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 the 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/
PS: Whilst you're here, take a moment to see our latest job opportunities for vets.
Hi Mark, You raise a very valid question although this is slightly different to that covered by the conversation above. What you are raising relates to the choice of whether to refer or not, not who or where to refer to. The updated guidance is designed to make the referral process as transparent for the owner as possible so that they can make an educated decision on the appropriate level of care for their pet. If a clinician accepts that referral is not necessary for a particular case then that is presumably based on an honest assessment of one's own capabilities and facilities. If it is felt that the outcome for that patient may be better or the risk may be lower elsewhere then I think it's only reasonable that a discussion about referral should be had with the owners. There will be many routine procedures where this is completely unnecessary. What constitutes routine will of course differ between clinicians, hence we all need the self-awareness to make the right choice for the pet.