Henry Schein said in a statement on Friday that it had sold the business in order to focus on its dental and medical markets and pursue new investment opportunities.
Covetrus says it will be using the experience, technology and global scale of the merged companies to provide veterinary practices with a more comprehensive set of integrated services and technology solutions, and tools to strengthen client relationships and grow their practice.
Covetrus launched on Nasdaq last Friday, when President and Chief Executive Officer Benjamin Shaw, said: "Today marks an important new chapter in the world of veterinary medicine, as we launch Covetrus as a new company listed on Nasdaq.
"We look forward to strengthening our customer relationships and expanding our veterinary practice partnerships worldwide as we bring more comprehensive and powerful solutions to market to meet their evolving needs and improve health and financial outcomes."
Jason has a very personal reason for supporting the charity: his wife is one of the 100 people diagnosed with MS each week: "My wife, Adele, was diagnosed with MS a few years ago and the support and information we have received from the MS Trust has been invaluable in helping us as a family to come to terms with the condition."
The MS Trust offers trusted information, a friendly voice to speak to and the funding and training of vital MS nurses. Each month the charity responds to on average 271 enquiries and sends out around 3,700 information booklets.
To support Jason's efforts, visit: uk.virginmoneygiving.com/jasondavidson
First they looked at the names of all the cats and dogs they saw in 2018, finding that the most popular names for dogs were Bella, Poppy and Alfie, whilst the most popular for cats were Charlie, Bella and Molly.
By comparison, the top ten names registered at the practice in the thirties were: Susie, Sally, Judy, Penny, Candy, Sam, Betty, Simon, Wendy and Bridget.
Honestly, who calls their dog Simon? Even in the 1930s.
Tom Ward, from White Cross Vets, said: "The most common names in our research reveal a leaning towards giving pets human names. It’s fascinating that this has gone full circle and was also a trend in the late 1930s, before names such as Fido, Patch, Sooty, Duke and Fluffy became popular with cats and dogs."
White Cross says that more recently it has also seen a surge of pets named after TV and film characters including Elsa from Frozen, Baloo from The Jungle Book, Peppa the cartoon pig, and Khaleesi, Sansa, Brienne and Tyrion, the Game of Thrones characters.
BSAVA President Sue Paterson said: "By signposting clients to extra downloadable advice or handing them a printed guide when they leave consultation room, we will hopefully reduce their temptation to run potentially misleading ‘Dr Google’ searches to find out more about the diagnosis."
The series includes:
My dog does not like other dogs
My dog has dental disease
My dog has diabetes
My dog has itchy skin
My dog has kidney disease
They join the PetSavers existing library of general online guides on Puppies, Kittens, Rabbits, Guinea pigs, Caring for your elderly pet and Losing your pet.
Printed versions of the new guides can be ordered by veterinary practices to use in their reception areas, in exchange for a donation to PetSavers.
The new guides can be downloaded at http://www.petsavers.org.uk/Pet-guides
60 veterinary surgeons, nurses and other team members from White Cross practices in Tividale, Guiseley, West Derby and Alvaston have formed 20 teams of three people, logging a total of 30,000 miles since the initiative was launched in February, or an average of 11,000 steps per team member per day.
James Harris MRCVS from White Cross Vets said: "We spend a lot of the day on our feet but really had no idea about the distance that we clock up. There are about 2,000 steps in a mile so we are walking more than five miles every day! We are always encouraging our clients to make sure their pets have a healthy lifestyle, so it’s great to practise what we preach.
"As well as the steps we take throughout the day many of us are also committed to sports and exercise regimes outside work and that has helped us to reach the top of the leaderboard for a few weeks. You might even find some of us marching on the spot to boost our step-counts and heart rates, so the Fitbit challenge is definitely keeping us active."
General manager Jo Jobling said: "We understand the vital importance of both physical and mental wellbeing, and our Fitbit challenge is a great way for our teams from across our 19 practices to work together to achieve a worthwhile healthy goal, as well as creating some healthy competition with colleagues in other practices. We also have an individual steppers league table which was recently topped by one of our veterinary nurses, Katie Rose from our Tividale practice. It might have helped that she completed a half marathon over that weekend though!"
This is despite the fact that 84% of the 524 veterinary professionals that were polled said they believe that veterinary wellness is very important to the success of their practice.
Perhaps as a consequence, the survey found many respondents taking steps to look after their own wellness, with 57% saying they have started an exercise regime, 54% saying they have taken up other hobbies outside work and 44% saying they are talking more openly to colleagues to share problems and offer support.
When questioned about the obstacles to improving wellness in their practice, 'staff not having the time to focus on it' was cited by 76% as the main barrier. 52% said it was not recognised as an issue, while a further 49% said that the lack of trained personnel to champion wellness was the biggest problem.
Of those practices which had initiated a wellness programme, 83% said it made a positive difference. The most commonly reported wellness initiatives were the provision of a counselling service (38%), online resources (32%), and appointing a practice wellness champion (30%).
When asked what one thing their practice could do to enhance veterinary wellness, the two most popular suggestions were:
Improved communication and support with more openness and empathy (26%)
Improved team working with more breaks and a quiet area for staff (24%)
10% said that an acknowledgement that wellness was actually an issue would be a start.
VET Festival organiser Nicole Cooper said: "What we find startling about these results is that, despite a growing appreciation of the importance of veterinary wellness, almost half of the UK’s practices still don’t recognise it as an issue.
"The good news from this survey is that many veterinary professionals are now starting to take responsibility for their own mental health, whether through taking up interests outside work or sharing problems and experiences more openly at work. We urge more practice leaders to step up and to prioritise enhancing the wellness and wellbeing of their dedicated teams.
Veterinary wellness is a focus for this year’s VET Festival, which takes place on 7-8 June at Loseley Park in Surrey. There'll be expanded Wellness Hub offering sessions run by the charity VetLife, yoga and talks on meditation and reducing stress.
Tickets for VET Festival can be purchased here: https://www.vetfestival.co.uk/delegate-info/ticket-information
There were two charges against Dr Mulvey. The first was that, between May and October 2018, she failed to provide the clinical history for an English Cocker Spaniel named Henry to the Tremain Veterinary Group, despite numerous requests. Also, that between August 2018 and October 2018, she failed to respond adequately or at all to Henry’s owner's requests for information, particularly his clinical records and details of insurance claims made for Henry by her practice.
The second charge was that in January/February 2019, she failed to respond to reasonable requests from the RCVS, particularly in relation to her treatment of Henry, her continuing professional development (CPD) and the status of her Professional Indemnity Insurance.
At the beginning of the hearing, Dr Mulvey admitted the facts and conduct alleged in the charges and also admitted that when her conduct was considered cumulatively, she was guilty of disgraceful conduct in a professional respect.
The Committee, having considered the evidence provided by the College and Dr Mulvey’s admissions found all the facts and conduct to be proved.
The Committee also concluded that Dr Mulvey's failure to respond to Henry's owners and to the College amounted to disgraceful conduct both when considered individually and cumulatively.
In respect of the first charge, the Committee decided that Dr Mulvey had breached the Code of Professional Conduct for Veterinary Surgeons by failing to provide clinical records or details of insurance claims.
This was an administrative part of the function of a veterinary surgeon’s role and that failure to provide clients with such information was unacceptable and fell far short of acceptable professional standards. The Committee noted that Dr Mulvey’s failure to provide details of insurance claims had occurred because she had not made those claims, despite offering to do so.
With regard to the second charge, the Committee concluded that Dr Mulvey’s failure to respond to five requests from the College for information about Henry was unacceptable.
The Committee also considered that the omissions took place in the context of Dr Mulvey’s previous Disciplinary Committee hearing in April 2018 during which she agreed to a number of undertakings including supervision on her professional practice by an appointed supervisor. It therefore decided that her failure to provide evidence of her CPD and Professional Indemnity Insurance to the College each individually amounted disgraceful conduct in a professional respect.
The Committee then went on to consider the sanction for Dr Mulvey in relation to the both charges that it had found proved and also in respect of the charges it had found proved at its earlier hearing on 26 April 2018 for which sanction had been postponed for a period of 1 year to enable Dr Mulvey to comply with undertakings she gave to the Committee to ensure that her practice met RCVS Core Standards by May 2019.
The Committee heard from Mr Stuart King MRCVS who had been appointed to act as a Workplace Supervisor for Dr Mulvey during the period of her Undertakings. Mr King provided the Committee with a report upon the extent to which Dr Mulvey had complied with the terms of her undertakings including the extent which she had implemented Dr King’s numerous recommendations.
The Committee also heard from Dr Byrne MRCVS an inspector for the RCVS’s voluntary Practice Standards Scheme that Dr Mulvey’s practice, when inspected by him in early April 2019, had not met RCVS PSS Core standards in a number of areas.
The Committee heard from Dr Mulvey and her Counsel that she accepted that she had not met RCVS Core standards as she had undertaken to do.
In reaching its decision as to sanction for all the matters, the Committee took into account that Dr Mulvey’s misconduct overall was serious because it was repeated.
The Committee also considered aggravating and mitigating factors.
Aggravating factors included the fact that the misconduct was sustained or repeated over a period of time (in relation to charge 1 for a period of approximately 4 months and in relation to charge 2 for approximately 6 weeks).
Other aggravating factors include the fact that Dr Mulvey’s conduct contravened advice issued by the Professional Conduct Department in letters sent to her, and that she had wilfully disregarded the role of the RCVS and the systems that regulate the veterinary profession.
Mitigating factors included that: there was no harm to any animal; there was no financial gain for Dr Mulvey or any other party; there was no ulterior motive behind Dr Mulvey’s conduct; and that Dr Mulvey had in fact both completed her minimum CPD requirement and secured Professional Indemnity Insurance, demonstrating that she had not attempted to hide such information from the College.
It also took into account that Dr Mulvey, prior to the first Disciplinary Committee’s hearing in 2018, worked without any previous disciplinary findings against her from 1976 to 2018. The Committee also noted that she had made efforts to comply with some of the undertakings.
Mr Ian Green, Chair of the DC and speaking on behalf of the Disciplinary Committee, said: "The Committee considered that a warning or reprimand was not an appropriate sanction that would meet the public interest. Instead, the Committee decided that a suspension order for a period of six months would allow Dr Mulvey sufficient time to focus on ensuring her practice met the Core Standards set out in the Practice Standards Scheme, without the daily demands of practising as a veterinary surgeon, and was a proportionate and sufficient sanction to meet the public interest.
"The Committee was satisfied that a period of six months met the public interest as it was sanctioning Dr Mulvey for two sets of similar misconduct which we had determined overall as serious. The Committee also believed that during these six months Dr Mulvey could reflect and reorganise her practice, and there would be little risk to animals and the public in her returning to practice."
Dr Mulvey has 28 days from being informed of the Committee’s decision to lodge an appeal with the Privy Council.
In August 2017, Georgina Bretman was found guilty of causing unnecessary pain and suffering to her two-year-old dog Florence by injecting the animal with insulin, causing the dog to suffer from hypoglycaemia, collapse, convulsions and seizures, for which it needed immediate veterinary treatment to avoid coma and death.
Following her conviction, Miss Bretman was sentenced to a Community Payback Order, with a requirement to carry out 140 hours of unpaid work. An order was also made to take Florence away from her and to ban her from owning a dog for two years.
At the VN Disciplinary Committee hearing, Miss Bretman admitted the facts as contained within the charge against her and the Committee found the charge proved.
The Committee went on to consider whether the charge rendered Miss Bretman unfit to practise.
The Committee heard from Miss Bretman’s counsel, Mr O’Rourke QC who indicated that Miss Bretman accepted that her conviction rendered her unfit to practise as a Registered Veterinary Nurse. The Committee found Miss Bretman’s actions in deliberately administering a poisonous substance to Florence thereby risking Florence’s death to be “very serious and deplorable conduct on the part of a veterinary nurse, a member of a profession specifically entrusted to look after and care for animals.” It also took into account the fact that Florence needed urgent veterinary treatment to avoid death and that Miss Bretman was in a position of trust over Florence as her owner.
Stuart Drummond, chairing the Committee and speaking on its behalf, said: "Miss Bretman’s conduct was also liable to have a seriously detrimental effect on the reputation of the profession and to undermine public confidence in the profession. The fact that she was a veterinary nurse was made clear at the trial and reported in the press. The Committee considered that members of the public would be rightly appalled that a Registered Veterinary Nurse had committed an offence of this kind.
The Committee was satisfied that this conduct fell far below the standard expected of a Registered Veterinary Nurse and that Miss Bretman’s conviction was of a nature and seriousness that rendered her unfit to practise."
The Committee then heard oral evidence from Miss Bretman in which she explained that she had always been passionate about working with animals and working in the veterinary profession and how she enjoyed her work as a veterinary nurse with a particular interest in hydrotherapy and rehabilitation.
She spoke about the devastating effect of the incident and the shame that was ‘brought down on her head’. She told the Committee that she had been suspended from her job and, since her conviction, had not worked as a veterinary nurse.
However, Miss Bretman said that, while she accepted and respected the verdict of the court, her stance remained that she had not done what was alleged and now hoped to rebuild her career as a veterinary nurse. She accepted that the offence of which she had been convicted was very serious, particularly for a veterinary nurse.
In considering Miss Bretman’s sanction the Committee took into account the aggravating and mitigating factors. Aggravating factors included the fact there was actual injury to an animal, that it was a pre-meditated and deliberate act against an animal for whom she was responsible, the fact that a medicinal product was misused, a lack of insight and a lack of remorse.
In mitigation the Committee took into account the fact she had no previous disciplinary history, had received positive references and testimonials and that, following the conviction, she demonstrated a willingness to be removed from the Register and to not work with animals to avoid causing embarrassment to the RCVS.
Stuart Drummond said: "The Committee was of the view that the nature and seriousness of Miss Bretman’s behaviour, which led to the conviction, was fundamentally incompatible with being registered as a veterinary nurse. The conduct represented a serious departure from professional standards; serious harm was deliberately caused to an animal; the continued denial of the offence demonstrated a complete lack of insight, especially in regard to the impact of her behaviour on public confidence and trust in the profession. In light of these conclusions, the Committee decided that the only appropriate and proportionate sanction was removal from the Register.
"In reaching this decision the Committee recognised the impact this was likely to have on Miss Bretman, which was unfortunate given her young age and her obvious passion for a career as a veterinary nurse. The Committee had considered with care all the positive statements made about her in the references and testimonials provided. However, the need to protect animal welfare, the reputation of the profession and thus the wider public interest, outweighed Miss Bretman’s interests and the Committee concluded that removal was the only appropriate and proportionate sanction. The Committee determined that it was important that a clear message be sent that this sort of behaviour is wholly inappropriate and not to be tolerated. It brought discredit upon Miss Bretman and discredit upon the profession".
The Committee then directed the RCVS Registrar to remove Miss Bretman’s name from the Register. Miss Bretman has 28 days from being notified of the Committee’s decision to submit an appeal.
Covering the topics of worming broodmares and foals, spring and summer worming and winter worming, a total of 20 AMTRA CPD points are available. Virbac says the 3 new training modules offer the opportunity to acquire additional CPD points in time for the June deadline.
The webinars can be accessed on demand at https://sqptraining.learnupon.com/users/sign_in
The allied professionals that the BVA says should be led by veterinary surgeons include: Registered Veterinary Nurses (RVNs), Official Auxiliaries/ Meat Hygiene Inspectors, embryo transfer technicians, equine dental technicians, foot trimmers, farriers, hydrotherapists, animal behaviourists and veterinary physiotherapists.
To clarify where the responsibility for a patient sits and how it is shared between veterinary surgeons and allied professionals, the new policy statement also calls for:
The regulation of allied professionals to include mandatory veterinary diagnosis and oversight and appropriate access to veterinary records as pre-requisites before treatment;
Clarity on the delegation of duties for RVNs under Schedule 3 of the Veterinary Surgeons Act and protection of the ‘veterinary nurse’ title in legislation;
Consultation with the veterinary profession on any regulatory changes that may arise as a result of technological or other innovation.
British Veterinary Association President Simon Doherty (pictured right) said: "Against an evolving landscape, it’s essential that the veterinary profession keeps pace with change and addresses the challenges and opportunities it presents.
"Vets across sectors have always worked closely with allied professionals. The hub and spoke model acknowledges and clarifies this working relationship with clear lines of accountability and responsibility for the animals under our care. It also emphasises that vets’ right to diagnose, prescribe, and undertake surgical procedures and medical treatments must not be undermined.
"An effective and efficient vet-led team can help deliver better animal health and welfare, improved client care, and more effective use of skills within the veterinary professions. Given the ongoing workforce shortages, a strengthened veterinary workforce also has the potential to ease recruitment and retention concerns for both vets and RVNs and offer improved wellbeing.
"BVA will continue working with professional bodies and organisations to formalise the hub and spoke model, promote the value of regulation, and drive up professional standards."
Firstly, the BVA recommends that more work needs to be done in order to clarify and communicate the duties that can already be delegated to Registered Veterinary Nurses under Schedule 3.
In addition, the Association says that:
there should be an expanded role for RVNs in general anaesthesia, where the veterinary surgeon maintains overall responsibility
consideration should be given to granting RVNs expanded rights to dispense POM-V flea and worming treatments
consideration should be given to expanding the role of RVNs in the management of chronic cases, including repeat dispensing
consideration should be given to the potential role for RVNs in dispensing contraceptives, anthelmintics and vaccines in a zoo setting
it would be beneficial to incorporate the Suitably Qualified Person (SQP) role within RVN training
The BVA also recommends that there should be accessible, flexible and professionally recordable post-registration awards for RVNs from all academic backgrounds, and has reiterated its call for the protection of the title of 'Veterinary Nurse.'
BVNA Junior Vice President Jo Hinde RVN (pictured right) said: "BVNA strongly supports the vet-led approach as we believe working together as a team is the best way to improve both patient and staff welfare. We are delighted to be working on this project with BVA and are using our best efforts to continue to strive to strengthen the role of the RVN.
"We have always believed the VN title needs to be protected and this is increasingly important as the veterinary profession adapts to new challenges. It is vital that owners can be confident that their pet is being looked after by well-trained and RCVS-registered staff, as well as there being more clarity surrounding Schedule 3 procedures.
"The support for the advancement of the nursing role through post-registration qualifications is a welcome development and we believe this will help enable RVNs to follow their passion for a particular subject and allow them to significantly increase their knowledge in specific areas of interest. When following the vet-led model, this would result in a strong team of individuals with in-depth knowledge that can enhance their patients’ care."
What do you think of these recommendations? Come and discuss here.
The company has created a waiting room board kit, social media pack and a video which surgeries can play on waiting room televisions.
The board kit comprises cut out images of items which are commonly found in a typical Christmas shopping basket which can be toxic or dangerous to pets. Meanwhile, the video explains the dangers pet owners need to be aware of throughout the year.
For practices which are limiting the number of people coming into the premises, TVM is also offering waterproof posters which can be displayed outside surgeries, along with Pet Dangers leaflets for clients to take home.
Will Peel, Product Manager of TVM UK, said: ‘We know that poisoning cases increase significantly over the Christmas period and while many pet owners are aware of the items which are toxic to their pets, it’s easy to get distracted during the festive season so the materials we have put together are intended as a reminder to be diligent and keep pets safe from harm.’
To claim your free Pet Dangers practice resource kit, visit https://www.tvm-uk.com/order-your-tvm-uk-christmas-pet-dangers-display-kit, contact your local territory manager, email help@tvm-uk.com or call 0800 0385868.
Generally, veterinary practices may remain open, but there are national variations in what services should be offered and how, including the conditions under which remote prescribing can be used to help support a case.
Wales currently has the tightest ‘firebreak’ restrictions, meaning practices can only provide essential and urgent work until midnight on 8 November 2020, thereafter, returning to usual operations in line with Wales’ standard measures around workplace safety.
England and Northern Ireland are under national restrictions (4 Nov – 2 Dec, and 16 Oct – 12 Nov, respectively), meaning practices can provide treatment essential for maintaining animal health and welfare, along with non-urgent work providing that social distancing measures and safe working can be maintained.
Veterinary surgeons practising in these three countries may also choose to support a case remotely at an earlier stage, for example, through the remote prescribing of POM-Vs without first having conducted a physical examination.
Scotland remains the only country under regional tiered restrictions, meaning practices can continue to provide treatment whilst maintaining social distancing; however, before remote prescribing is offered, veterinary surgeons should first consider whether the animal can be brought under their care.
The full guidance and corresponding flowcharts should be consulted together and are available at www.rcvs.org.uk/covidfaq2and www.rcvs.org.uk/covidfaq4.
Veterinary nurses, veterinary technicians and certain veterinary paraprofessionals around the world will soon be able to enrol for the first Distance Learning Veterinary Nurse (NCert)/ Veterinary Technician (VTCert)/Veterinary Paraprofessional (VPP) programmes.
The NCert, VTCert and VPP are due to launch in March 2021.
They each consist of eight modules, delivered using interactive online learning techniques. Delegates are guided through each module by a module tutor, while a discussion forum offers them the opportunity to share experiences and ideas with colleagues from around the world. Training in study skills and reflective practice is built into the programme to ensure that a holistic approach is taken to the learning experience.
Dr Charlotte French, Head of Curriculum and Quality at Improve International, said: “We wanted to create an exciting, practical and innovative learning experience that would offer the maximum flexibility to ambitious veterinary nurses and veterinary technicians anywhere in the world, who are keen to advance their career but need to fit their learning around their work and home responsibilities.
"We believe the modular structure and phased delivery of our programmes will offer a new level of accessibility and convenience to our delegates while giving them unique features, such as the opportunity to share their learning with colleagues from around the world and to gain support from vets and vet nurses who are specialised in their field.”
Assessment for the certificates will be undertaken by Improve’s assessment partner the International School of Veterinary Postgraduate Studies (ISVPS), and comprises:
Both examinations will be taken online with remote invigilation.
Dr Sheila Wills, Director of ISVPS, said: “Following feedback from candidates and our examiners, we have recently enhanced the examination process we offer to candidates to provide a robust assessment, while giving them the opportunity to clearly demonstrate that their learning has been understood and that they can apply it in a clinical setting.”
Further information on both programmes can be found here: https://www.improveinternational.com/uk/distance-learning-nurse/
The new Nutrition VNMA, which starts in March 2021, will be led by Georgia Woods RVN (pictured right) who holds the Canine and Feline Veterinary Health Nutrition Certificate and the American Veterinary Technician Specialist (VTS) Nutrition Certificate. Georgia is a Royal Canin Weight Management Clinic Nurse at the University of Liverpool, Small Animal Teaching Hospital, where she deals exclusively with pet obesity and nutrition.
The course, which is sponsored by Royal Canin, combines a series of online lectures, a practical teaching day and a variety of resources and quizzes, together with a discussion and Q&A forum.
The learning objectives are that by the end of the course, participants will be able to:
Following completion of the teaching, there is an assessment to help embed the learning experience.
VNs who complete the course will be awarded a BSAVA Veterinary Nurse Merit Award in Nutrition and will receive a certificate and badge. The course is also worth 30hrs CPD.
Lucie Goodwin, Head of Education said: “We are pleased to be able to add this important and highly topical course to our expanding repertoire of learning resources for RVNs. Practices really recognise the value of VNMAs and are continuing to send their nursing teams on multiple courses.”
The nutrition course costs £525.00 for BSAVA Members or £787.50 for Non-Members.
For further information visit: https://www.bsava.com/Education/VN-Merit-Awards or contact us courses@bsava.com
Before becoming a dragon, Jenny worked in banking for 30 years and will be sharing her experiences as an entrepreneur and business leader. She became CEO of cash machine company Hanco, bought out the business, turned it around and sold it for £50 million.
Jenny is supportive of the move to host BSAVA Congress online. She said: “Veterinary communities, like other professions, have seen the value that online technologies can offer, both for networking and socials, as well as essential CPD. We should all embrace these changes and look at the value that they can bring.”
The Congress programme is currently being finalised and the organisers say the emphasis is on ensuring the experience is an interactive as possible for each delegate. It will deliver more than 100 hours of CPD, delivered by globally recognised speakers.
BSAVA Congress 2021 Programme Committee Chair Andy Green said: ‘Whether a virtual or a live event our entire programme is proudly created by the profession, for the profession and we are committed to providing unrivalled education, with topical, clinically relevant and evidence-based content.”
There'll be a virtual commercial exhibition, where delegates will be able to chat with exhibitors from the comfort of their home or consult room. There will also be the ability to network with others in the profession, in face-to-face chat rooms. Professor Ian Ramsey, President of the BSAVA said: “BSAVA Congress 2021 is going to be one of the most innovative in the history of our events.
"While the pandemic circumstances we continue to find ourselves in are far from ideal, we must continue to evolve and progress as a profession. BSAVA Congress is a unique highlight in our calendar for next year and it is shaping up to be a truly memorable event."
For further information and to register your interest click here: https://www.bsavaevents.com/bsavacongress2021/en/page/home
The talk, entitled “Rabbit Dentistry: It Takes Two”, will be co-presented by Craig Tessyman, an exotics veterinary nurse who works alongside Molly at Rutland House Referral Hospital. Their talk will cover the diagnosis and management of dental disease. It is aimed at any veterinary surgeon or nurse who wants to learn more about best practice in rabbit dentistry.
Molly, who holds both a Certificate and Diploma in Zoological Medicine, said: "Dental disease is common amongst pet rabbits, so small animal vets often need to diagnose and treat dental problems.
"It can be challenging to manage these cases. Our aim with this talk is to help vets improve their clinical approach, and also to provide useful tips for nurses – we want to explain how the practice team can work together with these cases, along our theme of ‘it takes two’."
Molly and Craig’s presentation will cover relevant background on the mechanisms of chewing in rabbits and provide practical advice on recognising and diagnosing dental disease. Physical examination and dental charting will be discussed, as well as dental radiography.
Molly said: "Radiography can be a really useful tool to assess dental disease in rabbits. Vets often aren’t as familiar with positioning and evaluating radiographs of rabbits as compared to cats and dogs, so we’ll give some useful tips on what to look out for."
Molly will share some advice on taking good dental radiographs, and then go into the details of interpretation, explaining how to use imaging to gain a more accurate diagnosis and enable more specific treatment. After this, she will discuss how best to plan and perform dental treatment. Incisor removal, cheek tooth extraction and pulpectomy are some of the topics she’ll cover.
The talk counts for 1 hour of CPD and will be held on 11th November at 12:20pm. Those who can’t make the live session can access a recording afterwards. More information and the sign-up link is available here: https://supremepetfoods.com/rabbit-dentistry-it-takes-two/.
Cognitive aids are visual prompts that aim to reduce human error in critical processes by providing a supportive framework that ensures tasks are performed and communicated appropriately. They are designed for use whilst a task is being undertaken and enable individuals to concentrate on problem-solving and decision-making.
The BSAVA Cognitive Aids for Anaesthesia in Small Animal Practice, written by veterinary anaesthesia specialist Matt McMillan, includes both routine checklists, such as pre-anaesthetic assessment, equipment checks and postoperative handover, and crisis checklists for potential complications that may be encountered during surgery, such as hypotension, bradycardia and haemorrhage.
The guide also includes downloadable forms, which can be used in practice to ensure safety checks are completed and help improve clinical outcomes (available from www.bsavalibrary.com).
Ian Self, Principal Clinical Anaesthetist at the University of Cambridge Department for Veterinary Medicine said: "This handbook should be viewed as a ‘second pair of eyes’ throughout a procedure, especially if an anaesthetised patient deteriorates; consider it as having an experienced anaesthetist looking over your shoulder offering words of advice… I am very happy to endorse this exciting new BSAVA resource."
The BSAVA Cognitive Aids for Anaesthesia in Small Animal Practice is now available from the BSAVA website (www.bsava.com/shop) or by phone on 01452 726700 (£25; BSAVA members: £15).
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/
The RCVS Disciplinary Committee heard two charges against Dr Nemes, the first being that he had posted comments on social media about another veterinary surgeon, his employer, Dr Toth, which were offensive and/or derogatory and/or inappropriate.
The second charge was that Dr Nemes had posted his comments without having sufficient regard to maintaining their confidentiality and/or privacy.
Dr Nemes admitted the charges, though he did inform the Committee that his admission with respect to the second charge was caveated by the proposition that the comments were posted in private messages on Facebook with a limited membership, namely employees of Healers Veterinary Centre (Dr Toth’s practice).
The Committee noted the Respondent’s admissions as to the charges raised against him and pronounced the facts found proved.
In relation to the first charge, the Committee found that the comments on social media were, without a doubt, highly unprofessional. They included offensive language, were gratuitously personal against Dr Toth, and were made within an online chat which included junior lay staff, all employed by Dr Toth.
This behaviour was seen to directly contravene a numbers of parts of the RCVS Code of Professional Conduct, in particular Paragraph 5.3 that states: "Veterinary Surgeons and Veterinary Nurses should not speak or write disparagingly about another Veterinary Surgeon or Veterinary Nurse."
In relation to the second charge, the Committee found that Dr Nemes had paid no regard to maintaining the confidentiality and/or privacy of his malicious and damaging entries to the chat.
At the outset of his evidence, Dr Nemes admitted that the proven charges amounted to serious professional misconduct. The Committee noted however that the question of whether he was guilty of serious professional misconduct or not was in fact a matter for it to decide, notwithstanding his admission.
The Committee considered the fact that the period of time that Dr Nemes was involved in making postings was effectively about two weeks, that his involvement followed his wife’s dismissal from employment (representing a breach of Dr Nemes’ resignation conditions), and that he was very stressed at the time.
It also considered Dr Nemes’ point that he had never anticipated that Dr Toth would see the Facebook Messenger conversation, and that the relevant RCVS supporting guidance to the Code concerning good practice when using social media and online networking forums was only published in late November 2014 when Dr Nemes’ involvement in the conversation was virtually at an end.
In summing up, Ian Green, Chair of the Committee, said: "The Committee carefully considered the circumstances surrounding the Facebook Messenger entries which the Respondent posted from 13 November 2014. It noted that at the time he had handed in his resignation, morale at the practice was very low. The Facebook Messenger chat site had been started amongst the receptionist/animal carers. A perusal of the entries before the Respondent joined on 13 November 2014 demonstrates that morale was low among that group.
"…Notwithstanding the nature of the remarks posted on the Facebook Messenger, which the Committee deplores, it has reached the conclusion that, whilst the Respondent’s behaviour amounts to misconduct and falls short of the standards expected of a member of the veterinary profession, it does not amount to serious misconduct and does not fall far short.
"In the circumstances it has reached the unusual conclusion that, notwithstanding the Respondent’s admission, the appropriate finding is that he is not guilty of disgraceful conduct in a professional respect."
The committee considered 5 separate charges against Dr Radev, relating to his treatment of a Yorkshire Terrier and Shih Tzu cross called Pickles at a Vets4Pets veterinary practice in Oxford between 5 October 2015 and 1 November 2015. The charges related to Dr Radev failing to provide adequate and/or appropriate care to the animal and failure to keep detailed clinical records.
After hearing the evidence from Dr Radev and the complainant, the College submitted that it wished to withdraw charges 1(i) and 1(ii) on the basis of insufficient evidence. In addition, Dr Radev had already admitted charges: 1(iii)(b), 1(iv)(d), 1(v), 4(i)(a) and 4(ii)(a) but denied the remaining charges. Of these remaining charges the Committee found charges 1(iv)(a), 2(i), 2(iv), 3(i) and 3(ii) proven with the rest not being proven.
The charges admitted or found proven were that Dr Radev:
(1) On 5 October 2015, failed to provide adequate and/or appropriate care and/or treatment to Pickles, more particularly in that he:
(iii) Failed to offer and/or undertake adequate investigations into Pickles’ condition, more particularly in that he failed to offer and/or undertake:
(b) urine tests;
(iv) Failed to put in place and/or document an adequate management plan for Pickles, more particularly in relation to:
(a) adequate direction and/or advice regarding a review of Pickles’ condition within a clearly defined number of days;
(d) collection of urine at home for analysis on review at the practice;
(v) Having noted that he suspected renal disease, prescribed meloxicam when the same was contraindicated for dogs with renal disease;
(2) On 28 October 2015, failed to provide adequate and/or appropriate care and/or treatment to Pickles, more particularly in that he:
(i) Failed to take and/or record an adequate history from Mrs Pancott in relation to Pickles’ condition and/or clinical signs since 5 October 2015;
(iv) Failed to provide adequate direction and/or advice regarding a date for a review of Pickles’ condition within a clearly defined number of days;
(3) On 30 October 2015, having been informed that Mrs Pancott had telephoned the practice with concerns about Pickles, including blood in the faeces;
(i) Failed to note the matter in Pickles’ medical records;
(ii) Failed to take sufficient steps to obtain more information from Mrs Pancott or to ensure that Mrs Pancott was advised to seek veterinary attention for Pickles in relation to her concerns;
(4) On 1 November 2015, failed to provide adequate and/or appropriate care and/or treatment to Pickles, more particularly in that he:
(i) Failed to interpret the blood tests adequately and/or take appropriate and adequate action in relation to the results of those blood tests, more particularly with regards to:
(a) blood glucose;
(ii) Failed to offer and/or undertake adequate investigations into Pickles’ condition, more particularly in that he failed to:
(a) offer and/or undertake urine tests.
In considering these charges the Disciplinary Committee found that only charge 4(ii)(a) – namely the failure to correctly interpret and act upon the results of a blood glucose test – amounted to serious professional conduct with the rest not passing the threshold of disgraceful conduct in a professional respect. The Committee did not consider that in addition the cumulative effect of all the proven charges taken together amounted to serious professional misconduct.
In relation to the cumulative effect of all the proven charges Professor Alistair Barr, chairing the Committee and speaking on its behalf, said: "The Committee noted that Dr Radev had made errors in relation to one patient but on four separate occasions. These were, for the most part, individual failures at the lower end of the scale of seriousness. Taking into account all of the failings, the Committee in its judgement did not consider that the nature and number of errors and the period of time over which they took place justified a cumulative finding of disgraceful conduct."
In considering the sanction for Dr Radev the Committee took into account a number of mitigating circumstances including the fact that Dr Radev had undertaken suitable training and development in the areas in which he made mistakes, had demonstrated good insight into his conduct and had made some open and frank admissions early on in proceedings. It also considered that the one charge that was found to be serious professional misconduct was a single, isolated mistake linked to Dr Radev’s inexperience.
Professor Barr said: "The Committee considered that taking ‘no further action’ was appropriate and proportionate having considered the history of the case, the Committee’s overall findings and the good reports of Dr Radev’s performance in the two years since the matter which had led to the finding of disgraceful conduct in a professional respect."
The decision to take no further action was also influenced by the length of time it had taken the charges to be heard by the Committee, the positive character references about Dr Radev from professional colleagues and the fact he was unlikely to repeat such conduct in the future.
Each year, Davies Veterinary Specialists helps fund pairs of volunteers to and support the charity Mission Rabies, of which Ian Battersby, an Internal Medicine clinician at Davies, is a Trustee.
98% of rabies cases in humans are a consequence of dog bites from rabid dogs. Mission Rabies works in parts of India, Malawi and Uganda and Sri Lanka, using local teams and international volunteers. The aim is to vaccinate 70% of street dogs for three consecutive years. Current scientific evidence indicates if this is achieved the disease will be eliminated from an area.
Last year, Laura Barham RVN and Emily Prejac RVN (pictured right) were chosen by Davies to help vaccinate dogs in Goa.
Laura is a Patient Care Supervisor at Davies, helping to supervise the nurses and kennel assistants in the wards to make sure all patients receive the best possible care. Emily is a Nurse Supervisor for Diagnostics and coordinates the cases, the nurses and the order of procedures through the diagnostics area.
Although Davies funded their flights, Laura and Emily had to raise £2000 of extra funds, which they did by running sponsored dog walks and holding bake sales, raffles and competitions. Emily also ran the London Marathon in a bright yellow Mission Rabies vest.
Working in India for two weeks was a stark contrast to Laura and Emily's normal jobs. Laura described a typical day in Goa: "The volunteers were divided into six teams, each with a team of Goan dog-catchers, referred to as ‘the boys’ and a driver.
"The skilled boys would catch street dogs using nets and then we would vaccinate them and paint a red line on the top of their heads. This enables them to be counted easily when the surveyor checks an area after it has been done. We also knocked on house doors to ask owners if they would like their pet dogs vaccinated.
"There was a mix of languages spoken, including Hindi, English and Konkani (the local Goan language), so having the boys and driver help with communication was essential. Every vaccinated dog was logged on the app. Once an area had been completed a new team would cover the circuit to vaccinate any dogs that may have eluded being caught the first time. The morning stint lasted until lunchtime and we would get to work again between 3pm and 6pm."
<p">More than 5,000 dogs were vaccinated during the two weeks Laura and Emily were in Goa and over the four weeks of the mass vaccination drive more than 10,000 dogs were vaccinated.
Laura said: "This is the first time I have volunteered to work on a project and I can’t believe I have never done it before especially as it is a privilege to be able to use my nursing skills to help. I can honestly say it is the best experience I have ever had and I am proud to have been a small part of the great work that Mission Rabies does. I would most definitely do it again and recommend to anyone else to do it too."
Emily said: "I really do feel like I have been part of something amazing, even with just the small contribution I made in the two weeks of being there. It was great to see first hand the incredible work Mission Rabies is doing and the effect it is having. I am so pleased I had the opportunity to take part and also use my skills as a nurse to help in this way. I would definitely like to do it again and would urge anyone considering volunteering to go for it, they won’t regret it."
The Disciplinary Committee heard four charges against Dr Schulze Allen.
The first charge related to the original criminal conviction in the County of San Bernardino in California dating from September 2013, where Dr Schulze Allen pleaded guilty to petty theft for which he was fined US $435 and ordered to pay a fee of US $35.
The second charge related to the fact that, on or around 3 December 2013 in a written application for restoration to the Register, Dr Schulze Allen was dishonest in representing that he did not have any cautions or criminal convictions.
The third charge related to the fact that on or around 4 December 2013 in a sworn affidavit before a Notary Public in Riverside, California, he dishonestly and falsely represented that he had, at no time, been convicted of a criminal offence in the UK or elsewhere.
The final charge was that, in an email to the RCVS in June 2016, he dishonestly and falsely represented that he had "no criminal record whatsoever".
Having found Dr Schulze Allen guilty of all four charges the Committee then considered whether the conviction rendered him unfit to practise veterinary surgery and whether the remaining charges amounted to disgraceful conduct in a professional respect.
The Committee noted that the conviction was for a minor matter but had regard to all the evidence before it and considered that as an offence of dishonesty it represented a breach of one of the fundamental tenets of the profession. It further considered that Dr Schulze Allen’s dishonesty toward the College and his completing a legal document which he knew would be relied upon by the College was conduct that fell far short of the standard expected of a member of the profession.
With regard to the final charge, the Committee considered this a "clear attempt to deliberately misrepresent the fact that he had a conviction for a criminal offence." The Committee considered that Dr Schulze Allen’s conduct had been aggravated by the fact that it was protracted and repeated over a period of time.
Ultimately the Committee considered that the conviction rendered Dr Schulze Allen unfit to practise veterinary surgery and the remaining charges amounted to disgraceful conduct in a professional respect.
Ian Green, chairing the Committee and speaking on its behalf, said: "His conduct represented a blatant disregard of the role of the RCVS and the systems that regulate the veterinary profession. The Committee also remained particularly concerned at Dr Schulze Allen’s very limited insight into his conduct."
He added: "In mitigation the Committee noted that this is not a case where harm was caused to any animals or humans. It noted that prior to these matters which are before the Committee that Dr Schulze Allen had an unblemished career and that he had been of good character. In respect of purely personal mitigation the Committee noted that Dr Schulze Allen is the main breadwinner of the family."
However, the Committee considered that Dr Schulze Allen’s conduct had fallen significantly short of standards expected of a veterinary surgeon.
Ian Green concluded: "The Committee considered that the only appropriate sanction is that of removal from the Register. Such a sanction is required to send a clear message to Dr Schulze Allen and to veterinary surgeons of the unacceptability of being dishonest to the RCVS. Such conduct undermines public confidence in the profession and fails to uphold proper standards of conduct and behaviour.
"Accordingly, the Committee has decided that removal from the Register is appropriate and proportionate in this case. The Committee will direct the Registrar to remove the respondent’s name from the Register forthwith."
Dr Schulze Allen has 28 days from the date of the decision to appeal the Committee’s decision.
The Committee’s full findings and decision is available at www.rcvs.org.uk/disciplinary.
This is the first confirmed finding of the virus in the UK this winter and tests have shown it is closely related to the H5N6 strain that has been circulating in wild birds across Europe in recent months. This is different to the strains which affected people in China last year and Public Health England have advised the risk to public health is very low. The Food Standards Agency have said that bird flu does not pose a food safety risk for UK consumers.
UK Chief Veterinary Officer, Nigel Gibbens, said: "This is the first time avian flu has been identified in the UK this winter and while the disease does not represent a threat to the public, it is highly infectious and deadly to birds.
"As the virus has been circulating across Europe, this finding has not come as a surprise. But it is vital that anyone who keeps birds - whether a few in a back garden or thousands on a farm - is vigilant for any signs of disease, reports suspect disease to APHA and maintains good biosecurity to reduce the risk of their birds becoming infected."
Local measures will be put in place to manage the potential threat. These include a local Avian Influenza Prevention Zone (AIPZ) in Dorset as a precautionary measure to prevent disease spread to other birds. This means all captive bird keepers in the area will have to implement enhanced biosecurity measures such as feeding and watering birds undercover so that wild birds do not co-mingle with kept birds; minimising movement in and out of bird enclosures; cleaning and disinfecting footwear; and keeping areas where birds live clean and tidy.
There are no plans for culling or movement restrictions.
BVA President John Fishwick said: "I’d encourage vets to reassure their clients that this strain of Avian Influenza poses a very low risk to public health and the food chain. Defra have acted swiftly to try and contain further spread of the disease, which has likely come from migratory birds, yet vets and poultry owners should remain vigilant for signs of the disease."
British Veterinary Poultry Association (BVPA) President Phil Hammond added: "It’s really important that all bird keepers heed biosecurity advice issued by Defra, and maintain the highest biosecurity standards. Any suspicion of Avian Influenza should be reported to the APHA as soon as possible."
Up-to-date advice and guidance on Avian Influenza is available on the Gov.UK website, including how to spot it, what to do if you suspect it, and measures to prevent it: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/avian-influenza-bird-flu#about-avian-influenza
For further advice on Avian Influenza contact the Defra Helpline on 03459 33 55 77.
Trade should not be affected following the findings in wild birds, according to the rules of the World Animal Health Organisation (OIE).
Photo: Wild Birds, Shutterstock / aDam Wildlife
The decision comes after 13 dead wild birds were confirmed to have the virus in Warwickshire.
Last week 17 wild birds were tested positive in Dorset and 31 infected birds have now been identified at the Dorset site. At that time Defra responded by putting a local prevention zone in place and, now it is known the disease is not isolated to the Dorset site, the prevention zone has been extended across the country as a precautionary measure.
The prevention zone means bird keepers across the country must:
Those keepers who have more than 500 birds will need to take extra biosecurity measures that include restricting access to non-essential people, changing clothing and footwear before entering bird enclosures and cleaning and disinfecting vehicles.
The birds in Warwickshire are still being tested but it is expected that it will be the same H5N6 strain of bird flu that was found in the wild birds in Dorset and has been circulating wild birds across Europe. Public Health England have advised the risk to public health is very low with the Food Standards Agency also offering reassurance that bird flu does not pose a food safety risk for UK consumers. Defra has confirmed that the H5N6 strain is different to the strains which affected people in China last year.
Although it does not represent a threat to public, it is highly infectious and deadly to birds.
British Veterinary Association (BVA) President John Fishwick said: "I’d encourage vets to reassure their clients that this strain of Avian Influenza poses a very low risk to public health and the food chain. However, there is clearly a need to try to contain further spread of the disease, which has almost certainly come from migratory birds, and vets and poultry owners should follow the new prevention zone measures and remain vigilant for signs of bird flu."
Up-to-date advice and guidance on Avian Influenza is available on the Gov.UK website, including how to spot it, what to do if you suspect it, and measures to prevent it:
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/avian-influenza-bird-flu#about-avian-influenza