As part of the partnership between the two companies, anyone who takes part in one of Improve's CPD courses in 2018 will be entitled to 6 months' half-price pet insurance from Agria.
Online Bitesize CPD modules cover topics including: cardiology, ophthalmology, small animal medicine, feline medicine and exotic animals. Modules are 20, 40 or 60 minutes in length and provide veterinary professionals with interactive experiences which count toward annual CPD requirements in short convenient bursts, earning digital badges and certificates to demonstrate total CPD achieved.
Nick White, Head of Veterinary Channel at Agria, said: "We’re delighted that our partnership with Improve International will give veterinary professionals free, instant access to high-quality and engaging CPD. Not only are the modules available varied and highly relevant, the 'bitesize' nature of the training makes it extremely convenient for busy practice staff to access.
"This is a great incentive for any practices not yet working with Agria to get onboard. As well as benefitting from free CPD, practices will also be working with a specialist lifetime insurer offering 5 weeks free insurance policies and much more for clients and their pets."
For more information, contact your Agria Business Development Manager or visit: www.agriapet.co.uk/bitesize and complete the Contact Us section, using 'FREE CPD' in the subject line of the enquiry box.
The webinars are presented by Dr Rachel Dean BVMS PhD MSc(EBHC) DSAM(fel) SFHEA MRCVS, Clinical Associate Professor in Feline Medicine at the School of Veterinary Medicine and Science, Nottingham and founding Director of the Centre for Evidence-Based Veterinary Medicine (pictured right).
The first webinar kicks off at 8:00pm on Tuesday 17th April, when Rachel will give an introduction to EBVM and reminder of why it is so important in practice.
The second session will follow on 24th April, when Rachel will explain how to find and evaluate evidence, and how you can use it to underpin your clinical decision-making process in practice.
In the final webinar, on Tuesday 1st May, Rachel will use a nutritional case study to demonstrate the real-world clinical application of EBVM concepts.
Lee Danks BVSc BVMS MRCVS, Royal Canin’s Scientific Affairs Manager said: "In this three-part series we hope to summarise EBVM for those unaccustomed to this approach and review how it can help improve our clinical decision-making in practice.
"By taking a step by step approach and delivering 'easily-digestible' lessons over three weeks we hope to answer as many questions vets and nurses have as possible with some highly applicable content from Rachel Dean."
For more information and to register, visit https://vetportal.royalcanin.co.uk/cpd/webinar2018/
The Australian company, which launched in the UK offering equine specials in March 2017, says that while some human healthcare companies are authorised to supply veterinary specials under licence in the UK, it is currently the only company in the UK to have specific veterinary authorisation to manufacture sterile specials.
There are six formulations in Bova’s new small animal range with a further 23 formulations scheduled to be introduced in the first half of 2018. However, Bova says that due to advertising restrictions, only verified veterinary surgeons will be able to see its formulation list.
For more information, contact Bova Sales Manager Emma Jones on tel: 07780443731 or Victoria Dawson on 07780443738 or visit www.bova.co.uk.
The company will also be at BSAVA Congress this week on stand 817, where they will be offering the chance to win an afternoon champagne tea at the Ritz.
Ines, who graduated from the University of Santiago de Compostela in Spain in 2001, has spent the last seven years working at universities in America, Australia and Europe. She undertook her PhD in MR spectroscopy of the brain in dogs at the University of Bern-Zurich in Switzerland. She has a Masters in Radiology from University of Glasgow. She has also worked at the University of Illinois and Sydney University.
Willows clinical director Toby Gemmill said: "Ines is highly qualified and highly regarded, so is a very welcome addition to our talented imaging team. Her experience of working around the world will also be a terrific asset to the practice."
Ines said: "I am very happy and honoured to be joining Willows and to now be part of such a great diagnostic imaging team. "This is a well-known centre of excellence and I’m really looking forward to helping deliver the first class care and treatment that Willows always aims to provide."
For more information, visit www.willows.uk.net.
The charges were:
On 28 September 2015 she was convicted of stealing three packets of Tramadol to the value of £45 from Milton Keynes Veterinary Group.
On 20 April 2017 she was convicted on two counts of issuing a false prescription with the intention of being dispensed Tramadol.
On 15 June 2017 she was convicted of numerous counts of making false prescriptions, as well as stealing £108.47 worth of scratch cards and cigarettes from Premier Queensway Stores.
Between 5 January 2015 and 25 August 2015 she held herself out as a registered veterinary nurse when she was in fact not on the Register, and worked at two separate veterinary practices during that time; and that she was therefore either (i) being dishonest, or (ii) ought to have known that she was not registered.
That on or around 13 April 2016, she made a written representation on an application form for restoration to the Register that she had no criminal convictions, when on 28 September 2015 she had been convicted of burglary and that conviction was not spent; and that she was (i) either dishonest, or (ii) ought to have known that the representation was false.
Ms Wilde admitted charges 1-3, and the Committee were also provided with copies of the convictions. The Committee therefore found charges 1-3 proven.
In considering the fourth charge, they took into account Ms Wilde’s submission that she believed the submission of a cheque would be enough to restore her to the Register. The Committee noted that she had restored herself to the Register in the past, however, and so would have been aware that a cheque alone was not sufficient, and she had also been sent a restoration form following a telephone call with the College on 2 January 2015. The Committee therefore found that Ms Wilde was being dishonest, and determined that charge 4(i) was proven.
In considering the fifth charge, the Committee considered Ms Wilde’s submission that a Probation Officer had told her that her conviction was spent and that she need not declare it. The Committee believed this to be highly unlikely, however, especially as Ms Wilde had provided no evidence from the probation service to support this assertion. The Committee therefore found her to be dishonest, and charge 5(i) to be proven.
The question of whether the facts amounted to serious professional misconduct was, however, solely a matter for the Committee’s judgement. It determined that Ms Wilde’s conduct in relation to charges 1-3 had fallen far short of the standard expected of an RVN and her conduct clearly renders her unfit to practise as an RVN.
Similarly, the Committee found that Ms Wilde’s conduct had fallen far short of the standard expected of an RVN in respect of charges 4-5, and found her conduct clearly amounted to disgraceful conduct in a professional respect.
The Committee then turned to the question of sanction, firstly in respect of charges 1-3. It considered some testimonials that spoke on Ms Wilde’s behalf, but noted that they were all unsigned and none made any reference to the charges against her. The Committee also bore in mind that Ms Wilde had no previous disciplinary history and was apologetic and remorseful, and that no harm had come to animals or humans by her actions.
It also considered, however, that her behaviour had been repeated and sustained, that she had used her knowledge as an RVN to forge prescriptions, and that she had breached the trust of her employers by stealing from them. The Committee therefore decided that removal from the Register was the only appropriate sanction.
When considering sanction in respect of charges 4-5, the Committee took into account that Ms Wilde had difficult personal circumstances and was sincerely apologetic. Using her title of RVN to gain employment when she was not on the Register, however, and breaching the trust of the College by making a false declaration, were considered serious aggravating features. It therefore considered that removal from the Register was again the only appropriate sanction.
Judith Way, who chaired the Committee and spoke on its behalf, said: “Ms Wilde’s criminal behaviour failed to maintain public confidence in the veterinary nursing profession and it failed to declare and uphold proper standards of conduct and behaviour.
“She also knew that she was not registered as an RVN, yet she held herself out as being so and obtained employment in that capacity. In holding herself out in this manner she potentially put her colleagues at risk. She could have compromised the practices that employed her in the capacity of an RVN as their insurance had the potential to be invalidated.
“Ms Wilde was also dishonest with the RCVS when she completed the application for restoration of registered veterinary nurses’ form by stating that she had no convictions. Following this application, Ms Wilde went on to commit the seven further offences (from December 2016 to March 2017) for which she was later convicted in the Northampton and Leicester Magistrates’ Courts. The committee considered that such conduct falls far short of the standards expected of an RVN.”
Ms Wilde may appeal the Committee’s decision within 28 days of being informed of it. If no appeal is received, the Committee’s judgment takes effect.
There were two charges against Mr Staton, the first being that he failed to comply with eight requests from the RCVS sent by letter between November 2014 and August 2017 in relation to his continuing professional development (CPD) records.
The second charge was that between 1st January 2012 and 7th November 2017 he failed to have professional indemnity insurance or equivalent arrangements in place.
Mr Staton’s request to adjourn the hearing and agree undertakings was not opposed by the RCVS. The Committee had regard to advice of the Legal Assessor and submissions from both counsel for the RCVS and legal advisor for Mr Staton. In accepting Mr Staton’s request for adjournment and his undertakings no admissions have been made in respect of the charges against him.
In deciding whether to accept the adjournment and undertakings, the Committee was asked to consider a number of factors including Mr Staton’s age and health, his unblemished career of more than 50 years, the fact that he had closed his practice and retired from clinical practice on 31 March 2018 and that he had no intention of practising as a veterinary surgeon again. For those reasons the Committee felt it would be disproportionate to take Mr Staton through a full hearing.
Ian Green, chairing the Committee and speaking on its behalf, said: "In coming to this decision the Committee considered the respondent’s application to adjourn this inquiry in the light of the evidence he adduced. It had regard to the interests of justice, the public interest in ensuring high standards are maintained by veterinary surgeons and the need to ensure the protection of animals and their welfare."
Should Mr Staton seek to apply to rejoin the Register then the proceedings will become active again and a Disciplinary Committee hearing will be scheduled.
The consultation, which was held by the College early in 2017, asked for the views of veterinary surgeons and nurses, animal owners, and stakeholders on the use of telemedicine in veterinary clinical practice.
The consultation was designed to help identify potential risks associated with telemedicine, identify areas where it may help address the needs of both clinicians and the public, and support the potential development of new professional standards and guidance.
The online survey of veterinary professionals received 1,230 responses, while the public consultation received 229 responses and the survey of organisations/stakeholders received eight responses.
The headline question asked of veterinary professionals was whether RCVS 'supporting guidance to the Code of Professional Conduct' should be amended to allow remote examination to take the place of physical examination in certain circumstances. 41% said 'Yes', 40% said 'No' and 18% were unsure.
Veterinary professionals and organisations were then asked a series of questions in order to establish how they rated the risk associated with telemedicine according to activity type, practice type, clinical sign or syndrome, mode of technology, and familiarity with client, animal or environment.
Unsurprisingly perhaps, the majority felt that providing just general advice presented a low risk. At the other end of the scale, most felt that the use of telemedicine to diagnose disease or injury would be either 'high risk', or 'not appropriate at all'.
Likewise, the majority said the risks would be low or medium where the client and environment were known and the animal seen before, for the same problem. By contrast, the majority said telemedicine would be either 'high risk' or 'not appropriate at all' when the client, animal and environment were all unknown.
When asked whether the current definition of 'under care' should be extended to allow veterinary surgeons to prescribe veterinary medicines where there has been no physical examination of the animal, 69% said 'No', 16% said 'Yes' and 15% were unsure.
However, when asked whether certain types of veterinary medicines should be able to be prescribed without a physical examination of the animal, the majority of respondents to the professional survey (52%) were in favour.
The results of the consultation were first considered at a special meeting of the Standards Committee in August 2017, where it was noted how the consultation had revealed significant confusion around current supporting guidance to the RCVS Code of Professional Conduct and that, at a minimum, clarification as to what was currently permissible was needed.
The Committee determined a key issue going forward was whether to change the Supporting Guidance to the RCVS Code of Professional Conduct regarding 'under care' to allow veterinary surgeons to prescribe POM-V medicines based on telemedicine alone.
Given the complex nature of the issues and the wide-ranging implications, the Standards Committee presented a range of options for amending RCVS Guidance to RCVS Council at its meeting in November 2017. After discussion, Council asked the Standards Committee to continue their review and to present more detailed proposals to Council regarding the future of telemedicine in clinical veterinary practice.
Anthony Roberts, RCVS Director of Leadership and Innovation, said: "We would like to thank all those who took the time to respond to the consultation – although Council has not yet made any firm decisions, we felt it would be useful to share our research so far.
"The use of telemedicine is growing rapidly in human healthcare and it is only right the RCVS assesses the opportunities it could bring to improve access to veterinary services. It is critical, however, that we understand the issues it presents 'at the coal face' and consider all the available evidence before making any changes to our Guidance. The RCVS should ensure its regulatory framework fosters innovation and maximises the opportunities to improve the quality, efficacy and accessibility of veterinary services, whilst at the same time protecting animal health and welfare."
The Standards Committee will meet again in April 2018 to take further evidence and develop proposals to take the issue forward.
Meanwhile, the full summary is available on the College’s website: www.rcvs.org.uk/telemeds-summary/.
The RCVS statement, which can be read in full here, highlighted the fact that there is no body of evidence that homeopathy is effective and nor is it based on sound scientific principles. It should therefore be considered as complementary rather than alternative to treatments which are based on sound scientific principles, or for which there is a recognised evidence base.
In fact, the RCVS statement said nothing new. The principle that veterinary surgeons must first prescribe licensed medicines tested for safety and efficacy is enshrined in the Veterinary Medicines Regulations 2013, which say that if there is no veterinary medicine authorised in the United Kingdom for a condition in a particular species the veterinary surgeon responsible for the animal may treat with a veterinary medicine authorised for use in another animal species or for another condition in the same species, or, failing that, either a medicine authorised in the UK for human use, or a veterinary medicine authorised in another member state for use with any animal species in accordance with the Special Import Scheme, or a specially prepared (extemporaneous preparation or special) medicine, or exceptionally a medicine imported from outside the EU.
There are no homeopathic treatments listed by the VMD as 'authorised', just a handful of homeopathic preparations listed as 'registered', something which, as the BAHVS itself points out, means they have not been subjected to the same evaluation as authorised medicines or tested for efficacy.
The BAHVS is fond of using anecdote as evidence of efficacy (see the endorsements at the foot of this page: http://www.bahvs.com/), so one veterinary surgeon has been inviting colleagues to share their experiences of homeopathy causing harm on social media, in order to produce an infographic (pictured above right, click to enlarge) highlighting the very real harm caused when, for example, owners 'vaccinate' against parvo with homeopathic nosodes, only to have a dead litter on their hands.
The draft infographic can be found here.
The company says the new method, which was developed with Professor Ian Ramsey at the University of Glasgow, has been introduced following recent studies that showed a lack of correlation between ACTH stimulation test results and the clinical status of dogs treated with Vetoryl 1,2
Craig Sankey, Brand Manager at Dechra Veterinary Products, said: "Vetoryl is a medicine that will normally deliver major clinical benefits to a patient with canine Cushing's syndrome but finding a stable, long-term dosing regimen can be hard if ACTH stimulation tests return varying results.
"Pre-Vetoryl Cortisol monitoring is a reliable alternative to traditional ACTH stimulation tests for several reasons. It predicts clinical signs better, gives more consistent results, is less expensive and is easier to perform.
"Our online guide gives veterinary professionals a detailed insight into how they can integrate PVC into their treatment plans and the benefits it can bring to their patients and practice."
Information about Pre-Vetoryl Cortisol monitoring is now available at www.dechra.co.uk/prevetorylcortisol, together with other resources for patients on Vetoryl.
Dechra also hosts a website for owners whose pets have been prescribed Vetoryl: www.canine-cushings.co.uk.
References
This was the sixth time that Mr Warwick Seymour-Hamilton had applied for restoration after being removed from the Register in June 1994, the reasons for which related to the condition of his practice premises and his record-keeping following an inspection by the RCVS. His most recent restoration hearing took place in May 2017.
In his application Mr Seymour-Hamilton said that he wanted to be restored to the Register to aid his research into herbal medicines and, during the course of the hearing, he also challenged some of the evidence given to the Committee in the June 1994 hearing. In particular he challenged the assertion that his practice was open when it was inspected by the RCVS as, he submitted that, he had retired three weeks’ prior to the inspection due to ill-health.
Mr Seymour-Hamilton told the Committee that he did not wish to return to clinical practice but wished to restore his membership of the RCVS in order to prescribe his own herbal treatments and to obtain peer review that would allow his treatments to be licensed. Furthermore, he produced, during the hearing, a continuing professional development (CPD) record card in which he had logged 1,438 hours of CPD in 2017.
In considering his application for restoration the Committee dismissed his challenge to the details of his original hearing in June 1994.
Ms Judith Way, Chairing the Committee and speaking on its behalf, said: "The Committee has noted that this issue is ancient. It is not for this Committee to consider it. Moreover the finding of the Committee represents a determination which was not challenged by the applicant until one of the more recent restoration applications. He never appealed it. Nor did he attend at the original hearing. It acknowledges that the premises could well have been closed given their condition, but whether they were or not is not for it [the Committee] to decide. It is quite possible the applicant has persuaded himself of the position. This is not an issue which is a persuasive factor in this application."
Regarding Mr Seymour-Hamilton’s contention that he would use his RCVS registered status to further his research into herbal treatments Ms Way said: "The Committee accepted there were no direct public protection issues which caused it concern, although it did retain some anxiety that the applicant’s commitment to herbal medicine could govern the way in which he would wish to care for an animal. A more rounded veterinary approach, which involved a full evaluation of an animal’s condition, a coherent diagnosis and a subsequent discussion about treatment with the client is called for."
Turning to his CPD she added: "His CPD now has a bias for herbal medicine as does his extensive reading. The Committee was not satisfied that his skills are up-to-date and that he could practise veterinary medicine safely. The Committee was not satisfied that he would approach a sick animal with the full and rounded approach required of a veterinary surgeon. Nor did his confidence in this regard allay the concerns of the Committee. He expressed belief in himself on the basis of his practice which came to an end some 24 years ago."
The Committee did acknowledge that Mr Seymour-Hamilton’s removal from the Register had a considerable impact on him and that, not only is he ashamed of it, but he believes it is frustrating his ability to advance the cause of herbal medicine.
In conclusion, Ms Way said: "Taking all these matters into account, the Committee has concluded that the applicant has not satisfied it on all of the evidence that he is fit to be restored to the Register and so this application is refused."
This, says Spillers, suggests that older horses, whether or not they have been diagnosed with insulin dysregulation, need an appropriate diet and management plan to help minimise the risks associated with insulin dysregulation such as laminitis.
The two studies1,2, which were conducted in collaboration with Michigan State University, aimed to find out more about the relationship between insulin dysregulation, dietary adaptation, and ageing to help guide more appropriate feeding regimens for senior horses.
Both studies investigated tissue insulin resistance and the insulin response in healthy adults compared to healthy senior horses adapted to diets with varying levels and sources of hydrolysable and structural carbohydrate (starch, sugar, and fibre).
Results from both studies showed insulin responses tend to increase with age in healthy horses, regardless of the diet they had been fed prior to evaluation. The insulin response, for example, was highest in the senior horses fed a starch rich meal even when they had been adapted to such a diet.
Clare Barfoot, RNutr, the research and development manager at Spillers said: "These studies confirm that even healthy older horses can have an increased insulin response compared to younger animals.
"This suggests that the energy sources used in the diet of senior horses and their effect on insulin dynamics need to be carefully considered.
"Practically, this means restricting the overall amount of starch and sugar in the diet especially for those horses that already have additional risk factors such as obesity, native breeding or PPID."
The results, in order of number of votes, are:
Elected: Susan Paterson – 3,976 votes
Elected: Mandisa Greene – 3,819 votes
Elected: Neil Smith – 3,544 votes
John Innes – 3,502 votes
David Catlow – 3,310 votes
Matthew Plumtree – 2,677 votes
Iain Richards – 2,635 votes
Karlien Heyrman – 2,487 votes
John Davies – 580 votes
Thomas Lonsdale – 542 votes
Due to the fact that a Legislative Reform Order (LRO) that amends the College’s governance has completed its passage through the House of Commons and House of Lords and is expected to be signed off by the relevant Minister to bring it into law, only the first three candidates are expected to take up their posts on Council at RCVS Day on 13 July 2018.
Eleanor Ferguson, RCVS Registrar and Returning Officer for the election, said: "I would like to thank all the candidates who stood for Council this year and would like to, in particular, congratulate Susan, Mandisa and Neil for being re-elected to RCVS Council.
"The LRO that is likely to be signed off in due course will reconstitute the makeup of Council – with greater lay and veterinary nursing input – and will also reduce the overall size of Council, including the number of elected members. Because of this only the first three – as opposed to the first six under previous rules – candidates are likely to be taking up a four-year term at RCVS Day 2018. Our commiserations go out to all the unsuccessful candidates, especially in this unusual transitional year, and we thank them for their participation in this year’s election."
The results of the election will be formally declared at this year’s RCVS Day – the College’s Annual General Meeting and awards ceremony – which takes place at the Royal Institute of British Architects on Friday 13 July 2018.
The National Equine Health Survey is a snapshot survey conducted by the Blue Cross in conjunction with the British Equine Veterinary Association during the month of May each year, sponsored by Dodson & Horrell and Zoetis. Last year 5,235 people took part and returned records for 15,433 horses.
The 2017 survey found that 39% of those who carry out faecal worm egg counts do so at four-monthly intervals, 22% do so at 8-12 week intervals and 2% do so at six-weekly intervals.
Dr Wendy Talbot, equine vet at Zoetis said: "The NEHS results show that there’s still a lack of understanding about the purpose and benefits of FWECs during the grazing season. For the most effective results FWECs should be conducted every 8 to 12 weeks between March and October. They will indicate which horses are passing the most worm eggs in their droppings and mean that horses are only treated when necessary.2 Remember though that FWECs don’t remove the need to treat horses at specific times of year for encysted small redworm, tapeworm and bots, none of which will show up in FWECs.3"
References:
ATOP 7 Mousse and PYOclean Mousse are presented as a ‘dry shampoo’ in foam form for cats and dogs. They join the company's Dermoscent portfolio of companion animal products, developed to help with the management of scaling disorders, atopic or allergic skin disease and infections.
Both products contain a blend of plant extracts and essential oils from Hemp seed, which LDCA says has a moisturising and restructuring action on the skin. Atop 7 contains lemon tea tree extract, which the company says boosts anti-inflammatory and anti-pruritic activity. PYOclean contains lavender and manuka, which are claimed to have an anti-bacterial action.
LDCA says it has designed the two non-rinse mousses with owner compliance in mind; that used twice-weekly twice-weekly alone or in combination with other supplements or treatments as part of a skincare protocol, they can extend the time between shampoos. They can also be applied quickly to speed patients’ discharge from hospital or used when animals are boisterous or dislike baths.
According to the company, a 2-week veterinary-supervised study looking at the effect of ATOP 7 Mousse on the skin of flea-allergic and atopic dogs, reported a veterinarian general satisfaction score of 8.7/10. Owners of the dogs on the trial reported an 8.7/10 general satisfaction score and a similar score for the product’s ability to soothe irritated skin.¹
The full Dermoscent range, including the new mousses, is available through Vet Direct as well as Henry Schein (selected products) or as a special order through Centaur. ATOP 7 Mousse and PYOclean Mousse are both available in 150ml packs and are priced at £7.94 + VAT each (list price).
For more information visit: http://www.dermoscent.com. A clinical case study by Dr Jean-Loup Mathet on the use of PYOclean Shampoo, Spray and Mousse in a 14-year old West Highland White Terrier with chronic, recurrent, inflammatory, pruritic and seborrhoeic dermatosis is also available online or by request.
Reference
Mrs Angie Scullion (pictured right) from Okehampton joined the Healthy Pet Club in May 2017 at Okeford Veterinary Centre with her Border Collie, Cassie. She was awarded a year’s free membership by the practice to celebrate the milestone.
Launched in 2010 with 11,000 members, the Healthy Pet Club helps pet owners budget for their pets’ healthcare by spreading payments over a year. They also make savings on vaccinations, flea and worm treatments and receive access to a wide range of other benefits.
Mr Mukesh Rughani, Healthy Pet Club Manager at CVS, said: "Pet owners want value so we constantly research the market to check that the discounts and benefits we offer through the Healthy Pet Club are the ones that we know they will find most meaningful.
"We are delighted that the Healthy Pet Club has reached the 300,000-member mark and we have a number of exciting developments planned for later this year which we believe will make it an even more useful tool for our member practices while setting a new standard in value for our clients."
The Prince's Trust 'creates life-changing opportunities' for those aged 11-30 and Nick has long-held a passion for making a difference to young lives. He has set up three charities for young people: with learning disabilities; who want to campaign to change the world; and who want to break down the barriers to enjoying nature and the outdoors.
Nick has led the RCVS since September 2012. During his tenure, developments at the College include a new Royal Charter, major governance reform, improved regulation of veterinary nurses, the instigation of Vet Futures, the introduction of the alternative dispute resolution service, significant evolution within the Practice Standards Scheme, the refocusing of RCVS Trust into RCVS Knowledge, the launch of Mind Matters, and the recognition of the College as a Great Place to Work.
Nick said: "It has been a great privilege to be CEO of the College and to work with such amazing staff, such a progressive Council and such a decent and caring profession. It is no surprise to me that vets and vet nurses are among the most trusted professionals in this country, and in my view this is due to their professionalism and to the excellence of the Royal College in maintaining and advancing standards. I hope I have played my part in helping the College and the profession navigate through a period of great change and preparation for significant change to come.
"At The Prince’s Trust I will be focused on the next generation, helping to give young people the confidence and purpose they need to make a success of their lives and the world around them. I know from my own personal experiences of school, and the various charities with which I have been involved, how many young people are not given the best chance in life. I cannot think of a better mission to take on."
RCVS President Chris Tufnell said: "I feel very fortunate to have worked closely with Nick over his five years with the RCVS; he has made a tremendous contribution to the College and our professions. With his energy and drive, he has infused the College with a culture of openness, engagement and dedication and has inspired the team through some impressive achievements.
"Nick’s leadership will enable vets and veterinary nurses to fulfil their potential and it's fitting that he's moving on to a role which benefits the lives of others. Meanwhile, there's a considerable amount of important work being done by the RCVS and I am confident that we have a strong team at Belgravia House to manage this until the new CEO is in post."
The RCVS says its Operational Board will be reflecting on Nick’s successes and the future needs of the College, before developing a specification for the new CEO and a recruitment process over the coming weeks.
Emma, who completed her training as a Registered Veterinary Nurse in 2015, was nominated for the City & Guilds Medal by Lite Ltd, the organisation with whom she did her training.
The award was presented to Emma at a ceremony at Kensington Roof Gardens in London last week by City and Guilds.
Mrs Jackie Shopland-Reed from Lite Ltd said: "City & Guilds Medals for Excellence recognise the achievements of learners, lecturers and trainers who have achieved great results by producing exceptional work – going above and beyond what is expected to achieve their goals. It recognises not only excellent results but also those who show a true journey of progression throughout their qualification.
"We felt Emma was deserving of the Medal as she achieved outstanding results for each aspect of this very challenging qualification – showing exceptional skills in assignment writing, examination technique and in her practical ability. Emma proved to be a conscientious, adaptable individual who is an excellent role model, not only for future students but also for the veterinary nursing profession as a whole."
Emma said: "I am honoured to have been nominated for the Medal, particularly as I am the veterinary nurse to receive it. I love my job at Friarswood Vets and I am proud to be recognised for my achievements."
The Petplan/Panasonic Monitoring Kit, which was launched last year, allows pet owners and veterinary staff to check on their animals via an app on their smartphone or tablet.
Petplan says is it being used by some veterinary practices to help provide additional security and monitoring capability within the practice.
The kit includes an indoor camera, which comes with an in-built temperature sensor and night vision, a door sensor and Smart Plug which can be remotely activated to turn on a radio, lamp, portable heater or fan to help keep animals content.
The kit also contains an SD card which allows clients to save and share video footage of their pet in its home environment with their veterinary surgeon, and practices to record and share footage with their staff or clients.
Isabella Von Mesterhazy, Head of Marketing at Petplan, said "For Petplan, keeping pets healthy always has been and always will be our priority. We worry about our pets when we are not with them and the pet Monitoring Kit addresses this problem by providing welcome reassurance that they are safe and well. We are delighted to be able to share this exclusive, time limited offer with our customers and veterinary partners to allow them to check in on their pets, from wherever they are."
To find out more and access a discount code, veterinary staff should login to petplanvet.co.uk.
The case against Jose Ignacio Messa MRCVS related to two heads of charge against him.
The first charge was that, on 13th September 2015, Mr Messa failed to provide adequate and appropriate care to Barney, a border collie. The second charge was that on 14th September 2015 Mr Messa failed to ensure adequate and appropriate on-going care for Barney after his examination of him, including failing to take sufficient steps to ensure that Barney was referred urgently to the care of a referral practice and failing to ensure there were adequate arrangements in place for his ongoing care.
Barney was presented to the Basingstoke practice where Mr Messa was employed having suffered a severe 'stick injury' to his jaw on 12th September.
The Committee heard that, on 13th September, Mr Messa re-examined Barney, administered medication and then discharged him to be cared for at home by his owners. During the examination the owners alerted Mr Messa to the condition of the skin on Barney’s neck, but the Committee heard Mr Messa had felt the area and reassured them it was not something to be concerned about.
The Committee heard that at some point on 13th September, after he was discharged, Barney developed a foetid smell from his mouth caused by an infection and the next day his owners went back to the practice because Barney’s condition had deteriorated – he was unable to walk and had laboured breathing.
On 14th September Mr Messa admitted and sedated Barney and examined him again, noting a hole in the side of his throat that was infected. He recommended referring Barney to a referral practice for further treatment, which was agreed by his owners.
The Committee heard that the referral practice was contacted by a veterinary nurse at the practice and that an appointment for 9am on 15th September 2015 was booked directly with the owner. It also heard that, during his time at Mr Messa’s practice, Barney did not receive intravenous fluids or any further antibiotics.
Barney’s owners said they met with Mr Messa again at around 5pm on 14th September when they came to collect Barney, this was disputed by Mr Messa, and the Committee were not satisfied so as to be sure that it had been Mr Messa who had met the owners and discharged Barney although the Committee found that all the witnesses had been honest and reliable.
Barney was admitted to the referral practice on 15th September but, as a result of sepsis, he suffered a cardiac arrest and died at 10.30pm.
In respect of the first charge the Committee concluded that, on 13th September, Mr Messa made only a rudimentary examination of Barney, and the absence of such basic clinical examination of the temperature, the respiration rate and the pulse of Barney was a failure on the part of Mr Messa and that, furthermore, he did not choose the best course of antibiotic treatment for the wound and infection.
In respect of the second charge Mr Messa admitted that he did not provide fluid therapy to Barney on 14th September before he was discharged.
With reference to the remaining aspects of the charge the Committee took into account the Code of Professional Conduct, particularly in respect of the need for veterinary surgeons to refer cases responsibly and the Code’s supporting guidance on referrals.
The Committee determined that, having delegated the arrangements of the referral to a veterinary nurse, Mr Messa made no attempts to follow up and ensure it was a same-day appointment when this would have better suited the severity of Barney’s condition. The Committee found that he was unaware of Barney’s location or of the time of the appointment and did not make provision for antibiotic or fluid therapy.
Having found the majority of the charges against Mr Messa proven, the Committee then considered whether this amounted to serious professional misconduct.
Disciplinary Committee member Stuart Drummond, who was chairing the Committee and speaking on its behalf, said: "In the light of the facts found proved and considering that disgraceful conduct in a professional respect is that which is conduct falling far below that expected of a veterinary surgeon, the Committee had concluded that the heads of charge, when taken individually, or collectively, do fall below the standard expected.
"However, as a matter of judgement, the Committee did not conclude that Mr Messa’s conduct fell far below the requisite standard and therefore did not amount of disgraceful conduct in a professional respect.
"Whilst the Committee did not find Mr Messa’s actions fell far below the requisite standard, there were concerns expressed about several aspects of this case. There were a number of missed opportunities which occurred; in particular the Committee notes the failure of the care plan and to take adequate steps to ensure that the referral process has been timeously effected."
Ms Buttler was charged with having been under the influence of alcohol whilst at work on two separate occasions. On both occasions, she was working as a locum veterinary nurse.
The first occasion was between 25th and 28th April 2016 in Frome, and the second from 3rd July to 4th July 2016 in Salisbury.
It was also alleged that a prior conviction of drunk driving on 19th November 2013 rendered her unfit to practise as a veterinary nurse.
The Committee decided to hear the case in Ms Buttler’s absence as it was satisfied that she had properly been served with the notice of hearing and because she had stated that she was aware of the proceedings but did not wish to engage with the process. The Committee also noted that she had not requested any adjournment.
The Committee heard from five witnesses for the first charge, including three veterinary nurses and one veterinary surgeon. They gave testimony that they had had cause to suspect that Ms Buttler was under the influence of alcohol whilst at work due to her demeanour, and recalled Ms Buttler repeatedly retreating upstairs to her accommodation during the working day. Further, an open wine bottle was found in Ms Buttler’s accommodation and was observed to have been drunk during the course of her shift. The Committee found the first charge proved.
The Committee heard from four witnesses in respect of the second charge. Two of the witnesses stated that they smelt alcohol on Ms Buttler’s breath while she was on duty, with one of them stating that Ms Buttler had slurred speech and a flushed face at the end of a fourteen-hour shift. The other two witnesses also presented evidence to support the assertion that Ms Buttler was under the influence of alcohol whilst at work, while the Committee found that Ms Buttler lacked credibility because she had denied having any alcohol on the premises when originally confronted, but later admitted in an email to the College that she had had an open bottle of wine in her bag. The Committee found the second charge proved.
The Committee then considered the third charge, namely the conviction in 2013. The Committee considered the certificate of conviction obtained from the North East Devon Magistrates Court and was satisfied that Ms Buttler had been convicted of driving with excess alcohol as set out within charge 3.
When considering whether these all amounted to a finding of disgraceful conduct in a professional respect, the Committee was concerned about Ms Buttler showing no insight into her drinking, and the repeated nature of the offences. The Committee also considered that being under the influence of alcohol when working as a veterinary nurse was conduct which fell far short of the standards to be expected of members of the veterinary nursing profession.
It therefore concluded that Ms Buttler was guilty of disgraceful conduct in respect of charges 1 and 2.
The Committee then considered whether Ms Buttler’s conviction (charge 3) rendered her unfit to practise as a veterinary nurse. The Committee concluded that Ms Buttler had not acknowledged the seriousness of her actions in 2013, or learnt any lessons from it. Accordingly, it felt that she continued to pose a risk to animals and the public in the future. The Committee also felt that the conviction undermined the reputation of the veterinary nursing profession because the offence inevitably involved a risk of injury to herself and other road users.
Having found Ms Buttler guilty of misconduct, the Committee went on to consider sanction.
The Committee took into account aggravating factors, including that there was a risk of injury to an animal, the fact that the first two charges involved an element of premeditation, the fact that Ms Buttler was under the influence on more than one shift in each practice, that there is no evidence of insight from Ms Buttler and there is a future risk to animals if she continued to practice unrestricted.
They also considered mitigating factors, including the fact that this is the first disciplinary hearing she has faced, that she did not cause any harm to any animal and that she did not gain financially from her conduct.
In reaching its decision Jane Downes, chairing the Committee and speaking on its behalf, said: "The Committee noted that Ms Buttler said she had worked for twenty years without any problem and that she was previously of good character. However because there was no evidence that Ms Buttler would not repeat the conduct with regards to working whilst under the influence of alcohol she could continue to pose a risk to animals or the public in the future. The Committee therefore was bound to consider her removal from the register.
"Although it noted from the brief email correspondence Ms Buttler had sent to the College that she said she did not intend to practice in the future, the Committee decided that until she had shown insight into her behaviour in 2016, she remained a risk to animals. It therefore decided that the proportionate action was to instruct the Registrar to remove her name from the register of veterinary nurses forthwith."
If Ms Buttler chose to re-engage with the College, she could apply for restoration to the register after ten months.
Dr Crespo appeared in front of the Disciplinary Committee earlier this week with two charges against her. The first was that, in November 2015, she dishonestly and falsely made an online representation to the College that she had no criminal convictions, cautions or adverse findings despite having been convicted, in January 2015, of failing to provide a specimen of breath. The second charge against her was that, in March 2016, she once again dishonestly and falsely failed to declare her conviction when renewing her registration.
During the hearing the Committee had two main considerations in respect of both charges – as to whether Dr Marin Crespo had been dishonest in failing to declare the conviction and as to whether the respondent ought to have known that her representations were false. Regarding the dishonesty element, the Committee found the College had not sufficiently proven this, as it accepted Dr Marin Crespo’s evidence that she did not believe she needed to declare a motoring-related offence as it was not relevant to her professional practice.
However, the Committee found it proven that the respondent ought to have known that the representations were false, taking into account that Dr Marin Crespo made admissions that she ought to have checked the guidance on declaring convictions, cautions and/or adverse findings and ought to have been aware that making such declarations is a requirement of the RCVS Code of Professional Conduct.
Having found the parts of the two charges relating to false representation proven, the Committee then considered whether this constituted serious professional misconduct.
Judith Webb, chairing the Committee and speaking on its behalf, said:"The Committee considers that the false declarations made by the respondent were born of a careless disregard for the disclosure process. The Committee notes that the respondent could easily have checked online, and/or by telephone, as to what she was obliged to do when making the relevant declarations. She failed to do that.
"In these circumstances, the Committee considers that the respondent’s conduct fell far short of that which is to be expected of the veterinary profession. Therefore, in the judgement of the Committee, on the facts found proved, the respondent is guilty of disgraceful conduct in a professional respect."
In considering Dr Marin Crespo’s sanction the Committee took into account a number of mitigating factors including her full cooperation with the College’s investigation, her hitherto unblemished career, her testimonial evidence which it felt demonstrated her dedication and professionalism, and the fact that she has displayed remorse and insight into her conduct.
Judith Webb concluded: "The Committee notes that the respondent’s conduct caused no harm, or risk of harm, to animals or humans. The Committee also notes that there is no charge arising out of the criminal conviction itself. The Committee considers that, if the respondent had answered the online questions correctly, it is unlikely that the respondent would have appeared before the Committee.
"Every veterinary surgeon must ensure that they adopt a careful and accurate approach to the self-certification exercise, which is crucial if the public and the College are to have trust in that process. In these circumstances, the Committee considered that the proportionate sanction in this case is that the respondent be… reprimanded for her conduct."
The practice, which is owned by the Linnaeus Group, says it will be refurbishing its existing facilities, extending its premises, hiring more specialist veterinary surgeons, veterinary nurses and support staff and installing state-of-the-art new equipment.
In addition, it plans to refresh its intern programme and launch a nurse training programme.
A six-month programme of building works will include a new reception area, consultation room and medicine and surgery wards.
New services and facilities will include a cat ward, X-ray department and endoscopy and chemotherapy facilities.
Operations manager Daniel Hogan (pictured right), said: "This is a very exciting period as we grow in every possible area and work more closely with referring practices to continue to develop our bespoke and exceptional service for patients and clients.
"Our aim is aspiring and simple: to create the very best referral centre possible by bringing together the expertise of the very best of veterinary professionals supported by the very latest in technological innovation."
For more information about Southfields Veterinary Specialists, visit: www.southfields.co.uk.
Amir Kashiv faced a charge of being unfit to practise veterinary surgery after twice being found guilty of letting dogs roam freely on public highways or land not owned or controlled by him in Peterborough Magistrates’ Court, once on 20 April 2016 and once on 16 November 2016, and by having repeatedly breached court orders in relation to the same.
Dr Kashiv admitted the convictions, but denied that individually or in any combination they rendered him unit to practise veterinary surgery. This was therefore left to the judgement of the Committee.
In considering whether the convictions rendered Dr Kashiv unfit for practice, the Committee first considered the facts of the convictions.
Dr Kashiv had long taken in house dogs with physical and behavioural problems, at some stages having as many as 30 on his property. In 2014 neighbours became concerned by dogs escaping and noise nuisances, and on 14 November 2014 Dr Kashiv was served by the Police with a Warning Notice, requiring him to install adequate fencing within 28 days.
Four days later he was then served with an Abatement Notice for a Noise Nuisance about the dogs, and on 10 January 2015 he was then served with a Community Protection Notice requiring him to stop his dogs roaming and ensure adequate fencing.
After multiple subsequent escapes Dr Kashiv pleaded guilty of being in breach of the Community Protection Order at the Magistrates’ Court on 20 April 2016, receiving penalties amounting to £5,000 and costs of £6,000, as well as a two year Criminal Behaviour Order requiring him to reduce the number of dogs to no more than five with 28 days, and requiring his dogs to be supervised at all times while they were outside the house.
Two months later one of the dogs was seen outside the property, resulting in another conviction for breach of the Criminal Behaviour Order on 16 November 2016, and Dr Kashiv was fined £250 as well as £250 in costs.
The Committee then considered whether this resulted in Dr Kashiv being unfit to practise veterinary surgery. It considered it a serious matter that a veterinary surgeon should allow himself to be made subject to a Warning Notice, and that, being subject to such a Notice, he should then be found in repeated breach of the Notice and invite prosecution. While the Committee accepts that it is difficult to fence his entire grounds, ten acres in total, the Committee took it as a mark against Dr Kashiv that he failed to address the concerns of the authorities by reducing the number of dogs he housed until he was compelled to do so.
Jane Downes, who was chairing the Committee and speaking on its behalf, said: "The Committee regards this as a case close to borderline. These offences, involving the mismanagement by a veterinary surgeon of his animals and repeated offences demonstrate that Dr Kashiv had a less than adequate insight in 2014 and 2015 into the seriousness of the situation or into the understandable concerns of his neighbours and of the authorities. They are capable of bringing the profession into disrepute so as to undermine public confidence in it.
"But, in the end, The Committee has concluded that Dr Kashiv is not unfit by reason of these convictions to practise as a veterinary surgeon.
"It is apparent from the material before the Committee that Dr Kashiv is a dedicated veterinary surgeon whose life’s work has been devoted to the welfare of small animals and who has gone to extraordinary lengths, at his own expense, to do all that he possibly could to alleviate the suffering of, and rehabilitate, unloved and abandoned and unwell dogs.
"In all the circumstances and in the light of all the evidence the Committee finds that the convictions, whether taken individually or in any combination, do not render Dr Kashiv unfit to practice veterinary surgery."
All SPVS members who complete the survey online will be sent their own personalised survey results allowing them to benchmark their practice against the industry averages.
SPVS is also offering 3 months free membership to anyone who takes part who is not already a member.
VPMA and BVNA members can also complete the survey and the results will be published on their websites.
Peter Brown, SPVS President Elect who leads on development of the surveys said: "Whether you are recruiting, doing an internal pay review, looking for a new job yourself or trying to negotiate a pay rise, it helps to understand what the typical salaries are and the trends. Our new software allows you to easily compare your salaries to others in personalised results making it a valuable business tool."
SPVS is urging as many people as possible to take part in the survey as the more participants, the more reliable the results.
For more information, visit www.spvs.org.uk or call 01926 840318.
In 2009, Chiara (pictured right) was the first to be awarded by examination the title of European Veterinary Specialist in Oncology after completing a one-year small animal internship at the University of Glasgow and a three-year residency in internal medicine and oncology at the University of Edinburgh.
Alongside her clinical work, Chiara is an honorary lecturer at the University of Liverpool and a multi-lingual specialist consultant, writer and lecturer at events in the UK and Europe. Her focus is on postgraduate training in small animal oncology and internal medicine and online education of pet owners and animal carers. Chiara is a member of the general and oncology examination committees of the European College of Veterinary Internal Medicine (ECVIM).
She said: "My aim is to provide veterinarians and owners on a daily basis with the most up-to-date information on cancer diagnosis and treatment options so pets can spend more time with their families whilst protecting their quality of life and preventing suffering."
Samuela is a European Specialist in Veterinary Ophthalmology with a special interest in ocular pathology as well as corneal disease and surgery.
She said: "Working at Willows allows me to be part of a talented and passionate team, and a chance to become the best ophthalmologist I can. Willows offers a very high level of patient care, and working here gives me the opportunity for constant scientific and clinical development."