Hospital director David Walker said: “Ewan Ferguson has been providing our dermatology service for many years and with Hilary joining him, we will now be able to provide a full-time service to support our referring vets, their clients and pets.
He added: “We are really delighted that Hilary is joining the dermatology team at Anderson Moores. Her passion for dermatology is infectious and with a particular interest in chronic ear disease, I’m sure she’s going to be very busy!”
Hilary has been a past Board member and organiser of the scientific meetings for the British Veterinary Dermatology Study Group, a member of the In Practice editorial board for 20 years and a past chief examiner for the RCVS Small Animal Medicine Certificate. She continues to act as a mentor for the BSAVA PGCertSAM course and as an assessor for the RCVS Advanced Practitioner in Small Animal Dermatology.
Hilary has worked in first opinion and referral clinics around the south west, including running her own dermatology referral service within several veterinary practices. From 2018 to 2021, she had been working as lead clinician in dermatology at Langford Vets (University of Bristol).
Hilary said: “I’m very excited to be joining the fantastic team at Anderson Moores and really looking forward to helping make a difference with the new dermatology service we’ll be offering.
For more information, visit www.andersonmoores.com.
The review was recommended to Council by its Standards Committee following its exploration of the implications of new technologies for both animal health and welfare and veterinary regulation.
The main areas under consideration are the interpretation and application of an animal being under the care of a veterinary surgeon, and the provision of 24-hour emergency cover.
The College says that during the course of its research, which included numerous meetings and reports, a public consultation and examination of external legal advice, the Committee identified a number of anomalies in the College’s existing guidance that could affect how the Code’s provisions were applied across a range of different scenarios.
Chair of the Standards Committee, Dr Kate Richards, said: "It became clear to us that we could not consider telemedicine and remote prescribing in isolation and that it raised broader questions around the appropriateness of, and justification for, certain elements of existing RCVS guidance. I’m therefore pleased that RCVS Council has decided that the right and responsible approach is first to conduct a full review of these provisions."
The College anticipates that the review will require wide engagement from all relevant sectors, potentially including a Select Committee-style hearing in certain areas. This, it says, would help to ensure any decision to treat different groups differently, in relation to 'under care' and 'out-of-hours', is both reasoned and justified.
In the meantime, the College says that the current provisions of the RCVS Code of Professional Conduct and its supporting guidance remain in full effect.
Further information about the review will be made available in due course.
UPDATE (19/06/2019)
Following a number of concerns raised by members of the profession about this story, the RCVS has issued a further statement as follows:
We would like to acknowledge and address a number of concerns that have arisen amongst the profession following RCVS Council’s discussion last week that followed up queries raised during the previous debate in November, around the provision of telemedicine services, including remote prescribing.
The RCVS Council decision, made unanimously, was to proceed with a wide-ranging review of RCVS supporting guidance concerning 24-hour emergency cover and the interpretation and application of ‘under veterinary care’, and to postpone the proposed telemedicine trial for the foreseeable future and certainly until the conclusion of this review. The review will encompass, but not be limited to, consideration of what restrictions or safeguards to place on remote prescribing in the form of vet-to-client telemedicine.
RCVS Council discussed this paper ‘in committee’ in order to be able to examine the confidential legal advice it had requested at its previous meeting. The decision to hold these discussions privately was purely related to the privileged nature of legal advice and in no way related to any ‘commercial interests’.
We recognise fully that this is a complex issue, with strong views held on all sides. However, it is entirely right and proper for RCVS Council members to be able to discuss and debate such topics in detail, before reaching a decision through a vote. In the course of such discussions, issues may arise that had not previously been identified, and which may alter the original direction of thinking.
We appreciate that Council’s decision was perhaps unexpected, especially as the original topic had been under consideration for some time. This is why we announced it as soon as possible, along with an indication of what Council would like to happen next.
Whilst it is far too early to have worked out the details of the agreed review, it will be open and inclusive in parallel with our previous consultations, which continue to receive considerable levels of engagement across the veterinary professions and wider industry stakeholders.
We will publish full details about our plans for this review over the coming weeks, and will continue to work hard to engage all veterinary professionals in these important decisions.
The first change has been made to paragraph 1.6 which now advises general practitioners to check whether the vet they are referring a case to is on the RCVS Specialist or Advanced Practitioner list, explaining the difference to the client and what sets them apart from other vets who might be prepared to accept a referral.
Also, practitioners who accept a referral should provide information to the referrer about the experience and status of those likely to be responsible for the case.
The guidance about conflicts of interest in paragraph 1.7 has also been amended such that referring surgeons should tell clients if they are referring their case to a practice owned by the same group.
There is new guidance about how vets and nurses talk about referral practitioners, with the new advice being to focus on accepted terms such as 'RCVS Specialist' and 'RCVS Advanced Practitioner', and avoid more general terms like 'referral surgeon' or 'consultant' to avoid confusion or implying that individuals hold more qualifications than they do.
Lastly, there is new guidance that vets may only use the name 'Specialist' in the name of their practice where there is genuine and meaningful involvement, and oversight, in case management by at least one RCVS specialist in all disciplines where any clinical services are offered under this business name.
https://www.rcvs.org.uk/setting-standards/advice-and-guidance/code-of-professional-conduct-for-veterinary-surgeons/supporting-guidance/referrals-and-second-opinions/
Poulvac CVI + HVT Marek’s vaccine provides the combination of the Rispens CVI strain and the HVT strain.
Zoetis says this combination of serotypes has long been recognised for providing strong, reliable protection against the disease, effective even against the very virulent pathotype of the virus.
John Kenyon, Zoetis National Veterinary Manager for Poultry said: "Marek’s disease remains a major problem for the poultry industry.
"To increase protection, it is a good idea to combine the CVI and HVT vaccine strains, and the new supplies of our vaccine help to make this more feasible.
“Currently in some longer-lived broilers and backyard laying hens a vaccine composed of just a single serotype is used, but it is advantageous to use a combination of serotypes to boost immunity further.”
Marek’s vaccination with Poulvac CVI + HVT can be performed in the hatchery at day of age via subcutaneous or intramuscular injection.
The Zoetis vaccine is supported with a range of services, including hatchery and vaccine audits, vaccine training and technical assistance.
The initiative comes after BEVA's new nurse committee ran a survey which found a poor understanding within the profession and amongst clients of what equine nurses can do.
Nurses said they believed they could be given more responsibility and do more within their roles and that there was a lack of opportunity for progression.
BEVA President David Rendle, who is championing this initiative, said: “RVNs are a significant an asset to any equine practice.
“They have invested a lot of time and effort to become highly skilled but in some instances their significant attributes are not being utilised to the full.
“Allowing RVNs to perform the clinical tasks that they are qualified to carry out under Schedule 3 of the Veterinary Surgeons Act 1966, will provide better job fulfilment and career development as well as free up veterinary surgeons to carry out other tasks, all increasing the efficiency of the veterinary team.
“I feel, and the RVN survey results would seem to confirm, that veterinary surgeons and practice managers do not appreciate how much veterinary nurses are allowed to do in equine practice.
"We all know veterinary nurses have the ability; look at what they do in small animal and human nursing, but we have felt unnecessarily constrained by Schedule 3 of the Veterinary Surgeons Act 1966 and the associated RCVS guidelines.
"If you actually look at Schedule 3 it is clear that we can and should be letting our qualified equine nurses do far more.
“There are so many things in equine practice that nurses do better than vets.
"In addition to performing clinical tasks they can add wider value; they are generally (or are perceived by clients to be!) more patient, empathetic and caring so we should utilise these skills and get nurses to take on some of the roles that take more time and require longer client interactions – discussing parasite control programmes, running weight loss clinics, reviewing healthcare plans, making follow-up phone calls and visits to name just a few.
"Nurses can take a lot of pressure off vets and can add a significant revenue stream for the practice.”
On the 9th February, the BEVA will be hosting an online discussion forum for all members of the practice team to discuss the role of nurses and how their skills, experience and knowledge can be better-used.
It's free for BEVA members: https://www.beva.org.uk/Home/Events/BEVA-Events/Event-Details.aspx?eventDateId=1716
In addition, the Association is organising a number of other career events for nurses throughout the year:
Marie Rippingale Chair of the BEVA Nurse Committee said: “Last year’s recruitment and retention survey revealed that 50% of nurse respondents were earning less than £25,000 per annum and 48% of nurses said they were likely to look for a new job in the next two years.
"When asked their top reasons for leaving, salary was the biggest reason, and common themes on what would help the retention of nurses included salary, work-life balance and career progression.
“The review of Schedule 3 is important so we can encourage delegation of tasks to RVNs.
"This will allow RVNs to demonstrate their value and worth, earning money for the practice and achieving job satisfaction at the same time. This will contribute positively towards the current retention crisis.”
To find out more about what equine veterinary nurses can do in practice visit https://www.beva.org.uk/nurses
Photo: Liphook Equine Hospital.
Last year Petplan received over 31,000 nominations across the five award categories: Practice of the Year, Vet of the Year, Vet Nurse of the Year, Practice Manager of the Year and Practice Support Staff of the Year.
The awards are judged by an independent panel which narrows the field to three finalists in each category, who are then invited to attend the awards ceremony.
The judges are looking for examples of exceptional levels of animal care, building and sustaining great relationships with colleagues and pet owners, and those who have gone above and beyond the call of duty.
James Barnes, Head of Sales & Partnerships at Petplan, said: “The Petplan Veterinary Awards provide the perfect opportunity to say thank you for the exceptional work carried out by members of the veterinary profession, whatever their field and wherever they’re based. The Petplan Vet Awards provide a great opportunity for both clients and colleagues to recognise the dedication and talent of veterinary professionals, teams and practices, right across the UK and say a particular thank you to those who have kept up the exceptional level of care even in the midst of a global crisis."
To nominate a colleague or your practice, visit www.petplan.co.uk before nominations close on 10th January 2022.
The webinar, which takes place on Thursday 30th June at 7.30pm, is being presented by Debbie Boone, billed as one of America’s most prominent and experienced veterinary communications consultants.
Gerrard Harkins, Premier Vet Alliance’s Commercial Director said: “Many people struggle with managing challenging behaviour and confrontation in the workplace and Debbie will be focusing on providing delegates with pragmatic advice and skills to put into practice.
"She is one of the veterinary industry’s most prominent and successful communicators so we’re extremely fortunate to be able to access her advice.
“We’re also looking forward to gaining a US perspective on this important subject.”
To register for the webinar, visit: https://tinyl.io/5aIk
Nutrafibre contains high fibre pellets which use a combination of insoluble and soluble plant fibres, probiotic & prebiotics and fish hydrolysate which, the company says, optimises stool consistency and encourages normal bowel movements.
The company claims Nutrafibre also assists anal gland clearance, helps maintain a sufficient level of fibre in the body, supports pets with sensitive digestion, helps reduce hairball in cats and also helps to balance raw and high meat content diets.
Chris Jones, Director at Nutravet said: “We’re incredibly excited to launch this innovative new fibre product.
"The team have worked in partnership with veterinary practices across the UK to create this high fibre supplement and the feedback has been incredibly positive from both vets and pet owners alike.”
For more information, contact: 0845 604 1688, email: info@nutravet.co.uk or visit www.nutravet.com.
In the study1, which was funded by Universities Federation for Animal Welfare (UFAW), an online questionnaire was completed by 744 snake owners worldwide but predominantly from the UK (68.8%).
The questionnaire investigated housing and husbandry practices and snake health and welfare as measured by clinical signs and behavioural indicators.
Associations between clinical signs, behavioural indicators and housing and husbandry aspects were tested for the three most common snake families: Pythonoids, Boids and Colubrids.
The study found 54.7% of snakes were kept in enclosures shorter in length or height than their body, preventing them from stretching out fully.
10.2% of snakes in the UK were kept in enclosures that do not comply with current recommended guidelines (minimum enclosure length <0.66 of snake length).
Whilst most snake owners (93.1%) reported measuring the temperature in their snakes’ enclosures, 24% of these checked less than the recommended once daily.
When looking at the most commonly owned snake species (royal pythons, corn snakes and common boa constrictors), 47.2% were kept in sub-optimal temperatures for their species.
Furthermore, 48.1% of owners reported not measuring the humidity in their snakes’ enclosure.
Owners reported that many snakes experienced at least one of the listed clinical signs, with the most common issues being skin shedding (28.2%), parasites (11.2%), rostral cuts and scrapes (7.4%) and respiratory problems (5.6%).
Snakes that were kept in enclosures <1 snake length had significantly more clinical signs compared to those snakes kept in enclosures >1 snake length.
Similarly, most snakes were reported to experience at least one of the listed negative behaviours, most commonly interacting with transparent boundaries (52.8%), wincing or withdrawal of head when gently touched (52.4%), putting the head under the substrate (52.1%), unusually high level of activity (51.1%) and attempting to escape (45.9%).
All these negative behaviours have previously been described as associated with captive stress.
Snakes that were reported as having more clinical signs tended to show more reported negative behaviours.
Dr Nicola Rooney, Senior Lecturer in Wildlife and Conservation at Bristol Veterinary School and corresponding author for the paper, said: “Our study has highlighted various concerns for snake welfare.
"The first of these relates to enclosure size, with snakes commonly being kept in vivaria preventing straight-line postures and movement.
"Snakes that were unable to stretch out fully had more clinical signs than those that were able to stretch out fully.
“Whilst we did not find a significant association between temperature or humidity and measures of health and welfare in this study, it is a concern that many snakes were housed in conditions considered sub-optimal for their species.
"We know that appropriate temperature and humidity is vital for maintaining the health of snakes and it would therefore be prudent to investigate these associations further, using methods other than owner reporting.”
Dr Huw Golledge, Animal Welfare Editor-in-Chief, said: “Until now, there has been little empirical data on the housing and husbandry practices of privately kept snakes, and how these impact on their welfare.
"As the first study of this size, this research provides valuable baseline data against which future surveys or welfare interventions can be compared.
“As this survey relies on owner-reported information, it is very likely that many of the frequencies of clinical and behavioural signs are underestimated.
"This demonstrates the need for evidence-based recommendations, and the importance of such recommendations being made accessible to owners to improve snake welfare.”
Reference
Photo: Brown and Black Snake in Close Up Photography © deedee Pexels
Sponsored by Vets4Pets, Sarah will look at ways the veterinary profession can improve the detection of this condition and enable you to offer practical advice and support for older animals and their owners.
Sarah is an RCVS and European Veterinary Specialist in Behavioural Medicine and was made a Fellow of the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons in 2018.
She is a Certified Clinical Animal Behaviourist under the ASAB accreditation scheme and registered as a Veterinary Behaviourist with the Animal Behaviour and Training Council.
Dr Huw Stacey, Director of Clinical Services at Vets4Pets (pictured right) said: “Sadly, cognitive dysfunction is a progressive degenerative disease that can affect many of our beloved pets during their lifespan.
"However, various studies have shown that early intervention, using a combination of environmental, nutritional and medicinal approaches, can lead to significant improvement in quality of life.
“As part of our commitment to the wellbeing of pets, we are partnering with Sarah to sponsor this webinar and enable the entire industry to access the latest insights into early detection and proper management of the condition.
“Our aim is to help educate vets and nurses across the nation and empower them in their decision making when diagnosing elderly pets.”
The webinar will consist of a 45-minute webinar and 15-minute Q&A session.
It will count as one hour of CPD, and a recording will be available to attendees for a year following the event.
The webinar also forms part of a wider campaign which will see pet owners polled to ascertain their current understanding of the condition, and ultimately help to raise consumer awareness of cognitive dysfunction.
To register for a free place, visit: https://bit.ly/3IkuC9e
Ms Bowler faced four sets of charges, each of which contained sub-charges, summarised as follows:
Despite being served with the Notice of Inquiry, Ms Bowler decided not to attend the hearing due to ill-health but was represented by a counsel and solicitors.
The Committee did not find that Ms Bowler was medically unfit to attend on the basis of the medical evidence before it.
The Committee also concluded that it was in the public interest and interests of Ms Bowler to proceed with the hearing in her absence so that it could be concluded in a timely manner.
Ms Bowler’s counsel applied for parts of the hearing to be heard in private on health grounds, which was approved by the Committee.
It was also determined that any parts in the Committee’s decision or hearing that referred to Ms Bowler’s health would be redacted.
At the outset of the hearing, Ms Bowler’s counsel made admissions to five of the sub-charges which the Committee therefore found proven.
She also made some partial admissions in relations to a further 11 sub-charges.
After hearing a wide range of evidence, both written and oral, from Ms Bowler, the College, from clients and from an expert witness, the Committee found all charges proved except for four sub-charges.
On deciding whether the proved charges amounted to serious professional misconduct, the Committee took the following aggravating factors into account.
In mitigation:
In all, the Committee decided that the seriousness of the misconduct meant that a sanction was necessary to meet the public interest.
When deciding on whether to issue a reprimand with or without a warning, the Committee once again decided that the misconduct was too serious to allow for this.
It also decided that a reprimand and/or warning was not sufficient to protect animals and the wider public interest.
It then went onto consider whether a sanction of ‘suspension’ was sufficient but noted that it did not have enough evidence to show that Ms Bowler had shown significant insight to continue to practise unrestricted in the future.
The Committee eventually concluded that Ms Bowler’s conduct was incompatible with remaining on the Register.
Neil Slater, chairing the Disciplinary Committee and speaking on its behalf, said: “The Committee decided that the broad range of Ms Bowler’s misconduct which had spanned three years and eight months and involving injury or risk of injury to 18 animals, was incompatible with remaining on the Register and the public interest required removal from the Register even when all of Ms Bowler’s mitigation was taken into account.
“The Committee decided that it did not have sufficient evidence overall on Ms Bowler’s insight, current competence and future risk to persuade it that the lesser sanction of suspension was appropriate in this case.
“Although Ms Bowler had shown some insight, the Committee decided that she would need to have provided detailed evidence about her current practice before it could decide that she no longer represented a risk to animals in the future.
“The Committee therefore concluded that ‘removal from the Register’ was the appropriate and proportionate sanction because there had been a serious departure from professional standards, a reckless disregard for professional standards, multiple cases involving harm or risk of harm to animals and because, in Ms Bowler’s absence, it had been difficult to unravel whether she had an attitudinal problem.
“These were all factors in the Disciplinary Committee Sanctions Guidance that indicated that a sanction of removal was the appropriate sanction and, in the Committee’s decision, removal from the Register was the only sanction which would meet the public interest.
"It concluded that a lesser sanction would undermine public confidence in the profession and in the regulatory process.”
https://www.rcvs.org.uk/concerns/disciplinary-hearings
Apoquel chewable tablets were approved by the Veterinary Medicines Directorate (VMD) in November 2021.
Apoquel Chewable contains the same active ingredient, at the same dosing regime, for the same indications as original Apoquel, but in a palatable formulation which, in a field-study of client-owned dogs, was found to have a 91.6% acceptance rate.1
Dr Carly Mason, President of the British Veterinary Dermatology Study Group (BVDSG), said: “The new chewable form of Apoquel provides owners with a means of controlling itch using a tablet that can be given like a treat or mixed with a meal, making it much easier for owners and more acceptable to their pet.
“In many cases, the chewable formulation will be the obvious first-line Apoquel for veterinarians to prescribe to control canine itching while the underlying cause of allergic dermatitis is investigated.”
For the research1, 190 faecal samples were collected from dogs in 140 households (114 samples from raw fed dogs and 76 from non-raw fed dogs).
Salmonella species was detected in 4% of the samples (all raw fed) and antimicrobial-resistant E. coli was detected in 40% of all dogs, but in 62% of raw fed dogs.
The authors say that statistical analysis confirmed that this represented a significantly higher prevalence of AMR E. coli, including multidrug resistance and third generation cephalosporin resistance, and Salmonella species in dogs fed raw compared to non-raw meat diets.
The authors concluded that strategies should be implemented to increase the awareness of the risks of feeding raw meat diets to dogs, to reduce any potential risk to owners, their families, and their pets.
Nicola Di Girolamo, Editor of JSAP says: “In this study, an association between raw meat diets in dogs and faecal carriage of potentially dangerous enteric bacteria has been observed.
"Readers should keep in mind that cross-sectional studies such as this one lay the basis for additional research more suited to prove causality.”
The findings will be published in a freely-available and independently-authored report.
Jane Balmain, Chief Operating Officer at Vets4Pets (pictured right), said: “The last 18 months have been indescribably tough for everyone, not least the veterinary practice teams. Soaring levels of pet ownership coupled with recruitment challenges have meant that an already-stretched profession has been almost brought to its knees.
"As a profession, you’ve always put pets first. But now it’s time to also concentrate on you - the vets, nurses and support teams that make up our beloved sector. We want to hear how you’re feeling and give you the power to help us make change.
“By launching this sector-wide survey, we’re kick-starting a vital conversation to protect the wellbeing of vet teams and the future of the profession. We believe that, by sharing experiences openly and honestly from all corners of the sector, we can come together to bring about the much-needed changes to ensure it remains an attractive, long-term career option.”
The survey, which runs until 16th November 2021, can be completed at www.projectlisten.co.uk. Respondents will remain anonymous and no data will be collected via the survey.
Mike, an RCVS Queen’s Medal winner, will be in conversation with Catheryn Partington BVSc CertAVP(VC) MSc MRCVS, Jose Matos DVM DipECVIM (Cardiology) MRCVS European and RCVS Recognised Specialist in Small Animal Cardiology (canine and feline cardiology) and Paul Freeman MA, VetMB, Cert SAO, Dip ECVN, MRCVS (European and RCVS Specialist in Veterinary Neurology) (canine and feline neurology).
During the event, they will be explaining how Improve's new Academy Series can help vet professionals meet their annual CPD targets, learn through self-assessment and reflective study, and bring them to the forefront of medicine in several specialist areas.
Heber Alves, CEO of Improve International, said: “Here at Improve International, we are proud to be providing CPD training alongside the historic and prestigious University of Cambridge for our first Academy Series.
"We are excited to be working with many of its pioneering specialists at the Department of Veterinary Medicine and, as a former vet myself, I look forward to hearing how my fellow veterinarians handled the most difficult challenges of their careers.”
www.improveinternational.com
At the heart of the new system is a transportable monitor (pictured right) which starts automatically after you connect two sensors and press the power button.
The system uses the handheld Darvall H100N Pulse Oximeter, which uses Nellcor OxiMax pulse oximetry technology.
It also comes with veterinary blood pressure NIBP small animal cuffs which are designed for accurate pressure detection in exotic animals, cats, and all sizes of dog.
Completing the Darvall Express system is the Darvall Capnograph which continuously measures the EtCO2 and respiratory rate, and features EtCO2 waveform Cardiac Oscillation artifact detection, for correct respiratory rate determination.
There's a default system set-up for cats and small dogs, a colour-coded display and a ten-hour battery life.
Darvall says the monitor has been thoroughly tested at veterinary practices in Australia, where it displayed outstanding performance in small dogs and cats, which are notoriously difficult to get reliable readings.
Darvall founder, Dr Colin Dunlop said: “Anaesthetic monitoring plays a vital role in keeping patients safe, giving peace of mind to the hospital veterinary team, and boosting pet owner confidence in the care their pet is receiving.
"This is vitally important when you remember mortality in veterinary patients is many times higher than in human hospital practice”.
http://www.aasmedical.co.uk
Both veterinary professionals and clients can nominate people and practices for one of five awards.
Every professional nominated in the awards will be sent a personalised certificate.
An independent panel of judges from within the veterinary industry will then narrow down the entries to a shortlist of three finalists for each award, who will all be invited to awards ceremony in Manchester on Thursday 21st March 2024.
Bella von Mesterhazy, Sales and Marketing Director at Petplan, said: “Every year we think we’ve seen it all, but then we’re overjoyed by the sheer volume of and enthusiasm behind the latest nominations.
"So for anyone who’s considered nominating before but hasn’t got round to it, this year’s the time to get involved, as we all come together to champion the immense success of the UK’s veterinary industry, whilst celebrating the awards quarter-century anniversary.”
petplan.co.uk/vetawards
Nominations close on 8th January 2024.
Specifically, remote assessments will make sure that practices are continuing to meet Veterinary Medicines Regulations, the Core Standards of the PSS and other key standards relating to the practice's accreditation type and level.
Mandisa Greene, RCVS President and Chair of the Practice Standards Group, said: “We have introduced these remote assessments as a means of being able to quality assure veterinary practices that are either in the Scheme or who wish to join it, while still making sure that public health is safeguarded and that the burden our face-to-face assessments may place on practices is reduced.
"All our Practice Standards Scheme Assessors will be trained in carrying out remote assessments, and practices that are due an assessment will be given the full details of how it will work in advance, just like if a physical assessment of the premises were taking place.
"In the immediate-term we will be prioritising those practices that were due assessment visits in March, April and May this year which were cancelled due to the nationwide lockdown and they are currently being contacted to make arrangements. We will then start a rolling programme of visits for the other delayed assessments over the next few months. We will aim to give all practices at least one month’s notice before a visit takes place."
In order to help veterinary teams at RCVS-accredited practices understand the changes and its implications, the RCVS has produced a list of anticipated FAQs containing the details of how remote assessments will work. These can be found at: www.rcvs.org.uk/setting-standards/practice-standards-scheme/remote-assessments.
Those with any additional enquiries should contact the RCVS Practice Standards Team on: pss@rcvs.org.uk.
The Disciplinary Committee considered a number of charges against Javier Salas Navarro MRCVS and Roman Kristin over 35 days.
The charges against Dr Navarro concerned his treatment of a kitten named Marnie. They included:
In August 2016, failing to read the anaesthesia consent form in relation to a surgical spay he performed;
When Marnie was readmitted for surgery, failing to read the anaesthesia consent form, failing to undertake adequate assessment of Marnie’s condition; performing surgery without adequately considering her condition; subjecting Marnie to anaesthesia without recognising the seriousness of her illness; failing to obtain informed consent from the owners; administering medication which was contra-indicated; and failure to make an adequate record of his involvement in Marnie’s care.
The charges against Dr Kristin also related to his treatment of Marnie. They included:
In August 2016, failing to undertake an adequate assessment of her condition; failure to recognise and record the fact that Marnie could not pass urine; failure to refer or offer her for specialist treatment; and failure to ensure Marnie received care and treatment overnight.
When admitting Marnie for surgery, that he made a number of clinical mistakes including failure to gain informed consent; and failure to recognise the seriousness of her illness;
that there were a number of failings in relation to Marnie’s care, including failure to arrange adequate overnight care, failure to monitor and record her condition, and failure to gain informed consent for the overnight care.
that he failed to advise Marnie’s owners that he suspected her uterers had been ligated during the spay, failed to advise Marnie’s owners that she required specialist veterinary treatment; and advised that Marnie undergo further surgery at the practice in spite of this meaning her having to undergo further anaesthesia in a week and with poor chances of survival;
that the above conduct was misleading and dishonest.
The Disciplinary Committee found a number of the facts in the charges against both Dr Navarro and Dr Kristin proven (the full details can be found in the documentation at www.rcvs.org.uk/disciplinary).
The Committee found that Dr Navarro breached a number of aspects of the Code of Professional Conduct for Veterinary Surgeons including: making animal health and welfare the first consideration when attending to animals; the provision of appropriate and adequate veterinary care; responsible prescription, supply and administration of medicines; communication with professional colleagues to ensure the health and welfare of the animal; being open and honest with clients and respecting their needs and requirements; effective communication with clients; keeping clear and accurate clinical records; and working with the veterinary team to coordinate the care of animals.
Of the proven charges, the Committee found that his initial failure to read Marnie’s anaesthesia consent form on 5 August did not amount to disgraceful conduct in a professional respect, but that the repetition of this failure on 9 August did amount to disgraceful conduct. It also found that Dr Navarro’s failure to undertake adequate assessment and perform surgery without this assessment amounted to serious professional misconduct. Furthermore, the Committee found that subjecting Marnie to anaesthesia in spite of her being unwell, failure to obtain informed consent and failure to keep adequate records also amounted to serious professional misconduct.
For Dr Kristin, in summary, the Committee found not proven the allegation that he had failed to respond on 5 August 2016 to concerns from Marnie’s owners about her condition while she was recovering from a surgical spay and also all the allegations relating to Dr Kristin’s admission of Marnie to the practice on 9 August on the basis that it was not satisfied so as to be sure that Dr Kristin had been the veterinary surgeon who admitted Marnie on that day.
The Committee found proven the remaining charges and found he breached the following parts of the Code of Professional Conduct for Veterinary Surgeons: making animal health and welfare the first consideration when attending to animals; keeping within area of competence and referring responsibly; providing appropriate and adequate veterinary care; responsible prescribing, supply and administration of medicines; communication with colleagues to ensure the health and welfare of the animal; being open and honest with clients and respecting their needs and requirements; communicating effectively with clients and obtaining informed consent; keeping clear and accurate clinical records; and working with the veterinary team to coordinate the care of animals.
Of the proven charges, the Committee determined that his failure to adequately assess Marnie’s health, to obtain a clinical history, to undertake blood tests and recognise that she was seriously ill, amounted to disgraceful conduct in a professional respect and led to “Marnie’s underlying condition going undetected and undoubtedly contributed to her eventual death two days later”.
The Committee also found that Dr Kristin’s decision to hospitalise Marnie without adequate overnight care, place her on IV fluids without monitoring the treatment or her condition, and failure to obtain adequate informed consent – among other things – amounted disgraceful conduct in a professional respect.
Stuart Drummond, chairing the Committee and speaking on its behalf, said: "As a direct result of Dr Kristin’s acts and omissions, Marnie was left alone overnight on fluids when those fluids had nowhere to go. Had he done his job properly he would have known that and Marnie could have avoided the prolonged suffering caused by the chosen course of treatment that did not address the underlying condition. Every element of Dr Kristin’s behaviour was catastrophic for Marnie, and yet he took no personal responsibility for her welfare and just went home.”
Following its findings on disgraceful conduct in a professional respect, the Committee then went on to consider its sanction for both Dr Navarro and Dr Kristin.
In respect of Dr Navarro, the Committee considered the mitigating factors including previous good character, admissions to some of the facts of the case from the outset; genuine insight and remorse into the seriousness of the actions; his youth and inexperience; and relevant and good-quality testimonials from colleagues. The Committee noted that the testimonials were universally positive and demonstrated that Dr Navarro had reflected on his conduct, had become more mature and confident in his practice and made efforts to rectify the areas in which he had fallen below standards.
Stuart Drummond said: “Although the consequences for Marnie and her owners were clearly devastating, the Committee considered that Dr Navarro’s part in her demise has to be seen in the context of all the evidence. In light of the extensive mitigation, including significant evidence of insight and remediation, the Committee was able to conclude that Dr Navarro did not represent a future risk to animals or the public. In such circumstances, the Committee considered that it was not necessary to restrict Dr Navarro’s registration and that a reprimand was the appropriate and proportionate sanction in his case.”
In relation to Dr Kristin, the Committee took into account positive character evidence from Mr Karel Daniel, a semi-retired veterinary surgeon and Vice-President of the Czech Republic Veterinary Chamber, a similar body to the RCVS in that country, as well as other testimonials on his behalf. In mitigation, the Committee considered Dr Kristin’s previously unblemished career, the fact that it was a single case involving a single animal; some development of insight into his conduct; no evidence of repetition; expressions of remorse; the impact of a family bereavement during the course of proceedings; and his financial position.
However, the Committee also took into account aggravating factors including a lack of candour from Dr Kristin when he was giving evidence, demonstrated by a tendency to blame others rather than take responsibility, as well as his recklessness in suggesting a third operation on Marnie that was not in her interests, rather than referring her into specialist care.
The final decision of the Committee on the sanction for Dr Kristin was that, given the seriousness of the misconduct, it was satisfied that this warranted a six-month suspension period. However, given the mitigating factors, the Committee decided that four months was appropriate and proportionate.
Commenting on the sanction Stuart Drummond said: “The Committee determined that it was important a clear message be sent that this sort of behaviour is wholly inappropriate and not to be tolerated. It brings discredit upon the respondent and discredit upon the profession and, most importantly, caused harm to Marnie and great distress to her owners.
"The Committee did consider whether to remove Dr Kristin from the Register. However, in light of the mitigation in this case, the fact that this was a single case in an otherwise unblemished career, together with the unlikelihood he would repeat his disgraceful conduct, the Committee decided that, in all the circumstances, to remove him from the Register would be disproportionate.
"The Committee therefore decided to order that the Registrar suspend Dr Kristin’s registration…. The Committee was satisfied that a period of four months was appropriate and proportionate in all the circumstances."
The full facts and findings from the case can be found at www.rcvs.org.uk/disciplinary
The new Improve Veterinary Academy Series is comprised of five month-long semesters, each of which will focus on a different clinical topic.
Each semester will consist of videoed lectures, discussion forums, journal clubs, as well as the ability to access the university’s latest evidence-based research in these areas.
The clinical topics to be explored are:
Each semester counts towards your annual CPD requirement.
Professor James Wood, Head of the Department of Veterinary Medicine at University of Cambridge, said: “This new partnership will allow veterinary nurses to get the latest evidence-based knowledge directly from our top specialists.
"They will also learn to apply valuable skills in their everyday practice life and engage with others on Improve International’s global, interactive online platform.
Charlotte French, Head of Curriculum & Quality at Improve International, said: “We are thrilled to be working with University of Cambridge Department of Veterinary Medicine as another innovative way to help the veterinary community take their careers to the next level.”
Professor Mike Herrtage, Trustee of the University of Cambridge Veterinary School Trust and former Dean of the Cambridge Veterinary School, said: “The new joint agreement brings together Improve International, with its outstanding record of high-quality and innovative CPD provision and the staff of the Department of Veterinary Medicine with their excellent specialist clinical knowledge and experience, as well as their recognised quality in small group teaching to stage the Improve International Academy Series.
"This will provide a new milestone in CPD course delivery.”
Current estimates suggest that around 95,000 calves, 30 million chicks and 3,000 Billy kids are affected per year.
The new position calls for solutions based on the overarching principle that quality of life should take precedence over lifespan, with the longer-term aim to move away from the production of unwanted animals all together. In the meantime, the position calls for further research into solutions to reduce numbers of additional male offspring and for humane methods of killing surplus animals on-farm.
The dairy and egg industries have been advised to adopt a ‘3Rs’ (reduce, replace, refine) approach to the rearing and slaughter of animals which are surplus to the requirements of the specific industries. Reduction recommendations include selecting for sex (a technology used quite frequently within the dairy farming community) and increasing the length of time that an animal can produce milk through selective breeding.
In the absence of these options, the position recommends raising male offspring for meat, with the caveat that calves and billy goat kids should be raised within UK high welfare schemes only.
In the absence of any reduce or replacement options, veterinary experts advise that killing should be undertaken in the most humane way and that all the animal’s welfare needs must be addressed prior to slaughter.
In line with BVA’s sustainable animal agriculture position, this policy recommends that when animals are killed, every effort should be made to make sure that the carcass is used. For example, the carcasses of male chicks killed by controlled atmospheric stunning can be used in animal feed, such as for reptiles and birds of prey.
BVA Junior Vice President, James Russell (pictured right) said: "Unwanted male production animals in the dairy and meat industries are an ethical challenge on a number of levels. Firstly, for the producer who may have animals with little or no commercial value. Secondly, for the consumer who may find the notion of these unused animals a difficulty. Our new joint position is based around the principle of ‘a life worth living’ and looks at ways that the veterinary profession can work with the farming community to reduce the numbers of animals that this affects and ensure that high welfare is always front and centre.
"If slaughter of affected animals is undertaken humanely, it is not a welfare harm per se, but greater measures should be taken to make sure that these decisions are made with minimal carcass wastage and an eye to the economic, emotional and environmental impact at a farm level.
"With greater public understanding of ethical and animal welfare issues faced by the industry, the promotion of farm assurance schemes and further research into alternative breeding options such as selective sex technology, we hope to reduce these numbers and improve the welfare of the animals involved."
BCVA President, Professor David Barrett said: "The number of unwanted male dairy calves has fallen substantially in recent years, due in part to more efficient milk production meaning we now need fewer dairy cows to produce the same volume of milk, as well as the use of breeding technologies that mean we can select for female calves. Nevertheless, surplus males are still produced. Provided these calves’ welfare is protected they should become part of the meat production supply chain either as high-quality UK farm assured veal or beef."
"As we strive for improved sustainability and increase efficient use of resource in food production, we need to use every product from dairying, including calves that can be reared for meat. Our entire industry needs to work together to create a robust supply chains for high quality, farm assured British dairy beef and veal and we need to help consumers understand they should embrace these products. They are very different from intensively reared veal of the type produced in systems previously banned in the UK."
Pill Assist Cat is a soft treat pouch into which you insert a tablet, mould the pouch around the tablet and then feed to the cat.
Royal Canin says that in its tests, tablets were administered to cats successfully in 91% of cases using Pill Assist, which is not far off the 97% achieved with Pill Assist Dog which was launched earlier this year.
Erin Carr, Veterinary Marketing Executive at Royal Canin, said: "It’s an honour to be recognised by such an important industry body.
"Pill Assist Cat is set to launch next year. As with our Pill Assist Dog products, the aim is to make a real difference to pet’s health and wellbeing by turning pill time into a positive experience for both the pet and the owner."
For the study “Comparative accuracy of two veterinary-calibrated point-of-care glucometres for measurement of blood glucose concentration in dogs” blood was sampled from client and staff-owned dogs above 6 months of age, of various breeds and health status.
The samples were then used to compare the accuracy of both PGBMs against a reference method - the hexokinase reaction method.
The authors say this was the first study to investigate AccuTell and the first published evidence comparing AlphaTrak2 with a reference method.
The study also sought to determine how useful the monitors are in clinical decision making and to assess the effect that packed cell volume (PCV) (known to affect the reliability of blood glucose concentration measurement in dogs) has on blood glucose concentration using the two PBGMs.
AccuTell was found to be more accurate and useful in a clinical setting than AlphaTrak2.
Both PBGMs were inaccurate in comparison with the hexokinase reaction method, and although they have potential for standard clinical use, unexpected blood glucose concentrations need to be checked by the hexokinase reaction method.
In addition, measurement of blood glucose concentration by the AlphaTrak2 was affected by PCV whereas measurement by the AccuTell was not.
Nicola Di Girolamo, Editor of JSAP said: “We oftentimes think that an instrument that is developed specifically for our patients will provide satisfactorily results on most occasions.
"Instead, studies such as the one presented here, are critical to understand whether the ‘numbers’ provided by an instrument are reliable for clinical use.
"The authors provided 95% limits of agreements to their results.
"This value is of great help for clinicians, since it shows the difference expected between the instrument and the reference standard in the majority of occasions.”
The study can be read online here: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jsap.13491
The survey, which received over 1300 responses, found that the problem is more noticeable amongst locum vets (69% have worked when they’ve not felt well enough) and employees (64%) but is also an issue amongst partners and the self-employed (57%). It’s more common for vets in clinical practice (65%) than in non-clinical roles (51%). In all of these sectors over half of vets reported working when they were unwell.
18% of the vets surveyed said they do not take sick leave because they feel uncomfortable doing so. This is more common amongst younger vets (25% of under 35s compared to 19% of 35-54-year olds, and 8% of over 55s) and female vets (21% compared to 11% of male vets).
The main reasons given for not taking time off when sick are concerns about the impact on colleagues and worries about "letting the team down". One respondent said: "Because I would leave the practice understaffed and the remaining vets would have to work a lot harder and longer as a result." Another said: "Being ill is not an option. The practice is short staffed."
Members also reported a perceived culture of working through sickness. One said: "The veterinary industry on the whole has a 'phone in dead' policy ie don't call in sick!" and another said: "[I] feel that I am judged for taking time off, even when I lost my voice and was unable to consult."
A small number of responses (36 of the 450 vets who commented) mentioned that they did not receive sick pay or only received limited sick pay, so they avoided taking sick leave for financial reasons.
The BVA is reminding all vets that they have a legal right not to attend work when they aren’t well enough do so and that any concerns should be discussed with managers. The free BVA legal helpline is available to members to provide further guidance on taking sick leave.
BVA President Daniella Dos Santos said: "We know that veterinary workplaces are under enormous pressure from staff shortages, and none of us wants to feel like we are letting our colleagues down, but presenteeism only stores up more problems for the future.
"Working when you are ill puts your own health and wellbeing at risk longer term and can also put your colleagues, clients and patients under your care at risk.
"It’s particularly worrying that some of our colleagues feel pressure to work when they feel unwell, especially younger members. As a profession we have made huge steps forward in recognising the issues around mental health and supporting one another and being physically unwell should be the same.
“Anyone who is concerned should speak to their manager and remember that BVA members can always get free advice and support via the BVA legal helpline. Ultimately, it’s important to create a workplace culture that supports the entire veterinary team to prioritise their own physical and mental health."
Photo: Javier Brosch / Shutterstock
Cosacthen contains 0.25 mg/ml of tetracosactide which had only previously been available as human-registered or compounded veterinary ‘special’ preparations meaning availability and cost could be unpredictable.
Tetracosactide is used in the ACTH stimulation test to assess the adrenocortical function of patients with endocrine diseases, such as Cushing’s and Addison’s.
Dechra Brand Manager Claire Morgan said: “As experts in endocrinology, we recognise that the testing involved in adrenal conditions can be a costly process for pet owners, which can mean that some cases don’t progress to treatment or have their treatment optimised.
"The launch of Cosacthen gives veterinary surgeons the reassurance associated with a veterinary licensed medicine. As these cases can appear on an irregular basis, Cosacthen is ideal to keep in the practice ready for when a case is presented making it a cost-effective solution that can help offset the cost for owners of long-term treatment of adrenal conditions."
Cosacthen is available in 1 ml single-use vials.
For more information visit www.dechra.co.uk/cosacthen.