee took into account both mitigating and aggravating factors and the mitigation Dr De Armas Jimenez had put before it.
"It was not persuaded that a shorter period of suspension would properly reflect the seriousness of the proven misconduct.
"It concluded that this period of suspension had a deterrent effect and sent a signal as to how serious the Committee had found the misconduct to be.
"It also took into account Dr De Armas Jimenez’s remorse and insight.
“However, in order that the wider public interest was upheld and to reflect the Committee’s view regarding the seriousness of the proven misconduct, the Committee determined that the proportionate sanction and period of suspension should be a suspension order of eight months.”
https://www.rcvs.org.uk/concerns/disciplinary-hearings/
The lecture, which will take place at 4:30pm on Friday 6th April in the Premier Lounge, Arena Birmingham, is presented by Dr Ivan Crotaz BVetMed MRCVS and human anaesthesiologist Dr Muhammed Nasir MBBS BSc FFARCSI MRCA (pictured right).
Chris Geddes MRCVS, Marketing Manager for Docsinnovent, says the lecture is not to be missed for two reasons: "Firstly, the topic is very current – a lot of new information is emerging about regurgitation and reflux in our veterinary patients. We are learning that the starving times we have all been recommending for years may not be ideal after all.
"Secondly, the lecture will be presented by both a vet with an interest in airway management (Dr Crotaz) and a renowned human anaesthesiologist (Dr Nasir) – so we as a profession can learn from what is happening in the field of human medicine."
The session will include a review of the situation in human anaesthesia. The anatomy of the upper airway and oesophagus of the major small animal veterinary species will be examined as well as the pathogenesis, occurrence and disease associated with reflux.
Pre-, intra- and post-operative management will be discussed, as well as current recommendations for starving veterinary patients.
The lecture is free for BSAVA attendees to attend and will be followed by drinks and nibbles supplied by Docsinnovent, who are also exhibiting at BSAVA congress on stand 1006.
Novartis Animal Health is launching a new in-practice healthcare initiative designed to raise owner awareness about the importance of regularly treating their pet for fleas and ticks. The Flea & Tick Patrol is supported by a range of eye-catching marketing materials to create a talking point with owners.
Rolling out from August 2008, practices can decide when they wish to run their Flea & Tick Patrol campaign. Interested parties should contact their local Novartis territory manager to find out how.
"Our Flea & Tick Patrol initiative focuses on educating owners about the importance of regularly treating their dog for fleas and ticks and raising awareness of the risks to canine and human health if they don't," said Verity Page, brand manager at Novartis. "We're providing practices with the tools to ensure they engage with clients on this subject. This campaign is about responsible pet ownership - reinforcing the benefits about the health and welfare of their dog and family.
Owners should leave the practice with a positive message about flea and tick control and have a greater understanding of the hidden dangers."
The Flea & Tick Patrol campaign could help to increase business and practice revenue. "Previous campaigns we have implemented in practice have shown that these types of awareness initiatives do add value to a practice's existing services as well as establish good client relationships," added Verity.
Marketing materials include a waiting room poster & display kit, window banner, badges, stickers and a public relations tool kit for use in the practice's communications. For more information about the Flea & Tick Patrol campaign, practices should contact their local Novartis Animal Health territory manager or call the Practice Support Line on 0800 854100.
Ms Evans was charged with causing or allowing a veterinary nurse colleague to order a prescription-only medicine from a practice supplier knowing that it was intended for human use, and made a false entry prescribing the medication on the clinical records of a cat belonging to her nurse colleague.
She was also charged with falsely recording details purporting to be the results of the blood tests on cat and then entering notes on the animal's clinical history which falsely indicated that there had been a meaningful result, and then indicating to the animal's owner that there had been a meaningful result, when in fact the tests had failed to produce any meaningful results.
The final charge was that her conduct in making the false entry for the prescription-only medication, and all elements of the second charge was dishonest and misleading.
Ms Evans admitted the first charge on the basis that she had allowed rather than caused the order to be made, all the other facts of this charge were admitted.
She admitted the second charge on the basis that she had failed to inform the cat’s owner of the test results, all the other facts of this charge were admitted.
She also admitted that elements of her conduct had been dishonest and misleading.
Having found the charges proven by Ms Evans’ admissions, the Committee considered whether her admitted actions and conduct amounted to serious professional misconduct.
Ms Evans, through her legal counsel, accepted that the admitted charges passed the threshold for serious professional misconduct, though that question still needed to be determined independently by the Committee.
The Committee found that Dr Evans’ conduct had breached several key parts of the Code of Professional Conduct and its supporting guidance, particularly around honesty and integrity.
It also found aggravating factors in this case, including the risk to human health by allowing the prescription-only medication to be ordered knowing it was for human use, the abuse of her professional position, the breach of client trust, the potential adverse impact on the welfare of the cat for whom she falsified the blood test records, and the potential adverse impact on the welfare of the cat for whom she had falsely recorded the prescription-only medicine.
The Committee found no mitigating factors relating to the facts.
Paul Morris, chairing the Committee and speaking on its behalf, said in relation to the first charge: “In the Committee’s view, this irresponsible approach to a prescription-only medicine risked human health, potentially compromised an animal’s welfare, since the clinical record suggested the cat had been given Fluconazole when it had not, constituted an abuse of the trust placed in her as a registered veterinary surgeon and was in breach of legal provisions designed to safeguard human health.
“Such behaviour falls far below the standard expected of a registered veterinary surgeon, undermines public confidence in the profession and would be considered deplorable by colleagues and the public alike.
"The Committee was thus satisfied that charge 1 on its own amounts to disgraceful conduct in a professional respect.”
He added: “Acting dishonestly runs contrary to one of the most fundamental principles of the profession.
"The public need to know that they can rely on the honesty and integrity of the people to whom they entrust the care and welfare of their animals.
“Further, Dr Evans’ conduct in both incidents had the potential to undermine public confidence in the profession of veterinary surgery and bring the profession into disrepute.
"In all the circumstances, the Committee was satisfied that Dr Evans’ behaviour as reflected in charge 2 fell far short of the standard expected of a veterinary surgeon and amounted to disgraceful conduct.
“Accordingly, the Committee found proved the allegation that Dr Evans was guilty of disgraceful conduct in a professional respect.”
Having found serious professional misconduct in relation to all charges, the Committee considered what the most appropriate and proportionate sanction would be for Ms Evans’ actions and conduct.
In doing so, it considered 137 positive references and testimonials from Dr Evans’ professional colleagues and clients, poor staff morale at the practice at the time as well as compelling, exceptional evidence relating to Dr Evans’s health at the time of the two incidents.
In mitigation, the Committee considered the fact that Dr Evans had no previous disciplinary history and had a hitherto unblemished career as a veterinary surgeon; her open and frank admissions; the circumstances of pressures at work exacerbated by Dr Evans’ desire to please everyone and not let anyone down; the fact that Dr Evans was feeling very isolated; the significant insight into her conduct and its impact; effective and targeted remediation to ensure there would be no likelihood of the conduct being repeated; genuine expressions or remorse and apology; support from her employers; and the very significant number of positive testimonials.
Summing up the Committee’s decision on sanction, Mr Morris said “In all the, somewhat exceptional, circumstances of this case, the Committee was satisfied that a reprimand and a warning not to behave in this way again, would provide adequate protection to animals, as it was satisfied Dr Evans was most unlikely to ever make such a flawed set of decisions again.
“The Committee was satisfied that Dr Evans does not represent a risk to animals going forward, indeed from the character evidence it is clear that she always puts the welfare of animals first.
"She has also shown, since this episode, that she can work under pressure and not resort to making bad decisions and thus the Committee considered the wider public interest would best be served in this case by a reprimand and a warning.
“Notwithstanding the serious nature of Dr Evans' conduct, the Committee was satisfied that a fully informed member of the public would not be shocked if Dr Evans were allowed to continue to practise.
“The decision of this Committee is, therefore, that Dr Evans be reprimanded and warned about her behaviour.
"Dr Evans should, however, be under no illusion of how serious it is to have a finding of disgraceful conduct in a professional respect made against her and she should not take lightly the decision of this Committee to reprimand and warn her.”
www.rcvs.org.uk/disciplinary
At first glance, one might ask why? After all, who - other than the pilot - would fly with Thomas Cook sober?
However, there's a world of difference between being not entirely sober and Ms Heyes's level of intoxication, which according to the judge at Greater Manchester Magistrates Court, made her 'every passenger's worst nightmare', and earned her a sentence of 80 hours community service, a victim surcharge of £80 and £250 in costs.
At the start of her disciplinary hearing, Ms Heyes admitted the facts of her 2020 conviction, but denied that the conviction rendered her unfit to practise as a veterinary nurse.
The Committee then considered whether Ms Heyes's conduct amounted to serious professional misconduct.
The Disciplinary Guidance states: “A conviction may be related to professional or personal behaviour and whether it renders a respondent unfit to practise is a matter of judgment for the Disciplinary Committee.
"Behaviour unconnected with the practice of veterinary surgery can cause concerns about the protection of animals or the wider public interest.”
The Committee concluded that the conviction and underlying behaviour was sufficiently serious that it required a finding that Ms Heyes was unfit to practise veterinary nursing on public interest grounds and that it also breached Code 6.5 of the Code of Professional Conduct for Veterinary Nurses which states: ‘Veterinary nurses must not engage in any activity or behaviour that would be likely to bring the profession into disrepute or undermine public confidence in the profession’.
The Committee then considered the most appropriate sanction for Ms Heyes, taking into account the relevant aggravating and mitigating factors.
Aggravating factors included the risk Ms Heyes caused to passengers, including children and that she had behaved recklessly, falling far below the standard to be expected of a member of the veterinary nursing profession.
In mitigation, the Committee considered this was a single and isolated incident, Ms Heyes had no previous disciplinary findings against her and following her conviction she had shown developing insight.
It also noted that she had continued to practise as a competent and dedicated veterinary nurse.
Cerys Jones, chairing the Committee and speaking on its behalf, said: “The Committee decided to reprimand Ms Heyes because of its finding that the charge amounted to disgraceful conduct and rendered Ms Heyes unfit to practise.
"Such a sanction was necessary in the Committee’s view because the conviction brought the profession into disrepute.
"Whilst the charge was not so serious as to require suspension or removal from the register, the Committee decided it is necessary to issue a formal warning to Ms Heyes as to her future conduct.
“Taking into account the overall circumstances of the case including the positive references and the fact that a number of mitigating factors set out in the Disciplinary Committee Sanctions Guidance were present in this case, the Committee was satisfied that this sanction would meet the public interest and protect the reputation of the profession and uphold standards within the profession; thereby maintaining public confidence in the College as the regulator for veterinary nurses.”
The full details of the hearing and the Committee’s decision can be found at www.rcvs.org.uk/disciplinary
A new programme to help reduce the stress of pets suffering a reaction to sudden loud noises such as fireworks and thunderstorms, has been launched by the makers of Zylkène.
Intervet / Schering-Plough Animal Health, which manufactures Zylkène, a product to help manage stress in dogs and cats, has developed the programme in association with animal behaviour experts at Bristol University.
The Zylkène Sound Desensitisation Programme, to be used in conjunction with Zylkène, features sound tracks, advice, written and verbal instructions and a practice track designed to help pet owners find a long-term solution to a common and distressing problem. The CD features fireworks, thunder and lightening and gunshots sounds and includes component sound tracks to avoid overwhelming very sensitive pets.
One CD will be given away free of charge with every box of Zylkène purchased between 1 September and 30 November, while stocks last.
The Zylkène Sound Desensitisation Programme complements an educational waiting room display and owner information sheets which provide owners with practical advice and techniques to help pets cope throughout the firework season.
Melanie Dass, product manager at Intervet /Schering-Plough Animal Health, said: "The sad fact is that just under half the UK dog population reacts to sudden loud noises, as do many cats. Stress caused by unexpected sounds manifests in many ways from hiding, house soiling or attempts to escape.
"Unfortunately, if this problem is not correctly managed, firework-related stress reactions can become progressively more severe and can extend to other sounds such as thunder and even everyday noises such as car doors being slammed. Desensitisation is a proven method of changing a pet's response to sudden loud noises. This new Zylkène Sound Desensitisation Programme means we can now offer pet owners short and long term problems to a common and distressing problem."
From June 2008, the Royal Veterinary College (RVC) will be introducing a Graduate Diploma in Professional and Clinical Veterinary Nursing tailored to the needs of practicing nurses.
Detailed market research of nurses working in practice has shown a high demand for the course. From those surveyed via a questionnaire, 63% said they are interested in the Diploma course on a part-time basis over a 2 year period. With regards to how nurses wish to study, 83% of respondents confirmed their interest in distance/online learning.
The programme is aimed at veterinary nursing practitioners who wish to develop higher level professional and clinical veterinary nursing skills with emphasis on critical thinking by combining theoretical knowledge with practical application. It is a distance learning programme whereby students will learn via the College's Virtual Learning Environment (VLE).
Programme Director Perdi Welsh explains: "As this is a post-qualification award the nursing practitioners who would benefit from it are already in work. Therefore the course needs to be flexible to fit around their busy lives and their commitment to their employer.
"E-learning provides an ideal mode of study for qualified veterinary nurses wishing to advance their knowledge and skills. Distance learning means that students do not have to take time off work and travel to attend regular sessions at college."
Modules are hosted within the RVC Virtual Learning Environment, where students have access to course material, will participate in group discussion, carry out on-line tasks and collaborate with a small group of other students enrolled on the module to share experiences.
For more information call 01707 666660, email vnschool@rvc.ac.uk or log onto www.rvc.ac.uk/VNdiploma
Mr Seymour-Hamilton was originally struck off in 1994 after his Kent practice was found to be unhygienic and unsterile with poor record keeping.
However, he has always maintained that the reason his premises were unhygienic and unsterile was because they were closed.
As in previous applications, he said his reason for applying for restoration was to help him gain recognition for his alleged herbal and natural remedy discoveries and that he had no intention of going back into general practice.
As with previous applications, the Committee said that Mr Seymour-Hamilton has shown no real insight into the conduct underlying the original findings and nor has he shown insight into matters identified by previous restoration hearings.
The Committee also considered that Mr Seymour-Hamilton has been off the Register for some 31 years and would therefore need prolonged, intensive, formal retraining to ensure that he was now fit to practise, without which he might pose a risk to animal welfare.
Mr Seymour-Hamilton's case was not helped by the fact that he indicated that he had practised veterinary surgery while off the Register – including conducting two spay procedures in Calais, France, and treating two of his own dogs for cancer.
He also referred to having cultured faecal bacteria in a witness’ kitchen.
The Committee felt it was concerning that Mr Seymour-Hamilton thought these things were compatible with being on the Register and upholding the professional standards expected of a veterinary surgeon.
Paul Morris, chairing the Committee and speaking on its behalf, said: “Mr Seymour-Hamilton still lacks an understanding as to why he has not been restored in the past.
"Apart from additional CPD, he has not set about effectively addressing any of his shortcomings.
"He relies passionately on his research, yet he does not support that research with any peer-reviewed publications, indeed all his attempts to gain recognition have been rebuffed.”
He added: “The Committee is firmly of the view that after such a prolonged period of failing to be reinstated as a veterinary surgeon, Mr Seymour-Hamilton has to face the reality that his continued applications, taking up time, resources and expense (which is ultimately borne by all those veterinary surgeons who are on the Register), are vexatious and ultimately unlikely to succeed.
“Whilst the College cannot prevent him from continuing to apply to be restored to the Register, Mr Seymour-Hamilton should by now realise that this is not a good use of the College’s finite resources.
"He is now 86 years old and has not practised for over thirty years and in fact has now been off the Register for longer than he was on it.
"This is now the twelfth time he has been found to be not fit to be restored to the Register.
"The Committee hopes Mr Seymour-Hamilton will now take time seriously to reflect and take into account the impact to all concerned of his continued applications, before deciding to submit any more.”
https://www.rcvs.org.uk/concerns/disciplinary-hearings
Bayer Animal Health, manufacturer of Advocate, is launching an advertising campaign to support its 'Be Lungworm Aware' initiative, which aims to educate pet owners on the spread of Angiostrongylus vasorum and encourage them to seek advice from their local veterinary practice.
The campaign will see a new TV 'public information' style advertisement targeting dog owners. It will air on 20 national TV channels during April including ITV1, 2 and 3, Sky 1, 2 and 3, More 4 and Film4, with air time dedicated to GMTV and daytime ITV.
The TV advertising campaign will focus on the parasite's intermediate hosts - slugs and snails - and the ease in which dogs can become infected with the parasite by picking up something as simple as a toy with a slug attached to it.
Print advertisements will also be running in national newspapers and women's consumer magazines with a focus on publications read by pet owners.
Marketing support material is available for veterinary practices wishing to participate in the 'Be Lungworm Aware' initiative. For further details, or to order the new practice materials, please contact your Bayer representative or ring 0845 2574798 quoting 'Be Lungworm Aware'.
What does a well-known flea & tick collar have in common with the World Cup?
It transpires that the same Bayer MaterialScience technology which is being used by Adidas to make the 'Brazuca' - the new official match ball - more stable, elastic and hardwearing, is also used to allow imidacloprid and flumethrin to diffuse consistently through Seresto flea and tick collars for up to 8 months.
There you go. Bet you didn't know that.
Miss Herdman faced three charges.
The first was that she indicated to a friend that she would supply diazepam and/or tramadol for use by their husband.
The second was that she supplied diazepam and/or tramadol and/or gabapentin.
The third was that she gave advice on the dosages of diazepam and/or tramadol and/or gabapentin.
Miss Herdman was not present at the hearing and was unrepresented, but the Committee determined that it was appropriate to proceed in her absence as she had been notified, was aware that the hearing was taking place and her absence was voluntary.
However, Miss Herdman had been in contact to indicate her pleas to the charges.
She admitted the intention to supply diazepam and/or tramadol and that she had provided advice on the dosages.
She also admitted that she had supplied diazepam but strongly denied that she had supplied tramadol and/or gabapentin.
Taking all the evidence into account (including messages sent by Miss Herdman and her admissions), the Committee found proven the charges in relation to the intent to supply and the advice on dosages.
The Committee also found proven the charge in relation to the supply of diazepam, but found not proved the charge relating to the supply of tramadol and gabapentin for several reasons, including the fact that the messages sent by Miss Herdman did not point unequivocally to her actually suppling each of the drugs to which she referred.
There was no suggestion that the diazepam was stolen from her place of work.
The Committee found that Miss Herdman’s actions had breached paragraphs 1.5 and 6.5 of the Code of Professional Conduct for Veterinary Nurses.
The committee judged that there were a number of aggravating features of Miss Herdman’s conduct, including that she was not qualified or authorised to prescribe medication to animals, let alone to human beings and that providing a controlled drug to a person who was already taking various painkilling medications was reckless.
The Committee also felt that a reasonable and informed member of the public would be very concerned to learn that a veterinary nurse had supplied a controlled drug to a friend for their personal use.
Regarding the sanction for Miss Herdman, Paul Morris, chairing the Veterinary Nursing Disciplinary Committee and speaking on its behalf, said: “Drawing all the material together, and considering the matter as a whole, the Committee had to impose a proportionate sanction for an isolated incident of serious professional misconduct which arose out of a misguided attempt to help a friend.
"The conduct in question was entirely out of keeping with Miss Herdman’s usual practice and there is no real risk that it will be repeated.
"However, this case was much too serious to take no further action and no useful purpose would be served by postponing a sanction.
“The Committee considered that a warning or reprimand would not be sufficient to satisfy the public interest as veterinary nurses are trusted by the public to deal with medication responsibly and failure to do constitutes a severe breach of trust.
“The Committee therefore considered a period of suspension sufficient to meet the public interest in maintaining the reputation of the profession and declaring and upholding proper standards of conduct for members of the profession.
“The Committee also considered whether a removal order would be appropriate but concluded it would be disproportionate and that such a step would remove from the profession an experienced, competent and valuable veterinary nurse for no discernible benefit.
“It was decided that Miss Herdman’s registration be suspended for a period of three months – a period which is sufficient to mark the gravity of the misconduct while taking into account the circumstances in which it arose.”
Merial has announced the results of a survey which suggests that whilst diagnosis of gastric ulcers in horses is improving, there is still room for improvement.
The survey of 50 equine vets, which was conducted in May this year, showed that the number of practices owning a scope has more than doubled over the past six years. Half of equine practices now own a scope. Over the same period the average number of monthly scopes has risen from 1.5 to 9.25 and referrals from practices without a scope has risen by 65%.
Merial's Louise Radford MRCVS said: "The survey also showed that symptom recognition among vets prompting the need for an endoscopy has also risen. The vast majority of vets now consider changes in behaviour, loss of appetite and poor performance as potential signs. In addition, 100% of those surveyed would consider an endoscopy when presented with the signs of recurring colic.
"However whilst this is great progress, when diagnosis is compared to the incidence of ulcer, we know that more needs to be done. It is believed that up to 30% of leisure horses have some degree of gastric ulceration, and this increases in sports horses, yet just a fraction of this figure represents those scoped."
Richard Hepburn BVSc MS(Hons) CertEM(IntMed) DipACVIM(LA) MRCVS, American and RCVS Specialist in Equine Internal Medicine at B&W Equine Hospital says he is pleased that more horses are being scoped for gastric ulcers but says that further education is needed: "We've seen a huge leap in the appreciation of the incidence of gastric ulceration in non-racing animals, which long term will better our understanding of the individual clinical relevance of particular lesions, and the benefits of treatment and management change.
"This should improve both performance and horse welfare, as well as increasing client satisfaction. Despite the huge increase in the diagnosis and treatment of equine gastric ulcers it is still believed that many horses go undiagnosed."
Virbac Animal Health is calling on practices to prepare for Canine Prostate Awareness Month (CPAM), being held by the company in November to highlight the prevalence of the disease and to encourage owners and practices to test for it.
Last year, 400 practices sign up to support the event, and the company says that feedback from many taking part confirmed a significant lack of understanding among clients as to the risk of prostate disease in dogs.
Canine Prostate Awareness Month is timed to coincide with 'Movember', when thousands of men grow moustaches to raise funds for male prostate and testicular cancer. During the month, Virbac is providing promotional materials including dog leads; educational and display materials and a press release for local media.
Chris Geddes MRCVS, Virbac Product Manager, said: "With more than 80% of entire male dogs over the age of five suffering from Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia (BPH)¹, we wanted to give practices a reason to highlight the risk and encourage owners to test for it. Timing CPAM to coincide with Movember seemed a good way to interest dog owners at a time when some might be considering the state of their own prostate.
"The support we received last year confirmed that it was a topic which practices were keen to discuss with dog owners so we're already planning to make the initiative even bigger and better this year."
Stephen Bamber, Principal at participating practice Warwickshire-based Avonvale Vets, added: "CPAM was an attractive campaign as it was a bit different. It offered the opportunity to see some of our older patients with other, less obvious pathologies. Non-symptomatic testicular tumours in particular surfaced in the checks we did. Clients generally had little idea about dogs' prostates so it gave us a good platform to discuss prostate disease with them."
Virbac has introduced OdelisTM CPSE, the first ELISA test to screen for, diagnose and monitor BPH, available from three UK diagnostic laboratories. The company says it's a cost-effective, precise and reliable alternative to rectal palpation. Virbac also offers Ypozane, a tablet treatment for BPH which takes effect within a week and lasts for up to six months.
Chris added: "BPH is an unpleasant condition occurring in nearly all entire dogs as they get older, but one which is entirely treatable. We hope that, by running our Prostate Awareness Campaign at a time when the media spotlight is already on the dangers of prostate cancer in men, we can help spread the message that owners should be monitoring older dogs for signs of prostate disease."
For further information on the Prostate Awareness Campaign, email cpam@virbac.co.uk; contact your Virbac Territory Manager or contact the company direct on 01359 243243.
References
Mr Chaney was charged with stealing Trazadone and Metacam from the Hampstead practice he worked at, and of unlawfully possessing Trazadone and Metacam. He was also charged with unlawfully administering Butorphanol to a dog and failing to record the administration of the drug in the dogs records. He was also charged with making and deleting false entries into the clinical records of his own dog to the effect that it had been seen by a vet at the practice and that Metacam had been prescribed. The final charge was that his conduct over the false records was dishonest and misleading.
The Committee heard that Mr Chaney’s conduct in relation to the first two charges was discovered when, in July 2018, the Department for Environment Food & Rural Affairs (Defra), accompanied by police officers, executed a warrant (for unrelated matters) on the property where he lived. During the course of the search, police officers found Metacam and Trazadone in Mr Chaney’s bedroom which did not seem to have a prescription and so Defra officers launched an investigation.
During the course of this investigation, a Defra investigator was also provided with a video and messages that indicated Mr Chaney had unlawfully administered Butorphanol to a Husky dog in frustration with the animal as it was being too noisy.
The Committee heard that, in November 2018, Mr Chaney accepted a police caution in relation to his possession of Trazadone and Metacam, and the unlawful administration of Butorphanol. The Committee also heard that following the police attending his property and finding the medicines, Mr Chaney went on to create false records at the practice in relation to the examination of his dog in order to justify his unlawful possession of the drugs.
The Committee found all the charges against Mr Chaney proven.
The Committee then went on to consider if the charges, taken both individually and in totality, amounted to disgraceful conduct in a professional capacity.
Judith Way, chairing the Committee and speaking on its behalf, said: "The Committee had no doubt that administering a sedative to an animal that required prescription by a veterinary surgeon and then failing to record it in the clinical record with the resultant risk to the animal’s welfare due to lack of knowledge of the administration fell far below the expected standard.
"The Committee also considered that possession of prescription only medicines by a registered veterinary nurse, without the sanction of law, having stolen the same from a practice also fell far below the expected standard.
“The Committee also considered that tampering with the clinical record for a dog, in order to create a misleading impression and in doing so dishonestly, was conduct which fell far below the expected standard.
“Taken as a whole, the Committee considered that Mr Chaney’s conduct had fallen far below the expected standard.”
The Committee therefore found him guilty of disgraceful conduct in a professional capacity in relation to all seven charges.
It next went on to consider what sanction, if any, to impose taking into account the aggravating and mitigating factors.
In considering the aggravating factors, the Committee took into account that Mr Chaney’s conduct had presented a risk of injury to the animal and that much of his conduct was pre-meditated. It also considered that Mr Chaney’s conduct involved a breach of trust to both the practice where he was employed and the owner of the Husky, and it was also an abuse of position in gaining access to and stealing medication. Lastly, because the charges related to two separate incidents, there was a common thread in Mr Chaney disregarding rules on veterinary medicines.
In mitigation, the Committee considered that Mr Chaney had reflected on and gained some insight into his behaviour, and acknowledged he had made admissions at the outset of the hearing, including apologising for and showing regret about aspects of his conduct.
However, the Committee did not believe he had addressed his understanding of the effect that this conduct had on the risk to animals, the standards of the profession or the maintenance of public confidence in the profession. In mitigation the Committee also considered a number of positive character references and his previous good character.
Judith Way said: “The Committee determined that it would not be sufficient in the circumstances of the case, to satisfy the public interest to suspend the Respondent’s registration. In its view this case involved a serious departure from identified professional standards. The disregard had been deliberate, in relation to ignoring legislation in respect of prescription-only medication and dishonesty in stealing medication.
"There was evidence of attitudinal issues in relation to that behaviour and insufficient evidence of the development of insight. The dishonesty in relation to the clinical record relating to dog O [his own dog] had been an attempt to conceal earlier dishonesty relating to the theft of the medication. In administering the Butorphanol to dog L [the Husky], Mr Chaney had been putting his own interests in quieting the dog ahead of the dog’s interests, which would have required checking with a veterinary surgeon as to appropriate steps.
"The Committee acknowledged that, by directing removal, there would likely be professional reputational damage to Mr Chaney and possible financial loss. However, in the view of the Committee the requirements of the public interest outweighed these factors.”
Accordingly, the Registrar of the RCVS was directed to remove Mr Chaney’s name from the Register of Veterinary Nurses.
Full details can be found here: https://www.rcvs.org.uk/concerns/disciplinary-hearings/
Ludivine, who graduated in 2008, has come over from America to take up the new post, having just completed a three-year residency at the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia.
She said: "I’m really enjoying working as part of a great team and working with the various different disciplines here.
"I’m passionate about my ECC speciality and I have a keen interest in respiratory diseases, trauma and acid base disturbances.
"I also like teaching and being updated about the most recent studies in ECC to ensure I can deliver the most up-to-date care possible for our patients."
Ludivine was born in France and originally studied at her home town university in Lyon, progressing to a rotating internship there after graduation.
In 2012, she worked as an emergency veterinary surgeon in several general practices across France and Switzerland, before moving to the United States in 2014 to see how ECC medicine was practiced overseas.
First, she undertook an ECC internship at the University of California, followed by a three-year residency at the University of Pennsylvania.
Away from work, Ludivine enjoys horse riding, running, work-outs and practising her skiing in the French Alps. She also has two dogs Dalhi her Golden Retriever and Baya her German Shepherd.
For more information, visit www.willows.uk.net/en-GB/specialist-services.
Agria Pet Insurance has announced a competition for two veterinary nurses to win tickets and hotel accommodation for the BVNA Congress '00-heaven' Party Night.
BVNA Congress is taking place at the Telford International Centre in Shropshire from 11th-13th October, with Party Night happening on Saturday 12th.
To enter the competition, you need to complete a 2-minute online poll about how your practice uses pet insurance. Click here
The competition closes on 6th October 2013.
Burgess Excel has extended its range with what it claims is the UK's most absorbent paper bedding for rabbits, guinea pigs and chinchillas, and a new 'sensitive' variety of nuggets for rabbits and guinea pigs.
Burgess says the bedding is made from environmentally-friendly high quality virgin wood pulp which locks away moisture and liquids quickly and securely. The company also highlights the fact that it is made using advanced, specialised drying and dust extraction techniques to prevent respiratory problems and eye infections which can occur when there is a large amount of dust present in a fibrevore's environment.
The new rabbit and guinea pig nuggets contain 46% Beneficial Fibre with a grain free recipe for delicate digestive systems.
To find out more about the new products, visit www.excelfeedingplan.com/ or contact 0800 413 969.
The survey was conducted after it was found that only 10% of job adverts on VetSurgeon.org and 16% on VetNurse.co.uk include an indication of the salary. By contrast, a quick analysis of the adverts on other leading job boards for professionals found that 66% of jobs advertised for doctors include salary details, 87% for human nurses, 64% for architects and 92% for computer programmers.
The survey received 1,147 responses: 524 from veterinary surgeons and 622 from veterinary nurses.
When asked how they would likely react to job advertisements seen online or in print:
75.7% of vet nurses said they would read adverts which display a salary first (before those that don't)
54.5% of vet nurses said they would respond to adverts which display the salary first (before those that don't).
28.8% of vet nurses said they would ignore ads that don't show a salary.
Only 18.4% said they would consider the job adverts equally, regardless of whether or not they displayed a salary.
Respondents were then asked what impression it gave them if a practice advertised a job without stating a salary. 66% of vet nurses said 'negative', 32.2% said 'neutral' and 1.1% said 'positive'.
The final question asked how annoying it is to read job adverts which only describe a salary using words like 'competitive' or 'generous'.
1.9% of veterinary nurses said: 'Not at all annoying"
30.7% said 'Mildly irritating'
67% said 'Very annoying. It's a waste of my time to ring and find my definition of 'competitive' is not the same as the advertiser's.'
By comparison, veterinary surgeons were a little less salary conscious, but very much the same patterns emerged (full results of the vet survey here).
The bottom line is that if you spend £99 to advertise a job on VetNurse and you don't advertise the salary, you're effectively throwing away £28 there and then. Might as well just set fire to a £20 and a £10 note. Even if you think that is a price worth paying (and let's not forget that it'll be a considerably more expensive mistake if you advertise elsewhere), you then have to think of the monetary value of having sent someone away with a negative impression of your practice, or worse still if you described the salary as 'competitive' or 'generous'.
It is worth highlighting that on VetNurse and VetSurgeon, employers are invited to advertise the 'Minimum Offer', described to jobseekers as the starting point for discussions, or a salary range. Both are designed to give jobseekers something to go on, whilst still allowing room for negotiation.
To help employers get the most out of their recruitment adverts on VetNurse.co.uk and VetSurgeon.org, we're sharing a special training video, which you can watch below. If nothing else, a quick reminder of what you need to include in the advert:
The inaugural Vet Charity Challenge, which took place on 15th September at the Royal Agricultural College in Cirencester, has raised at least £20,000 for charity.
Twenty-six teams of four people took part, spending seven hours walking, running, cycling, kayaking, orienteering, along with a few mental physical challenges along the way.
The Challenge started in the morning with a sprint to collect puzzles for teams to solve. This determined time slots when teams could attempt six mental and physical puzzles during the morning session. The teams then headed off on a walk or run around the surrounding countryside. The aim was to visit as many points on the map as possible. Each team could choose its own route. After lunch, the teams headed off again for the cycling stages, visiting places on the map in order to gain more points. Then finally it was onto the water for the kayaking stage.
The winning team was the Complete Animal from Hyde Park Veterinary Centre in London. Team captain Leah Morley said: "The event was great fun, really well organised, and all the teams seemed to have got right behind it. You really had to work as a team, playing to different peoples strengths both physically and mentally. Everyone had a fair chance of winning. We would really like to thank others in the practice and our clients who were massively generous in their support and sponsorship. Their response was quite inspirational and certainly had an impact in driving us to perform well. I think every practice should take part and we look forward to returning next year to defend our title."
All the teams enjoyed the day and met the challenges head on and were enthusiastic for the Vet Charity Challenge to continue next year. Head Nurse Angella McNellan from Glenbrae Veterinary Clinic in Bearsden, Glasgow said: "The Vet Charity Challenge has been brilliant fun, beautiful scenery, great challenges. It has really helped get fitter through training as a team after work during the summer. We cannot wait to do it all again next year."
Roger Dixon MRCVS from Ashbrook Equine Hospital in Cheshire said: "The Challenge has been great fun, we really enjoyed the teambuilding element. Also it was worth the pain to beat the farm team!"
Nicolette Hayward from team The Far Canals said: "The Vet Charity Challenge has been superb, enormous fun. We did absolutely no training and came in fourth, so we are very happy with that result."
Jason Rogers from BCF team Witness the Fitness said: "We really enjoyed the day, found it exhausting though, the kayaking was the toughest part, and we had quite a run back in the morning to get back in time."
To add to the level of exhaustion competitors were flung around the dance floor for a Ceilidh following a barbeque in the evening. The band consisted of organisers from the event including caller Brian Wright from Vets Now and competitors Nicolette Haywood and Jim Hughes.
For more information, see more photos and to register interest for the challenge in 2013 visit www.vetcharitychallenge.co.uk. Also follow Vet Charity Challenge and on Twitter @vetchallenge.
Prac-tic® - the spot-on flea and tick treatment from Novartis Animal Health has added a new claim to its licence.
It now states that adult fleas are killed before they lay eggs for a minimum of four weeks after treatment and, as the product completely eliminates egg production, it also breaks the flea life cycle.
Just over 17% of the RCVS membership voted in the Council elections - which the RCVS reports is consistent with previous turn-outs.
New faces on the RCVS Council include Richard Stephenson, Charles Gruchy and Catherine Goldie. Dr Barry Johnson (first elected to Council in 1985) and Dr Christopher Chesney (first elected in 1996) have been voted on for further terms. Dr Robert Ellis, who has had three previous periods on Council, has been re-elected.
Meanwhile about 9% of registered and listed veterinary nurses cast their vote in the VN Council elections. At 680, the number of votes was up 100 on last year, but the turnout remains disappointing low. Dot Creighton, current Vice-Chairman, will continue on Council for another term, and Katherine Kissick has been newly-elected.
Virbac Animal Health has launched an enhanced version of its flea and tick spot-on Effipro (fipronil) to help pet owners master the art of 'spotonologyTM - a Maureen-Lipmanesque term the company has coined to describe the optimum application of a spot on treatment.
Effipro is now presented in a clear pipette featuring 'Drop-lock' technology to provide precise finger tip control of the flow of liquid with no risk of drip or leakage. The pipette has also been redesigned to ensure it is simple to open and that users can easily check that all the treatment has been dispensed.
Virbac says Effipro is priced to offer an effective but affordable solution to parasite control. It is presented in client packs of four pipettes and in practice packs of 24 to offer flexible dispensing opportunities. It is also available in a spray form.
Victoria Hudson, Product Manager at Virbac, said: "Parasite control is a key revenue generator for many practices. It also presents a great opportunity to create loyal, bonded clients as fleas and ticks cause great concern to pet owners.
"Effipro is already a popular product but we know that some owners find using spot-ons difficult and worry about the risk of the liquid getting on to their fingers or on furniture, particularly if their pets move around while the treatment is being applied.
"With this in mind, we've taken a fresh look at the technology of spot-ons in order to ensure that we're providing a solution which is as simple and hassle-free as possible. As a first step, we've redesigned our pipette. Our unique Drop-lock technology means that owners can start or stop the flow of liquid with their finger tips, giving them full control over where and when the product is applied. The new see-through design and enhanced opening mechanism also make the new version of Effipro more convenient to use.
"We've had great feedback from practices which have trialled the product and believe it represents a significant step forward for users of spot-ons. We are, of course, providing a range of support materials and product promotions to support its launch and look forward to working with our customers to ensure that their clients become expert and enthusiastic 'Spot.on.ologists' during 2012.
For further information about Effipro contact your Territory Manager or call Virbac on 01359 243243.