1243 farmers took part in the survey, which was held in partnership with the National Beef Association, British Dairying magazine, the relevant farming unions and the four eradication programmes.
Matt Yarnall from Boehringer said: "Reliance on veterinary input for this decision shows how valuable client discussion and guidance is. And further interrogation of the data shows other areas of BVD control where veterinary input could be extremely valuable.
"Too many producers are still holding onto PI animals in the hope they can be reared successfully and too many are making basic mistakes when it comes to herd biosecurity.
"The survey data revealed that 43% of farmers in Wales have identified a PI, but it is hugely concerning that almost half (42%) of these producers would not cull them immediately; these animals will go on to spread virus throughout the herd."
In Northern Ireland, 26 individual producers said they have kept a PI. "However, 20 had to be put down before reaching adulthood or had to be treated for other health conditions," said Matt. "Even in Scotland, with its well-established scheme, a small percentage of farmers claim they would isolate a PI and try to rear to slaughter and it was exactly the same in England."
Similarly, when it came down to the definition of a closed herd, Boehringer reports that there was significant lack of understanding about what this actually means.
Matt said: "Of the 62% of English producers that state they are closed herds, 2% rear calves away, 19% bring bulls in, 2% buy in heifers or cows and 1% purchase fattening stock.
"Obviously, this means they are not truly a closed herd and supports previous years when 23% and 24% of ‘closed herd’ producers in 2018 and 2017 respectively also brought bulls onto the farm.
"Add to this that 10% of these herds do not currently vaccinate so will not be protected against the BVD virus, and it is clear to see how vulnerable they are."
In Wales, 56% of herds were classified as closed, yet 12% still brought bulls on to the farm. Likewise in Northern Ireland, 60% of farms classified their herds as closed but 20% brought bulls on to the unit. The vast majority of Scottish herds also claimed to be closed, yet there were still inconsistencies around buying policy and biosecurity.
Matt said: "A certain lack of awareness about both the BVD Stamp it Out initiative and Gwaredu BVD schemes (43% English and 27% of Welsh producers respectively claimed to have no knowledge of these programmes) could actually be a positive for vets. It could be the perfect opportunity to engage in proactive conversations with clients, covering issues such as testing, PI removal and biosecurity."
This only affects batch number C967336A, expires before 07/2020. Any other batches of Tylan 200 Injection are not affected and may continue to be distributed.
Elanco is contacting wholesale dealers and veterinary surgeons to examine inventory immediately and quarantine products subject to this recall.
For further information regarding the recall, please contact Ms Victoria Haslingden 01256 779519 or email elanco_orders@lilly.com
First they looked at the names of all the cats and dogs they saw in 2018, finding that the most popular names for dogs were Bella, Poppy and Alfie, whilst the most popular for cats were Charlie, Bella and Molly.
By comparison, the top ten names registered at the practice in the thirties were: Susie, Sally, Judy, Penny, Candy, Sam, Betty, Simon, Wendy and Bridget.
Honestly, who calls their dog Simon? Even in the 1930s.
Tom Ward, from White Cross Vets, said: "The most common names in our research reveal a leaning towards giving pets human names. It’s fascinating that this has gone full circle and was also a trend in the late 1930s, before names such as Fido, Patch, Sooty, Duke and Fluffy became popular with cats and dogs."
White Cross says that more recently it has also seen a surge of pets named after TV and film characters including Elsa from Frozen, Baloo from The Jungle Book, Peppa the cartoon pig, and Khaleesi, Sansa, Brienne and Tyrion, the Game of Thrones characters.
First out of the stalls was Vet AI, a company founded in 2017 by Paul Hallett and Robert Dawson MRCVS, which announced last November that it had filed patents for artificial intelligence technology to deploy in giving online consultations through its newly-launched app: Joii.
More recently, a Swedish company called FirstVet has announced the UK launch of a consultation service it has offered in the Scandinavian countries for a few years now.
All three companies charge £20 for an online consultation with a veterinary surgeon.
All of these services are currently limited in what they can offer pet owners here in the UK, because veterinary surgeons are not allowed to prescribe medicines without having physically examined the patient. FirstVet says that in Sweden, similar rules apply, except that under current guidance, antiparasiticides and feline contraceptives can be prescribed remotely.
This means that for the moment at least, online consultations in the UK can only advise pet owners whether they do or do not need to see a veterinary surgeon in person, or recommend OTC treatments, such as flea control.
Personally, I'm not convinced that it's worth £20 for the privilege of asking a vet whether or not my pet needs to see a vet, although to be fair, Joii includes a free symptom checker to differentiate between those cases that need directing to see a vet in person, and those that would benefit from the online consultation. Also, if a case needs to be referred to another vet after a consultation, Joii refunds the consultation fee.
Nevertheless I think I'd just ring my normal practice and ask. But that's just me. Perhaps others will see a value in the immediacy of the online service, or that it entails less commitment.
FirstVet does, however, have another string to its bow. It has been busy forging relationships with insurers to fund the majority of its consultations. The insured owner gets a free consultation subsidised by the insurance company; if the animal requires treatment, the owner is referred to their normal vet, unless they don't have one, in which case the referral is to the nearest practice which can help.
That seems to make all sorts of sense for insured clients. It really adds value to the insurance policy, to be told you'll have access to free, immediate online veterinary consultations. Almost certainly it will mean pet owners seeking veterinary advice sooner than they might otherwise have done. For the insurer, that in turn might mean earlier diagnosis and therefore cheaper treatment. One assumes it also translates into cost-savings for the insurer by dealing with certain queries without needing a trip to the practice.
Still, the really big prize here for remote consultation companies will come if and when the regulations allow remote prescribing. Not necessarily because they'll make a mark up on the sale of prescription drugs, though of course they will, but because suddenly the proposition to the pet owner is that the consultation can, in many cases, offer more convenient and cheaper treatment than if they had to visit a practice in person.
The problem with that, however, is that the £20 remote consultation may carry a greater risk of misdiagnosis. It may mean that the preventative approach to veterinary medicine goes out of the window, at least until remote monitoring technology catches up. There is also a risk that these new limited service providers will take the bread and butter consultations from bricks and mortar practices, consultations that may have been to some degree subsidising care for other patients. These are all the sorts of things that were hotly debated at RCVS Council last November.
Nevertheless, Vet AI is unashamedly pushing for remote prescribing rules to be relaxed. Founder Robert Dawson MRCVS said: "I think that the ease and reduced cost of access to veterinary advice and medicines will have a positive impact on animal welfare. I also think that it will free up vets' time to see the cases they really need to see.
"But in truth, what I think is not the point. The whole debate at the moment is characterised by members of the profession saying what they think will happen as a result of remote prescribing. What we actually need is some evidence. I'd really like to see some movement from the College on this, for a limited number of treatments like parasiticides, before the end of the year."
As Robert says, the debate is characterised by a lack of evidence. But there is, of course, another way that online consultations could really add value to the client/vet relationship without any of these problems, and that is as an adjunct to the service offered by bricks and mortar practices.
Bricks and mortar practices can already prescribe medicines to animals under their care without physically seeing the animal on every occasion. Furthermore, there are a number of situations where a remote consultation could save both the practice and pet owner time and money. For example, post-operative follow-up consultations.
However, none of the existing providers I've spoken to plan to offer a 'white label' solution. So, if I owned a practice, I tell you what, I'd be looking into online consultation software right now. It is already possible, of course, to offer online consultations via things like Skype. But better still would be a system that allowed clients to schedule an online appointment with their normal vet, perhaps slotted in between their face-to-face consultations. As opposed to the existing online providers, you wouldn't need to refund money if a physical consultation was needed, just - perhaps - set it against the later consultation. You could also offer annual plans to include a certain number of online consultations. You could have online triage consultations carried out by veterinary nurses.
There are lots of possibilities. But if you're a bricks and mortar practice, one thing is for sure, the time to look into all this is now. You could do worse than to start here: https://www.vetsurgeon.org/news/b/veterinary-news/archive/2019/01/15/now-all-vet-practices-can-offer-remote-consultations.aspx
RCVS CEO Lizzie Lockett said: "I am so proud of our performance in the Great Place to Work Awards and the efforts of everyone at the College, and especially our HR team, who have been tirelessly and creatively striving to make the College a wonderful place to work.
"Consistently being placed in the top 50 Great Places to Work is also a testament to the sustained hard work all of our employees and the important part they play in creating a supportive, interesting and good-humoured workplace.
"We are a service-led organisation and we want to make sure that we give our best to the veterinary professions and the general public. If our team enjoys the work, and the workplace, that will improve the service we are able to offer and, ultimately, benefit animal health and welfare."
The link emerged after six cats were taken to separate practices in England suffering with clinical signs of TB. Further tests confirmed that they were all infected with Myobacterium bovis. Seven more cats from the same household were also infected, but asymptomatic.
Researchers at the University of Edinburgh’s Royal (Dick) School of Veterinary Studies carried out an investigation to identify the source of infection.
The one common factor identified, as detailed in their paper, was that all the animals, which were kept exclusively indoors, had been fed Natural Instinct's Wild Venison cat food.
The authors concluded that whilst not conclusive (they were not able to test the food), their research provided 'compelling, if circumstantial, evidence of an association between the commercial raw diet of these cats and their M. bovis infections.
Natural Instinct withdrew the Wild Venison product last December, as some of the ingredients were not inspected in line with EU requirements.
A spokesperson from Natural Instinct said: "Everything we do at Natural Instinct is done so with the best interests of our customers and their pets in mind. We can assure our customers that Natural Instinct followed, and continues to follow, every food standard, hygiene regulation and best practice required to produce raw pet food in the commercial marketplace.
"As a responsible manufacturer, we are regularly inspected by the Animal and Plant Health Authority (APHA). We have complied with all of the necessary requirements, and consequently APHA have confirmed they are satisfied all standards have been met by us.
"Even though we no longer manufacture and sell the Venison cat product, we are continuing to work with Food Standards Agency as part of the investigation into the Venison cat food product."
The big question is what broader implications this incident has for feeding animals with raw diets.
Professor Danièlle Gunn-Moore from the Royal (Dick) School of Veterinary Studies, a co-author of the paper, said: "With this outbreak, the problem has been feeding wild venison – the law states the stalker must have their Deer stalker level 1 qualification, but this is only a 3-day course with just one day of disease recognition etc (apparently).
"Natural Instinct apparently sourced their deer from stalkers in the Edge area re TB risk. The stalker is supposed to inspect the gralloch (innards) wild ‘on the hill’ then leave it there for wildlife to eat. They only bring the carcass in skin back with them – which means significant pathology can easily be missed.
"Do we need to strength the law? Either that, or only feed raw venison from Scotland or other areas with no M. bovis (I am ignoring all the other potential infections here).
On the broader issue of feeding cats commercial raw food, Danièlle added: "In concept I think raw food can be far more environmentally stimulating – especially for housecats.
"But that is only safe if we can master 2 things: 1) be nutritionally sound – this is now possible with good companies doing this, and 2) be free of infectious agents – and this is a real problem, especially where the meat has been minced – which they need to be to get the minerals and vitamins correctly mixed in. So I don’t see how to square the circle at present."
Reference
Conor O’Halloran et al. Tuberculosis due to Mycobacterium bovis in pet cats associated with feeding a commercial raw food diet. Journal of Feline Medicine and Surgery, 2019. DOI: 10.1177/1098612X19848455
The Essity Veterinary Academy covers four topics of education: Anatomy and Physiology of Wound Healing, Infection Management, Exudate Management and a Wound Assessment Workshop.
Richard Barker, Account Sales Executive said: "Essity Veterinary Academy events allow us to educate veterinary professionals with a full, comprehensive day of wound management.
"We have run our Academy events for the last two years and the feedback we have had has always been positive, therefore the decision to run four events again this year was an easy one.
"The events offer a great opportunity to share best practice with other veterinary professionals, and to obtain invaluable information from our Medical Education Manager, who has vast experience in dealing with all areas of wound management. We are very lucky to be able to offer these events free of charge and we can’t wait for the first event to begin on 18th June."
Essity is hosting these events across four venues, with the days running from 09:00 – 16:00, refreshments and lunch provided. The venues available this year are:
18th June, Huntingdon Racecourse
9th July, West Midlands Safari Park
17th September, Durham Cricket Club (Emirates Stadium)
24th September, Edinburgh Zoo
To book your place, email animalhealthcare@essity.com, giving your name, job title, practice details, telephone number and any dietary requirements.
Alternatively, if you would like further information please dial 01482 670124.
A shift towards a more outcomes-based model of CPD for veterinary surgeons and veterinary nurses has been under discussion for a number of years and one of its main proponents has been the current RCVS Senior Vice-President Professor Stephen May (pictured right), who chaired the CPD Policy Working Party.
Stephen said: "There has been increasing recognition over a range of different professions that CPD records based on ‘inputs’ alone, for example, measuring the number of hours attending a lecture, do not necessarily prove that any significant learning has taken place or that this learning will be used to improve professional practice.
"By contrast, research has demonstrated that CPD activities focused on outcomes encourage professionals to reflect on what they have learned, how they will apply their learning and how it will improve their practice, which has a positive impact on professionalism and patient health outcomes. Numerous other professions, including human medicine and dentistry, have moved to this model and the veterinary world has been somewhat ‘behind the curve’ as a result.
"However, as with any significant shift in policy, there has been a recognition that we needed to take the profession with us and not force through change. This is why, in March 2017, we launched a pilot scheme for the outcomes-based model with veterinary and veterinary nurse volunteers, including people who, during the initial consultation stage, had voiced some skepticism towards the concept.
"The overall feedback from volunteers was very positive and supportive towards the changes and I look forward, over the coming years, to talking to the professions at large about the benefits of the approach and how to best engage with the model."
In all, around 120 volunteers took part in the pilot, of whom 70% were veterinary surgeons and 30% veterinary nurses. When the pilot finished in October 2018, volunteers provided feedback as part of the evaluation process. Of the 57% of volunteers (n=70) who responded to the survey:
77% said they would be willing to use an outcomes-based CPD model in the future;
41% found it ‘easy’ or ‘very easy’ to implement outcomes-based CPD while only 11% thought it was either ‘difficult’ or ‘very difficult’;
61% thought that the outcomes-based model made CPD more meaningful for them and 25% said it encouraged them to undertake a wider range of CPD activities than previously;
Other feedback included the need for a better CPD recording system and more information and guidance ahead of any future changes.
Following the feedback, particularly around the need for a new approach to CPD recording, it was also recommended to Council that a new online CPD recording system should be introduced. This system will integrate the current disparate systems, such as the Student Experience Log (for vet students), Nursing Progress Log (for student VNs) and the Professional Development Phase (for recent vet graduates), making it a ‘one-stop shop’ professional development recording platform.
Richard Burley, RCVS Chief Technology Officer, said: "We will be building a new platform, consolidating all professional development-related capability for all members, into a single, integrated solution, seamlessly accessible via our ‘My Account’ online portal, and forthcoming mobile app. We have assembled a new, dedicated, software development team to drive this work and more details about this system will be published in coming months."
Linda Prescott-Clements, RCVS Director of Education, added:"Following the approval of the CPD proposals by RCVS Council, a phased roll-out of the new model and the accompanying IT system will take place. This includes recruiting a group of volunteers from the profession later this year to get some initial feedback around the guidance resources and online CPD platform, with members of the profession being voluntarily able to sign up to the new model and IT system from January 2020 onwards.
"Implementation of the new CPD requirement for all members is expected to start in January 2022 but, prior to that, we will be working hard to talk to the profession about why an outcomes-based model is a more effective and meaningful way of undertaking CPD and this will include workshops, webinars and roadshows. Look out for more news on our plans over the coming months."
For more information about the College’s current CPD policy requirement and policy, visit: www.rcvs.org.uk/cpd
The company says the new range performs as well as the leading brands and delivers consistently reliable sterilisation, but at a much lower price point than the market has seen before. The entry level 8 Litre machine retails at £1,100.
The Yeson machines range in size from an 8 litre to a 22 litre capacity and offer quiet Class B operation, 7 pre-set sterilisation programs, B&D Helix testing and a choice of printer or USB reporting.
Yeson UK MD Will Thomas said: "The autoclave market has been dominated by a few major players for many years and until now they’ve been largely unchallenged. Many people are now asking “why should I pay thousands more for a utility machine such as an autoclave? We’re just hoping that we can meet the demand."
For more information, visit www.yeson-uk.com
The research also found that awareness of feline hypertension amongst cat owners is very low, with 80% of those questioned unaware that cats could have high blood pressure and nearly 20% believing that it was only an issue in humans.
Amongst those cat owners who are aware of feline hypertension, only 25% said they would consider asking their vet for a blood pressure check for their pet.
However, once made aware of the risks of high blood pressure, including blindness, seizures and kidney disease, 83% of owners said they would ask their vet for a blood pressure test for their cat.
Dr Natalie Borrill MRCVS, veterinary technical manager for cardionephrology at Ceva Animal Health, said: "Feline hypertension is a common condition in older cats; it is estimated that one in five cats from nine years of age are at risk of suffering from the condition3, but there is a low level of awareness amongst cat owners about this condition.
"By increasing awareness of the disease amongst owners, they will be more inclined to visit the vet with their older cat for regular blood pressure checks. It can also be very helpful for an owner to be present when blood pressure is measured because this can help reduce stress and anxiety in their cat. For more information cat owners can visit amadeus.vet."
The research results were released as part of Feline Hypertension Month, which is running until the end of May to raise awareness of hypertension and improve the detection and management of high blood pressure in cats. As part of the campaign, veterinary practices are being urged to measure their feline patients' blood pressure in cats over the age of seven.
Ceva says it will continue its Mercury Challenge throughout 2019 to increase veterinary professionals' confidence in measuring blood pressure and identifying feline hypertension. Participating practices are given the opportunity to win diagnostic tools to help them identify feline hypertension.
For information, contact cevauk@ceva.com or visit mercurychallenge.ceva.com.
References
The hearing concerned an incident which took place at the VetsNow Huyton premises in Liverpool. There were two charges against Dr Rafiq. The first was that in December 2017, shortly after a litter of puppies was delivered by caesarean to a French Bulldog named Lila, she took one of the puppies away from the practice with the intention that it should not be returned to Lila’s owner and that, in doing so, she was dishonest, misleading and had not acted in the best interest of the puppy’s welfare.
Another puppy was taken away by an animal care assistant who was also working at Vets Now Huyton on the night in question.
The second charge against Dr Rafiq was that she had told her employer at VetsNow that the puppy she had taken from the practice had died in the car when she had been driving home when, in fact, the puppy was alive at that stage and, in telling her employer this, she had been dishonest and misleading.
There was one charge against Mr Perez: that he had made an entry in the clinical records for Lila that she had given birth to four live puppies when in fact she had six; that he had only discharged four of the six puppies to the owner; that he knew that his colleagues intended to remove or had removed the puppies; that he had failed to prevent the removal of the puppies and had failed to report to a colleague the removal of the puppies. The charge also stated that, in relation to the incident, Mr Perez had been dishonest, misleading, did not act in the best interests of the puppies’ welfare and failed to keep accurate clinical records.
At the outset of the hearing, Dr Rafiq admitted in full the charges against her and accepted that she had acted dishonestly. Mr Perez admitted some of the charges against him including that he had made the false clinical record, had discharged four rather than six puppies and had failed to keep accurate clinical records, however he denied any knowledge of the intention to remove puppies and denied that his conduct had been misleading or dishonest.
The Committee was not satisfied that Mr Perez knew at the time of surgery that his colleagues intended to remove the puppies and also considered there was insufficient evidence that he subsequently became aware of their removal.
As a result, the Committee found that he could not have prevented their removal or reported the matter to a colleague. However, the Committee did find that his actions were unintentionally misleading regarding the clinical records and the discharge of the incorrect number of puppies.
The Committee found all the charges against Dr Rafiq proven.
The Committee considered whether the admitted and/or proven charges against Dr Rafiq and Mr Perez amounted to serious professional misconduct.
In respect of Mr Perez, the Committee was critical of his failure to keep accurate clinical records and considered that it was his duty to know how many puppies were born and to record them accurately.
However, while the Committee concluded that Mr Perez’s conduct fell below the expected professional standards of a veterinary surgeon, it did not fall so short as to constitute serious professional misconduct. As a result, no further action was taken against Mr Perez.
In regard to Dr Rafiq, the Committee recognised her admission at the outset that her actions constituted serious professional misconduct and noted her expression of remorse.
The Committee did however have concerns regarding the evidence she gave as to her actions being motivated by animal welfare concerns. The Committee felt that such concerns should have been raised with colleagues and it found that Dr Rafiq had acted recklessly and had been dishonest both with the owner and with her colleagues.
The Committee therefore concluded that her conduct fell so far short of what would be expected of a veterinary surgeon that it constituted serious professional misconduct.
The Committee then considered the sanction against Dr Rafiq, taking into account aggravating and mitigating factors. The aggravating factors included a risk of injury to the puppies, an abuse of the client’s trust, sustained misconduct as the puppy was retained by Dr Rafiq from 2/3 December until its actual death on the night of 5 December, that the dishonesty was sustained until 7 December and that she had only demonstrated limited insight in respect of her wider professional responsibilities.
In mitigation, the Committee considered that her actions involved no financial gain, that it was a single and isolated incident, that she had no previous adverse findings, that she had demonstrated genuine remorse and that she had made admissions at an early stage.
Dr Rafiq, who was unrepresented during the hearing, also submitted evidence in mitigation including testimonials from colleagues and clients, her youth and inexperience at the time, and her remorse, among other things.
In deciding the sanction Ian Arundale, who chaired the Committee and spoke on its behalf, said: "The Committee concluded that Dr Rafiq was a competent veterinary surgeon who was very unlikely to pose a risk to animals in the future.
"However, it considered the reputation of the profession and the need to uphold standards was an important consideration that outweighed the hardship which would be suffered by Dr Rafiq by not being able to practise in her chosen profession. It considered that Dr Rafiq would be fit to return to the profession after a period of suspension.
"It therefore determined that, notwithstanding the nature and extent of the dishonesty in this case, a suspension order was a sufficiently severe sanction to maintain the reputation of the profession and to meet the wider public interest. It took into consideration the overall dishonesty, including that Dr Rafiq had been dishonest when first confronted about these matters, when deciding on the length of any suspension.
"The Committee considered the sanction of suspension was proportionate in the circumstances of this case where there was supporting evidence that Dr Rafiq was a competent and well-regarded veterinary surgeon. It considered the positive testimonial evidence given… and that she was held in high regard by her current employers who were aware of the admitted misconduct, were significant factors in deciding that a suspension order was the proportionate sanction."
The Committee determined that a six-month suspension order would be the most appropriate sanction under the circumstances and directed the Registrar to remove Dr Rafiq from the Register for this period of time.
The Disciplinary Committee considered four charges against Dr Strokowska. The first was that, whilst registered in the 'Practising Outside the United Kingdom' category of the Register of Veterinary Surgeons maintained by the RCVS, she practised as a veterinary surgeon in the counties of Somerset, Shropshire, London, Lancashire and Norfolk between July 2016 and August 2017 when she was not registered as UK-practising. The charges were that her conduct in relation to this was dishonest and misleading to her employer and/or clients.
The second charge was that, between October 2016 and July 2017, Dr Strokowska made posts on social media which included photographs of and comments about animals being treated at the practices where she worked, without the consent of the owners or the practices.
The third charge was that, between January 2017 and March 2017, Dr Strokowska made posts on social media which included photographs, videos and comments about animals being treated at Goddards Veterinary Hospital in Wanstead, without the consent of the treating and/or operating veterinary surgeon.
The fourth charge was that, between July 2017 and September 2017, Dr Strokowska made representations to the practice principal of Barn Lodge, in Lancashire, and/or a student vet working at the practice that she had gained consent for photographs and social media posts when she had not, and that her conduct was dishonest and misleading.
At the outset of the hearing, the Dr Strokowska admitted to having practised as a veterinary surgeon in the UK when she was registered as practising outside the UK, but disputed that she had been dishonest or misleading with regards to this.
She also admitted to the entirety of the second charge and part of the third, but, under the latter charge, denied that she had, without consent, taken a video of an animal being operated on by a veterinary colleague.
Finally, she admitted to dishonest and misleading conduct with regard to part of the fourth charge, but denied that, in July 2017, she informed the practice principal that she had been told that she would be allowed to take photographs at Barn Lodge and post these on social media, when she had not been so told.
The Disciplinary Committee went on to consider the facts of the case for each of the charges that remained in issue.
Having considered all of the evidence, the Committee accepted that she did not have her registration status with the RCVS in her mind while she was working in the UK during the period in question. Accordingly, the Committee did not find her to have been dishonest.
With regards to the third charge the Committee considered the issue of whether the video in question had been posted "without the consent of the treating and/or operating veterinary surgeon". After examining the relevant evidence (which included the video in question) the Committee determined that the evidence did not support the facts charged and thus that charge three was not proved.
With regards to the fourth charge, Strokowska denied that her conduct in relation to informing the principal that she had been told that she would be allowed to take photographs and post these on social media was dishonest or misleading, on the basis that she believed she had permission to take and post photographs on social media. The Committee was not able to be sure as to how she sought this consent and the response provided and so the charge was found not proved.
The Committee then went on to consider whether the charges that were admitted amounted to serious professional misconduct.
The Committee found that it was the respondent’s responsibility to ensure that her registration status was appropriate at the time she was doing locum work in the UK. However she had provided her RCVS registration number to all the practises she had worked for and in the view of the committee there was no intention to deceive anyone. In the judgement of the Committee, her conduct was not sufficiently grave so as to constitute serious professional misconduct.
The Committee, in its judgement, concluded that her conduct in relation to the second charge did fall far short of the behaviour to be expected of a member of the veterinary profession, and amounted to serious professional misconduct.
The Committee considered that all members of the profession are obliged to ensure that they comply with the provisions of the Code of Professional Conduct, and the supporting guidance, in relation to the use of the internet and social media.
Unauthorised posting of photographs of animals being treated by a veterinary surgeon on social media may well cause distress to the owners, and damage to the reputation of the profession as a whole, and to the reputation of individual practices.
The aspect of the third charge admitted by the respondent involved posting a photograph with accompanying text of a dog without the consent of the treating and/or operating veterinary surgeon. The Committee considered that this was, indeed, a matter of professional discourtesy, but did not consider that it amounted to serious professional misconduct.
The respondent admitted the fourth charge and admitted that her conduct was dishonest and misleading. The Committee, in its judgement, considered that by choosing to lie in response to a genuine professional enquiry about her conduct, her behaviour fell far short of that to be expected from a member of the veterinary profession, and constituted serious professional misconduct.
The Committee next considered what, if any, sanction to impose.
In mitigation the Committee considered that the postings were an attempt to promote the health and welfare of animals; the lack of risk of harm or actual harm to an animal or human; no apparent financial gain from her actions; her youth and inexperience at the time of the misconduct; her open and frank admissions at an early stage; her subsequent efforts to avoid repetition; the lapse of time since the incident; and her demonstration of insight into the effects of her postings on some owners.
The Committee considered the available sanctions in order starting with no further action. The Committee did not consider that this was appropriate where the serious professional misconduct found in this case involved dishonesty, even given the mitigating factors relating to that as outlined above, nor in view of the repeated nature of the social media posts without owner consent.
The Committee determined that a reprimand and warning as to future conduct was the appropriate sanction in the circumstances of this case.
Dr Strokowska was reprimanded for her serious professional misconduct in relation to her admitted failure to obtain necessary consent for posts on social media and her dishonesty in communication.
She was warned that she should in future be fully aware of, and comply with, the provisions of the RCVS Code of Professional Conduct and its supporting guidance, in particular as it relates to the use of social media, including the need to ensure that she has obtained all the necessary consents from all relevant parties.
Equibactin vet contains sulfadiazine and trimethoprim, and is indicated for use in the treatment of infections, particularly respiratory tract infections associated with Streptococcus spp. and Staphylococcus aureus; gastrointestinal infections associated with E. coli; urogenital infections associated with beta-hemolytic streptococci; and wound infections and open or drained abscesses associated with Streptococcus spp. and Staphylococcus aureus.
The new product has been designed to provide accurate administration to all sizes of horses or ponies. One syringe provides a complete dose for 600kg bodyweight and is subdivided into 12 markings, to help keep track of dosages.
Dechra Brand Manager Emma Jennings said: "Equibactin vet has a proven antibiotic combination with a synergistic effect2 making it an excellent first line broad spectrum antimicrobial treatment for most Gram positive and negative aerobes.
It can be administered without food which improves the oral bioavailability, offering equine veterinary surgeons a quick and efficient treatment when it comes to targeting these infections that are often experienced in day-to-day practice.
"With its ease of use and three-year shelf life, we anticipate that Equibactin vet will quickly become a popular product when it comes to maintaining equine health."
For more information, visit www.dechra.co.uk/products/equine.
For the research, 326 recruited veterinary practices examined 812 cats and 662 dogs using a standardised flea inspection protocol in April and June 2018.
Fleas were collected, the species identified, and pooled flea samples from each host were analysed for the presence of pathogens using PCR and sequence analysis.
Overall, fleas were found on 28.1% of cats and 14.4% of dogs.
Unsurprisingly, over 90% of the fleas on both cats and dogs were our dear old friends, Ctenocephalides felis.
The PCR results found that at least 14% of the samples were positive for at least one pathogen, and 11.3% were positive for Bartonella spp (35 from cats, 4 from dogs), a pathogen which was identified as a risk to veterinary professionals and others with direct animal contact in a 2010 research paper2.
Entomologist Professor Richard Wall from the University of Bristol said: "Fleas are the most clinically important ectoparasites of dogs and cats worldwide.
"Rising levels of pet ownership, climate change and globalisation are increasing the importance of a detailed understanding of the endemicity and prevalence of flea-borne pathogens. This requires continued surveillance to detect change.
"The results have shown the high numbers of cats and dogs that still carry fleas and the relatively high prevalence of Bartonella spp found in the samples provided, which is of significant concern for the health of the pet, pet owner and veterinary practice staff."
Nicola Barclay, Senior Product Manager at MSD Animal Health said: "The Big Flea Project results demonstrate the ongoing need for pet owners to understand the importance of flea prevention, particularly with the implications of infestation for human and animal health.
"It’s particularly important at this time of the year as the weather is getting warmer and infestation is more likely to occur.
"Our national launch today has been designed to raise awareness amongst pet owners and encourage them to seek advice from the veterinary practice.
"Building awareness of the risks of fleas to practices and pet owners is also at the forefront of our ongoing campaign."
Louise had achieved great things in her all-too-short life. Born in February 1974, she qualified as a veterinary nurse in 1999. She gained the DipAVN (Surgical) in 2004 and the DipAVN (Medical) in 2007. She then qualified as a Veterinary Technician Specialist (Emergency and Critical Care) in 2011 and as a Veterinary Technician Specialist (Anesthesia) in 2014.
Along the way, she was widely published, contributing to over 35 publications and lectures worldwide on all aspects of anaesthesia, emergency and critical care, surgery and infection control.
In 2016 Louise received the inaugural Bruce Vivash Jones Veterinary Nurse Award, presented by the BSAVA as the primary recognition for outstanding contributions to the advancement of small animal veterinary nursing. It is the highest award the Association can bestow on a veterinary nurse. That year, she also received the The Veterinary Nursing Golden Jubilee Award for her leadership role in the profession as a clinical director for a veterinary group, her advocacy on behalf on the profession and her research work into antimicrobial resistance.
At the time of her death, Louise was the Clinical Support Manager at Vets Now.
We all live on in the hearts and minds of the people we knew in life and from the moving tributes that have appeared in such large numbers online, it is clear that Louise was one of those rare individuals whose ripples will keep spreading for years to come:
Along with many many others i feel absolutely shell shocked to hear the news that Louise O'Dwyer is no longer with us. I've had the privilege of working with her and only ever in her shadow. The world will not be the same without her. A terrible loss to the profession. If there was anything she would have wanted it would be that the Veterinary Nurses in this world could realise their potential. I am sure that no-one will disappoint her. Good night beautiful lady - you were not a star but a supernova. Georgie Hollis.
I feel greatly honoured to be able to call Louise my head nurse and then my Clinical Director, but most importantly a friend. She was an inspiration to nurses up and down the country. It has been said what Louise didn’t know wasn’t worth knowing. Nick Shackleton RVN.
Louise had a natural ability to inspire and foster talent in others; her passion and dedication to emergency and critical nursing led her to become a leading veterinary nurse, mentor, author and teacher respected throughout the international ECC community. We were privileged to be able to call Louise a colleague as well as a much loved friend and she will be sorely missed, not just by the Vets Now team, but by everyone across the veterinary profession. Amanda Boag MRCVS
I feel honoured to have known her and share the deep sadness, expressed by hundreds of her friends and colleagues at her untimely passing. Sue Paterson MRCVS
Burgess Pet Care, which organises the event, is encouraging vets and nurses to watch the webinars to ensure they’re aware of the key information concerning this year’s Rabbit Awareness Week, Protect and Prevent campaign, taking place from the 1st to the 9th June.
The webinars are hosted by Dr Richard Saunders BSc (Hons) BVSc FRSB CBiol DZooMed (Mammalian) DipECZM(ZHM) MRCVS, veterinary adviser to the Rabbit Welfare Association & Fund (RWAF).
Richard said: "These webinars provide information across all of the key areas relating to preventative healthcare in rabbits. There is a large number of health issues facing rabbits but thankfully many of these can be prevented. Vets play an incredibly important role in ensuring rabbit owners have all the information they need to correctly care for their pets but unfortunately there is still a lack of awareness and understanding around many basic needs such as diet, husbandry and the importance of vaccinations to protect against dangerous diseases.
"The webinars have been designed to be accessible and engaging to all vets and nurses, regardless of their experience level. We’re urging vets and nurses to watch all three seminars so they’re able to provide the best possible advice to rabbit owners seeking advice on their pets in advance of Rabbit Awareness Week."
To watch the webinars and learn more about this year’s Rabbit Awareness Week campaign, visit: www.rabbitawarenessweek.co.uk, where you can also request a free vet pack to help promote any activity you're planning for RAW.
For the study, Tim Charlesworth, an RCVS Specialist in Small Animal Surgery from Eastcott Referrals (pictured right), analysed 260 cases where dogs had undergone laparoscopic or open surgical ovariectomy between January 2013 and January 2018 by the same team of similarly experienced surgeons using standard practice anaesthetic, theatre and perioperative protocols. Complications were then compared between the two groups.
44% (46) of the dogs that underwent open ovariectomy developed a complication, compared to 20% (31) of those that underwent laparoscopic ovariectomy.
Whilst the authors acknowledge the limitations of a retrospective study and emphasise that confirmation requires a randomised trial, they say that when considered alongside previously demonstrated improved postoperative comfort and earlier return to normal function, laparoscopy could be considered preferable for ovariectomy in dogs.
Galliprant is a first in a class of drugs called piprants, or non-COX-inhibiting prostaglandin receptor antagonists (PRAs), which specifically target the EP4 receptor largely responsible for OA pain and inflammation1,3 without interfering with other prostanoids and receptors, thereby minimising the impact on gastrointestinal and kidney homeostasis.1,4
According to Elanco, the main benefit of the new drug is that it can be given in the earlier stages of the disease; from first diagnosis in fact. Speaking at the London Vet Show in 2018, Dr Kristin Kirkby Shaw, Surgeon and Rehabilitation Specialist at the Animal Surgical Clinic of Seattle, said: "…being much more targeted, it makes us feel more comfortable starting this product in an earlier stage of osteoarthritis."
In the target animal safety study, Galliprant was well-tolerated over 9 months at doses equivalent to 15 times the target dose.5 Kristen said: "I challenge anyone to think of another product that has been given in a safety study at that high of a level for that duration of time."
The efficacy of Galliprant was demonstrated in the field study at the licensed target dose of 2mg/kg body weight, with treatment success seen by owners in their dogs at home, and confirmed by vet assessment.2 Owners saw statistically significant improvements in pain severity and interference with daily activities vs placebo at days 7, 14, 21 and 28.2
For more information, visit www.galliprant.co.uk. You can also watch Dr Kristen Kirkby Shaw's London Vet Show presentation and other expert opinion here.
References:
Members of the profession are of course more likely than most to receive information about violent incidents that constitute abuse against an animal, and research has shown that such cases are often the index case that trigger investigation into violent households.
Jennie Bartholomew, education coordinator at the BSAVA said: "Suspecting animal abuse can be an alarming and sensitive issue to confront but our training courses should give veterinary teams the skills and support they need to help deal with such cases."
The sessions will provide guidance on setting up a practice protocol and identifying a Safeguarding Liaison Officer (SLO) who will aid practice staff in suspected cases of abuse. Through the SLO, relationships with RSPCA officers, police domestic abuse officers and aid agencies can be set up to give staff expert support to call upon if they suspect animal or human abuse.
Freda Scott-Park is a BSAVA Past President and is one of the lecturers on the Links Veterinary Training Initiative courses. She said: "There are few veterinary practices that do not encounter animal abuse, not daily, but the incidence is increasing.
"Cases can be quite complicated to diagnose but often vets find they develop a sixth sense that something isn’t right. By defining the complexities and difficulties in diagnosis, the course aids vets, veterinary nurses and receptionists to understand how to proceed – to ask the right questions and how to seek help from the correct people.
"Information from the veterinary practices may allow human healthcare professionals to investigate troubled households, offering support to the family and potentially improving or saving a human victim’s life."
Three sessions have been organised around the country during 2019. They are free for BSAVA members, with a non-member price of £40.00.
Sunday 23 June: Wetherby Racecourse, Yorkshire
Monday 16 September: Woodrow House, Gloucester
Sunday 27 October: Jesus College, Cambridge
This year, in collaboration with Your Cat, the charity is looking for entries which showcase the cat-human bond with a brand new theme of ‘Cat-Human Relationships’.
The judges want to see a range of relationships in a variety of situations, locations and ages. For instance, entries can include but are not limited to: pet cats with their owners in the home, street cats with the public and cats with those who work with them eg, veterinary professionals with their patients and homing centre workers with the cats in their care.
Since its launch in 2013, the competition has collectively attracted over 15,000 entries from all over the world.
Eve Davies, who runs the competition, said: "Whilst we tend to think of our relationship with cats as that of pet and owner, cats and humans can have a huge variety of unique connections with each other and we would love to see this reflected in the entries.
"This year’s theme is quite different to previous topics – for example kittens or sleeping cats – but it has the potential to be much more rewarding. As well as receiving exceptional photos over the years, we have been sent some incredibly moving stories to accompany them and we are hoping that this year will be even better still."
Twelve winning images will be selected by the iCatCare and Your Cat Magazine judges to feature in the charity’s 2020 calendar (and other materials) which will be sold to raise funds for the charity’s work, with one crowned the overall winner and gracing the front cover.
All twelve winners will each receive a certificate, copies of the calendar and a selection of iCatCare merchandise. The overall winner will also receive £500 in prize money.
To find out more and to enter, visit: www.icatcare.org/photography-competition. The competition closes at 10 am (BST) on 1 July 2019.
Global names in gastroenterology will be sharing the latest knowledge to help veterinary surgeons and nurses support the work of the BHS and Nottingham University’s REACT to colic campaign, which is designed to help vets and horse owners work together for colic patients.
On Friday 13th September there'll be a two-hour session chaired by Harry Carslake, a diplomate of the American College of Veterinary internal medicine (ACVIM). The session will involve five experts speaking about aspects of colic, followed by discussion and the opportunity for questions from delegates.
Natasha Jocelyn, Internal Medicine Specialist, Sussex Equine Hospital, will speak about managing the acute colic in the field: what to do when flunixin doesn’t work.
Prof. Dr. Gunther Van Loon European Veterinary Specialist in Equine Internal Medicine, Ghent University, Belgium, will discuss managing acute colic in the equine hospital.
Dr Nathan Slovis member of the American College of Internal Veterinary Medicine, Director of the McGee Medicine Department and a partner at Haygard Equine Medical Institute in Lexington, Ky will explain colic guidelines – can ‘algorithms’ help?
Prof. Dr Lutz Goehring European Veterinary Specialist in Equine Internal Medicine, Ludwig-Maximilians University Munich, will explore the question ‘is there an evidence-based approach to managing enteritis?’
David Rendle European Veterinary Specialist in Equine Internal Medicine, Rainbow Equine Hospital, North Yorkshire, will look at parasitic disease as a cause of colic and methods of management.
All BEVA Congress delegates get a certificate of attendance worth seven hours of CPD.
If you're struggling for time or torn between several lectures you can use the BEVA Congress Encore Room to play back missed lectures at your convenience. BEVA Congress is also providing day crèche for children between the ages of 0-8 years. Find out more here.
Anyone who registers for Congress before 8 May 2019 will receive significantly reduced booking fees, and BEVA members save up to £379 on their Congress passes.
The MSD Animal Health Vet Surgeon Research Bursary offers awards of up to £4,000 each. Each project has to be completed within one to two years and the veterinary surgeon proposals are judged by university academics to ensure independent assessment.
Michelle Townley, veterinary advisor at MSD Animal Health said: "We’re delighted to be awarding Amie this bursary as we consider deepening the understanding of equine vaccination practices and protocols to be important new knowledge for the companion animal sector, especially in the light of the recent equine flu outbreak.
"We will be inviting applications for the 2019 vet surgeon bursaries from August this year so would encourage any vet keen to develop their research skills to keep an eye on our website for further information. We would like to encourage as many vets as possible to apply as part of our commitment to advancing research within the veterinary industry."
2018 is the second year MSD Animal Health has extended its Veterinary Surgeon Research Bursary to include companion animals. The 2017 award went to Dr Sarah Caddy for her research into cat bite abscesses.
Veterinary surgeon research bursary applications will open again in August.
For more information, visit www.msdahresearchbursary.co.uk.
Tialin is licensed for the treatment of dysentery, colitis, ileitis, pneumonia and pleuropneumonia in pigs. It is also suitable for the treatment and metaphylaxis of chronic respiratory disease and infectious synovitis in chickens and infectious sinusitis and airsacculitis in turkeys. Withdrawal times range from zero in eggs to two - six days in meat and offal.
The product is available in two strengths: 25% (250 mg/ml) and 12.5% (125 mg/ml). It can be bought in five and one litre bottles with a shelf life of two years or three months once opened.
Dechra Brand Manager Emma Jennings said: "Any of these diseases could have a widespread effect on a herd or flock of any size so it is vital that veterinary professionals have access to a treatment such as Tialin to offer farmers.
"Its short withdrawal times and long shelf life makes it a cost effective and valuable tool for vets and farmers in their treatments of these diseases. All the products in our premium SoluStab range have been specifically developed with a unique formula to provide the optimum balance of stability and solubility."
For more information, visit www.dechra.co.uk/therapy-areas/food-producing-animal/water-medication.
Dechra also offers an online tool to calculate dosage for SoluStab products at http://calculator.solustab.eu/.
Euthasol vet is presented as a clear blue liquid, licensed for intravenous, intracardial and intraperitoneal usage. A dose of 140 mg/kg (equivalent to 0.35 ml/kg) is considered sufficient for all licensed routes of administration.
Euthasol vet comes in vials of 100ml and has a 28 day broached shelf life.
Dechra Brand Manager Claire Morgan said: "Choosing the correct product for euthanasia is vital for veterinary professionals and Euthasol vet offers a highly effective solution.
"The intravenous route of administration should be the route of choice. Where intravenous administration is impossible, the product may be administered via the intracardiac route in all named species.
"Euthasol's versatility in terms of the range of species in which it is licensed for use, coupled with its 400 mg/ml concentration, is set to make it a popular choice in practice."
For more information, visit www.dechra.co.uk
The research, carried out by the Royal Veterinary College’s (RVC) VetCompass programme, involved analysing data from 333,910 bitches who presented at veterinary practices participating in the programme between 2014 and 2017.
The study also indicated that the females of certain breeds are more prone to UI than others, with Hungarian Vizslas, Doberman, Weimaraners and Boxers most at risk.
UI affects around 3% of bitches in primary veterinary care in England.
The researchers say that a connection between neutering and UI in bitches has long been suspected but this study provides stronger evidence on the extent of the relationship.
The data also showed that age and bodyweight are major contributory factors to bitches developing UI as well as neutering and breed. Other key findings include:
Bitches over nine years old are 1.7 times more likely to develop UI compared to those younger than three years.
Bitches weighing over 10kg are 1.9 more likely to develop UI than those weighing less than 10kg, while bitches over 30kg are three times more likely.
Camilla Pegram, VetCompass epidemiologist and lead researcher on the study, said: "First opinion vets discuss and perform neuters on a daily basis but, until now, evidence on the link between neutering and urinary incontinence has been tenuous.
"This study provides stronger evidence of an important association between neutering and urinary incontinence. The decision to neuter a bitch is based on many factors, not just incontinence risk alone. However, these results suggest that the component of the decision driven by urinary incontinence could be emphasised for the high-risk breeds and bitches of larger bodyweight.”
It is hoped that the results will aid owners and vets in making evidence-based decisions when it comes to neutering female dogs.