The University of Edinburgh and the Royal Veterinary College (RVC) have announced a new initiative to help vet students prepare for their Extra Mural Studies (EMS) placements.
Freda Andrews, RCVS Head of Education said: "This is a free online learning tool which will look familiar to any veterinary student who has recently taken the driving theory test. Any veterinary student can use it as part of their preparation for EMS."
The project was drawn up by Dr Catriona Bell at the University of Edinburgh, and Dr Sarah Baillie at the RVC, two lecturers with experience of practice life who want to make sure that student placements work well for all concerned. The aim is that by helping veterinary students understand what will be expected of them, students can be better prepared and get the most out of their placements.
Sarah Baillie said: "We found that students aren't always aware that doing some simple practical things can make a huge difference to how well their placement goes. There are some common pitfalls, such as not taking a lunch with them so the vet has to find a shop whilst out on call, which can catch out the unwary."
Catriona Bell said that the importance of body language was a consistent theme in the research they undertook for the project: "Students want to do well, however placements are a new environment and can be tiring. Vets are not paid to provide EMS, and say they take on students as they want to support the next generation of vets. Students need to make sure they convey their interest and enthusiasm to all members of the practice team through their body language - they don't always realise, for example, what an impact slouching and looking down at the floor can have."
Other tips for students that came out of the research include making sure that you prepare thoroughly before you go, and offering to help out the veterinary nurses.
Sarah said: "We put in what real students told us they'd wished they'd known. The practising vets who support students also gave us valuable information; for example, by explaining what they expect with regards to confidentiality and professionalism, a working vet's skills."
There is no need for a sign-up for students to use the EMS Driving Licence, and veterinary practices who will be hosting EMS students may also find it useful. To try it out for yourself visit www.vet.ed.ac.uk/ems_driving_licence/
The review started with a series of focus groups amongst veterinary professionals across multiple sectors.
This was followed by an analysis of the information gleaned from the focus groups, additional stakeholder submissions, data from the College's Covid surveys, independent research studies and formal legal advice to formulate an online qualitative survey to gain the views and feedback of UK-based veterinary professionals.
In this final stage, the public consultation, all veterinary professionals, vet and vet nurse students, practice managers and all those who work in the veterinary practice team are invited to share the extent to which they agree (or disagree) with each element of the proposed new guidance on ‘under care’, their views on the requirements for a 24/7 follow-up service following a remote prescription and other safeguards, and their feedback on the proposed definition of limited-service providers.
There will also be a consultation with members of the animal-owning public, which will likely include questions asking for information about animal owner experiences with remote prescriptions, the perceived advantages and/or disadvantages of remote prescribing, and views on 24/7 care and how important a service this is to respondents.
Dr Melissa Donald MRCVS, RCVS President and former Chair of the Standards Committee, said: “The past two years have shown us that the veterinary professions are highly capable of adopting new ways of working.
"It also revealed that we can adapt our established ways of practice to better respond to shifts in public expectations and advancements in technology.
"However, it is our collective responsibility to ensure that any changes continue to allow us to provide safe and effective care for our patients, and meet the appropriate expectations of our clients.
“Whilst we recognise and reflect on the need for change, the proposed guidance seeks to protect animal health and welfare and maintain public trust by ensuring that decision-making remains firmly in the hands of individual veterinary surgeons, as to what they, in their professional judgement, consider appropriate in a specific situation.
“This consultation, then, while not a referendum on whether RCVS guidance on ‘under care’ and 24-hour emergency first-aid and pain relief should change – that decision having been made by Standards Committee and approved by Council based on the evidence gathered, including the views of the profession and objective evidence, and legal advice – is a crucial opportunity for veterinary colleagues to tell us whether we have got the draft guidance right, whether the proposed safeguards are sufficient, and whether there is anything we might have missed or should amend.”
www.rcvs.org.uk/undercare.
The RCVS has announced that registrations for the new RCVS Register of Veterinary Practice Premises will be accepted from 1 November 2008, allowing all those who wish to supply medicines from veterinary practice premises from 1 April 2009 onwards a full five months to comply with the latest medicines legislation.
In order to fulfil its obligations under European law to maintain and improve traceability of, and accountability for, veterinary medicines, the UK Government decided that any veterinary surgeon may only supply veterinary medicinal products (VMPs) from premises registered with the Secretary of State, with effect from 1 April 2009.
The Veterinary Medicines Directorate (VMD) is responsible for the inspection and registration of practices under the Veterinary Medicines Regulations. Steve Dean, VMD's Chief Executive, says the new veterinary practice premises register will complete the UK information base by bringing veterinary practices in line with other suppliers of veterinary medicines who already have to operate from registered premises.
The Register will enable the supply of veterinary medicines by veterinary surgeons, including controlled drugs, to be subjected to inspection and verification. As a result, DEFRA Ministers and the European Commission can be re-assured that veterinary medicines are being supplied in the UK in accordance with EC legislation.
In discussion with the VMD, it was agreed that the most appropriate body to maintain this register would be the RCVS, not least because the College already manages the RCVS Practice Standards Scheme and publishes the (voluntary) Directory of Veterinary Practices, so has the necessary systems already in place. The register will be published on RCVSonline and updated quarterly.
Whilst there will now be a statutory fee levied for each practice premises registered on the new Register, the College's existing database framework has kept this to a relatively low £40 compared to what other bodies might have had to charge after starting from scratch.
Practices could appear in the Directory for free because the cost of producing it was partially covered by subsequent data sales. However, the new Register will need to be self-funding, as the data it contains will be freely available online.
Not all practices will have to pay the statutory fee. RCVS President Jill Nute said: "For those practice premises already accredited under the RCVS Practice Standards Scheme (PSS), the fee will be taken from their existing PSS annual fee.
"What's more, accredited practices will not face additional four-yearly inspections by VMD inspectors (unless there is an investigation for enforcement purposes) as their PSS inspections already ensure that they keep up to date with current medicines legislation."
Practice premises that have applied to join the Scheme, but have not yet been accredited, will not face additional VMD inspections either, but will still need to pay the statutory fee.
To help practices understand the new requirements and what they need to do before next April, the RCVS has produced a range of guidance, including a series of Frequently Asked Questions (www.rcvs.org.uk).
"In particular, we hope this guidance will help to explain which premises are likely to be considered ‘veterinary practice premises' and the difference between those premises and places where medicines might simply be stored or kept," said Mrs Nute.
"It is important to realise that there is a legal requirement to register veterinary practice premises for the supply of medicines, and a professional obligation, set out in the Guide to Professional Conduct, to keep a record of where all medicines are stored or kept. This record should avoid the need for additional registration of car boots, farms and homes."
Over the coming weeks, application forms will be posted to all practices currently listed in the Directory and accredited under the PSS, containing all the practice information currently held. These forms must be checked, signed and returned, even if no fee is due. Separate application forms will be available for any non-accredited practice premises not published in the Directory, and a letter will be sent to all RCVS members to ensure the whole profession is aware of the new requirements.
The Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons is seeking feedback on a new draft Code of Professional Conduct for Veterinary Nurses.
The new draft Code, which would replace the existing RCVS Guide to Professional Conduct for Veterinary Nurses, has been produced by a Working Party set up by the RCVS Advisory Committee to review the Guides for both veterinary surgeons and veterinary nurses.
It is the benchmark for professional conduct against which registered veterinary nurses will be measured in any hearings on serious professional misconduct held by the recently-introduced VN Disciplinary Committee.
The purpose of the review is to ensure that guidance to the profession, and the public, is clear, for example, using consistent language to distinguish between what must be done and what is advised.
The new Code is a short, principles-based document, using the Federation of Veterinarians of Europe's Code of Conduct as the starting point. It will be supported by additional advice on specific areas of veterinary practice or issues, for example, clinical governance.
The consultation follows an earlier one for a new draft Code for veterinary surgeons that closed at the end of June: the new Code for veterinary nurses follows the format and style of that for veterinary surgeons. Comments made during the veterinary surgeon consultation will be taken account of alongside comments made during this new consultation.
For the first time, the draft proposes that veterinary nurses make a declaration on joining the VN Register, which underlines the primary importance of animal health and welfare: "I PROMISE AND SOLEMNLY DECLARE that my constant endeavour will be to ensure the welfare of animals committed to my care and that I will pursue the work of my profession with integrity and accept my responsibilities to my clients, the public, the profession and the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons."
Comments on the proposed draft are invited from the veterinary nursing profession, the veterinary profession and the public, particularly on the issue of whether the Codes for veterinary nurses and veterinary surgeons ought to be combined.
Andrea Jeffery, the RCVS Veterinary Nurses Council member who led the group tasked with developing the new Code, said: "It is 50 years since the start of the veterinary nursing profession and the changes proposed in the Code reflect the development of our professional role over this time.
"This new Code is a simplified document that focuses on key principles and which will be supported by more detailed guidance. Although it follows the format of the draft Code for veterinary surgeons, it is important that we recognise our unique position as veterinary nurses."
The new Code, together with the consultation paper, can be downloaded at www.rcvs.org.uk/VNcodeconsultation.
Comments should be sent by email to Christopher Murdoch, Secretary to the Guides Review Working Party, at c.murdoch@rcvs.org.uk by Friday, 21 October 2011.
The course was developed with RCVS Leadership and Inclusion Manager, Gurpreet Gill (pictured), and aims to increase self-awareness of unconscious bias, explore strategies to reduce it, and promote equity, diversity, and inclusion in the workplace.
Gurpreet said: “Unconscious bias is an area that some within the professions may not be familiar with and so this course provides an overview of unconscious bias and its impact in the workplace.
“We also explore strategies that we can all apply to help reduce unconscious bias.
"This is important in helping to achieve fairer and more equitable working environments, and I’d encourage any veterinary professional, whatever your role, to undertake the course.”
The course is accessible free via the RCVS Academy, and takes about an hour and three quarters to complete,
Building on the unconscious bias course, the RCVSA academy has also launched a course for members of the Fellowship Credentials Panels, who are responsible for assessing applications to the Fellowship.
Dr Niall Connell FRCVS, Acting Chair of the Fellowship Board, the governing body for the learned society, said: “This course explores the complexities of assessing applications, ensuring that each candidate receives a fair and thorough evaluation.
"Participants will gain insights into best practices for reviewing applications, offering constructive feedback, and identifying and addressing potential biases that may influence decision-making.
"By completing this course, participants will gain a heightened proficiency in assessing applications and managing bias, enabling them to support the RCVS’ mission of fostering equity, diversity and inclusion within the Fellowship.”
https://academy.rcvs.org.uk
The plenary speaker was Professor Rory O’Connor, Chair of Health Psychology at the University of Glasgow’s Institute of Health & Wellbeing whose talk: "When it is darkest: understanding suicide risk" opened the day with an outline of his 25 years of work looking into suicide prevention.
Rory discussed his recent investigation into the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on people’s mental health and wellbeing, and how to reduce the risk of suicidal ideation turning into suicidal action.
He said: “In the last 10 to 15 years there has been an increased focus in particular on psychological and psycho-social interventions for helping people who are suicidal.
"Although suicide is complex, interventions, even brief interventions, can be effective.”
Rory was followed by presentations from a number of teams, including those who'd been awarded the MMI’s Sarah Brown Mental Health Research Grant in 2019 and 2020:
The full report of the day’s talks can be found here https://www.vetmindmatters.org/resources/report-mind-matters-initiative-research-symposium-2021
The webinar was hosted by RCVS Senior Vice-President Dr Melissa Donald, with Standards Committee Chair and Junior Vice-President Linda Belton, Registrar Eleanor Ferguson, and Head of Standards Gemma Kingswell.
The panel gave an overview of the main changes for the guidance, which comes into effect on 1st September, the considerations to take into account when prescribing POM-Vs remotely, the circumstances under which POM-Vs cannot be prescribed remotely, the prescription of antibiotics, antifungals, antiparasitics, and antivirals, and how the guidance will be enforced.
The webinar also dealt with issues raised in a previous webinar, including a query about prescribing under the cascade and an update on the position when prescribing based on cultures and sensitivities.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vSTZKdbVD8g
For further information about the new guidance, including a range of practice-based scenarios and FAQs, visit: https://www.rcvs.org.uk/setting-standards/advice-and-guidance/under-care-new-guidance/
Questions about the under care guidance can be sent to advice@rcvs.org.uk
The RCVS has announced the names of the candidates standing in the Council elections this year and is, once again, inviting veterinary surgeons to put questions to them directly in this year’s 'Quiz the candidates'.
There are eight candidates (well, seven really, if you exclude the 'Donald Trump' candidate) contesting six places in the RCVS Council, including four existing Council members eligible for re-election and four new candidates. They are:
Ballot papers and candidates’ details are due to be posted to all veterinary surgeons eligible to vote during the week commencing 14 March, and all votes must be cast, either online or by post, by 5pm on Friday, 29 April 2016.
To submit a question to the candidates, email it (NB only one per person) to vetvote16@rcvs.org.uk, post it on the College’s Facebook page (www.facebook.com/thercvs) or on twitter using the hashtag #vetvote16, by midday on Monday, 29 February.
Each candidate will then be invited to choose two questions to answer from all those received, and produce a video recording of their answers. All recordings will be published on the RCVS website on Thursday 17 March.
RCVS Chief Executive Nick Stace said: "Last year, all election candidates produced videos for the first time and, with over 3,500 views in total, it seemed a popular way for voters to find out more about the individuals who were standing.
"Providing a way for all vets and vet nurses to put their own questions to the candidates is now an integral part of the elections, and one which we hope will continue to encourage people to get involved and have their say."
There will now be significant changes to the RCVS Council, as follows:
A gradual reduction in the number of elected members of RCVS Council from the current 24 to 13 by the year 2021.
A change of composition to include six lay members and two veterinary nurse members. Furthermore, the number of Council members appointed by each university whose veterinary degree is recognised by the RCVS will be reduced from two to one and Privy Council will no longer be required to appoint members. From 1 July 2020 university membership will undergo further changes as, from then on, veterinary schools will collectively appoint three members in total to serve on Council.
Members of Council will no longer be able to serve more than three consecutive four-year terms of office and, after serving three consecutive terms, they will not be eligible to re-stand as a candidate for two years.
Members of Council may be removed from office if they fail to satisfy any conditions about fitness to be a member, as determined by their peers on Council. If removed from office they will not be eligible to re-stand as a candidate for two years.
Introducing the LRO before the House of Lords last Tuesday, Lord Gardiner of Kimble said: "The proposed changes… reduce the size of Council and revise the balance of membership between vets and non-vets, including veterinary nurses and lay persons. They will bring the RCVS in-line with many other modern-day regulatory bodies and allow for greater efficiency, transparency and accountability to both members and the general public. For all the reasons I have outlined today, I commend the use of Legislative Reform Order to make changes that will benefit the veterinary profession."
The full text of the Legislative Reform Order can be found on www.legislation.gov.uk and the full transcript of the debate in the House of Lords can be found in Hansard Online (https://hansard.parliament.uk).
Professor Stephen May, RCVS President, said: "We have been looking at reform of Council as an issue of some urgency since 2013, in recognition of the fact that, with the formula-driven growth of Council, it was becoming unwieldy, which has an impact on the cost of each meeting and the frequency with which it could reasonably meet.
"This reform has been long in gestation and so we are glad that this has now been approved and that we can look forward to a more modern, agile and efficient governance structure, aimed as always at benefitting the professions, animal owners and animal health and welfare."
One immediate impact of the LRO relates to the results of this year’s RCVS Council election as the Ministerial sign-off now confirms that only the first three candidates (in order of number of votes) will take up their four-year terms at RCVS Day on Friday 13 July 2018. These are Susan Paterson, Mandisa Greene and Neil Smith, all of whom are current members who were re-elected.
The RCVS Veterinary Nurses Council agreed reforms to its own governance last year, including shortening the term of office from four years to three years; introducing a consecutive three-term limit for elected members; and, reducing the size and changing the composition of VN Council to six elected veterinary nurses, two appointed veterinary nurse members, two appointed veterinary surgeon members from RCVS Council, and four appointed lay members.
The Committee heard a number of charges against Dr Davies.
Two of the charges related to convictions for drink driving in March 2014 and October 2015, for which she received driving bans for 17 months and 45 months respectively.
The third charge related to her breaching a number of undertakings she had entered into as part of the College’s Health Protocol, including her consuming alcohol on four occasions between May 2015 and January 2016 and missing a pre-arranged appointment.
The fourth charge related to being under the influence of alcohol on three occasions while she was on duty as a veterinary surgeon in December 2016 which was also in breach of her undertakings under the Health Protocol.
At the outset of the hearing Dr Davies admitted all five charges against her and that this meant she was unfit to practise veterinary surgery and that she was guilty of disgraceful conduct in a professional respect. The Committee accepted her admissions and found, with the exception of one allegation, that her conduct was disgraceful in a professional respect.
In considering the sanction for Dr Davies, the Committee considered a number of aggravating factors including the risk of injury to animals in her care; the fact that the misconduct was sustained or repeated over a period of time; the fact that her conduct contravened the advice issued to her by the Preliminary Investigation Committee upon entering the Health Protocol; and the fact that Dr Davies was in a position of trust and responsibility during the occasions she was under the influence of alcohol in December 2016 as she was the sole veterinary surgeon on duty.
In its consideration of sanction the Committee heard a submission from counsel for Dr Davies for the decision on sanction to be postponed for six months on the basis of Dr Davies complying with nine separate undertakings, including one not to practise as a vet. In making this application Dr Davies’ counsel told the Committee that her client was remorseful over her conduct and that she had been abstinent from alcohol since August 2017 after referring herself for treatment.
The Committee decided to postpone the hearing for six months on the basis of Dr Davies’ fulfilling her undertakings. These include not to practise veterinary surgery and to remain abstinent from alcohol during the period of postponement.
Alistair Barr, chairing the Committee and speaking on its behalf, said: "The Committee accepted Dr Davies’ evidence and found her to have genuine remorse. Further it recognised that Dr Davies was fully committed to understanding and addressing her alcohol problem. Her efforts to avoid any repetition of misconduct were evident from the detailed undertakings which she had volunteered.
"The Committee took into account that Dr Davies had a hitherto unblemished career prior to her alcohol problem, having qualified in 1996. Further it noted that she had not worked as a veterinary surgeon since December 2016.
"The Committee therefore decided to postpone judgement so that Dr Davies could continue to demonstrate her improved insight and her abstinence from alcohol.”
The courses are:
MMI Manager Lisa Quigley commented: “I am really proud of this new tranche of training.
"Whereas our previous training has focused on the individual experience, for example, mental health awareness and resilience, these new courses recognise that individual instances of poor mental health and wellbeing can often be caused by systemic issues – whether that’s a poor workplace culture where bullying and incivility thrive, or discrimination on account of someone’s protected characteristics.
The full range of courses, including the dates and times and details on how to register, can be found at www.vetmindmatters.org/training
Feedback about any of the courses can be sent to info@vetmindmatters.org
The 1CPD homepage now displays two progress bars: one to track the number of CPD hours currently achieved and recorded, and another to show how many hours have been reflected on.
Once the number of required CPD hours has been recorded and reflected on, a message appears to tell the user that they're CPD compliant.
This change will not affect existing CPD records, and all previously inputted activities and reflections will remain in the system.
Jenny Soreskog-Turp, RCVS Lead for Postgraduate Education, said: “We hope that the changes to the 1CPD platform will allow people to track their CPD more easily.
"A key element in outcomes-focused CPD includes reflecting on what you have learned as this is known to have a positive impact on both personal professionalism and patient-health outcomes.
“It should be noted that any CPD you have already undertaken for this year but have not yet reflected on will still remain in the system.
"However, in order to be compliant for 2023, you must reflect on every CPD activity completed.
"If you have completed your hours but have not reflected, this will show as non-compliant.
"In order to make those hours count, you simply need to go back and add your reflections.
"This doesn’t have to be a long and onerous task – uploading audio notes, adding an attachment, or writing a few notes stating what you learnt and how you will use this newly acquired knowledge moving forward will all suffice.”
www.rcvs.org.uk/cpd
The RCVS Disciplinary Committee has reprimanded Gloucestershire veterinary surgeon Adele Lewis for failing to pass on information about a horse’s clinical history to a potential buyer during a pre-purchase examination.
Ms Lewis, the sole principal of the Cotswold Equine Clinic in Lechlade, Gloucestershire, carried out the examination of a pony called Luke on 13 February 2014. Luke was owned by Mrs Booth who was a long-established client of Ms Lewis, both at her previous practice, Bourton Vale, and at her current practice. The examination was carried out on behalf of the prospective purchaser, Mrs Grieve.
Upon examination Ms Lewis certified that, in her opinion, Luke’s veterinary history did not increase the risk of purchase.
Following the purchase of Luke, Mrs Grieve attempted to obtain insurance for Luke and found out from a pet insurance company that a claim had been made by Mrs Booth in September 2013. She subsequently found out that, following concerns expressed by Mrs Booth and her trainer about Luke’s movement and their wanting an expert opinion, Ms Lewis had referred him to Dr Kold, a Specialist in Equine Orthopaedics, in September 2013. Dr Kold had diagnosed Luke with lameness and had given him intra-articular medication. Luke had also had a follow-up appointment with Dr Kold about four weeks later in October 2013.
The Disciplinary Committee hearing commenced on Tuesday 13 October 2015. At the outset, Ms Lewis admitted several parts of the charges (charge A and charge B) against her. In regards to charge A, she admitted that she had failed to inform Mrs Grieve that, when she examined Luke on 24 September 2013, his then owner Mrs Booth had complained firstly that Luke was “not tracking up and going forward” and, secondly, that he had improved significantly when put on a Phenylbutazone trial. She also admitted that she had referred him to Dr Kold for a poor performance investigation and that she ought to have informed Mrs Grieve of these matters.
In regards to charge B, she admitted that she completed a Certificate of Veterinary Examination in which she had declared that Luke’s veterinary history did not increase the risk of purchase and allowed the vendor’s declaration to include assertions that there had been no previous lameness and no intra-articular medication given in the last 12 months. Ms Lewis admitted that she ought to have known that her declaration that Luke’s veterinary history did not increase the risk of purchase was incorrect.
However, Ms Lewis denied being aware that Dr Kold had diagnosed lameness, administered an intra-articular corticosteroid to Luke and examined and noted a problem with his breathing, including upper airway disease and possible lower airway disease. Furthermore, she denied dishonesty in regards to both the charges against her and in relation to vendor declarations made on the Certificate of Veterinary Examination regarding previous lameness and intra-articular medication.
During the course of the hearing, Ms Lewis told the Committee that she had not received the reports about the two consultations by Dr Kold (despite their having been sent to her by letter and, with respect to the second report, also by email) and that she was therefore unaware of his findings when she carried out the pre-purchase examination. She also stated that she had not been informed of these by Mrs Booth. During her evidence, Ms Lewis also admitted having entered inaccurate information on a veterinary report to assist with an insurance claim.
The Committee did not find Ms Lewis to be an impressive witness citing the fact that her “explanations as to her practice showed a worrying absence of probity in the completion of veterinary reports for the purposes of insurance claims, and an absence of any effective practice management, consistent with acceptable practice.”
However, the Committee felt it did not have the evidence to conclude that Ms Lewis had acted dishonestly during the pre-purchase examination. It cited the fact that her actions, when informed by the purchaser Mrs Grieve of Dr Kold’s examination, did not appear to be those of someone trying to cover their tracks.
In regards to charge A, the Committee also found that the “apparently chaotic manner in which Ms Lewis ran her practice, and her own opinion that the pony was sound, would appear to have led her to wrongly disregard these matters from disclosure.”
In making its decision on her conduct and sanction, the Committee said that Ms Lewis’ failure to fully communicate to Mrs Grieve all the relevant information about Luke’s veterinary history fell far short of the conduct expected from a veterinary surgeon. It also cited the utmost importance of a complete and accurate certification process, as made clear in the RCVS Code of Professional Conduct and the Twelve Principles of Certification.
Chitra Karve, chairing the Committee and speaking on its behalf, said: “The Committee continues to emphasise the importance of maintaining the integrity of veterinary certification in any aspect of practice. Mrs Grieve told this Committee that if she had been fully informed about Luke’s veterinary history she would not have purchased the pony. It is clear from the evidence that it affected Mrs Grieve’s ability to insure the pony. Ms Lewis has accepted that the information about Luke’s veterinary history, not having been disclosed, was capable of affecting the risk of purchase. The public are entitled to rely upon veterinary surgeons providing complete and accurate information, when certificates and reports are prepared.”
In mitigation, the Committee paid regard to Ms Lewis’ inexperience at running her own practice and found no issue with her competence or clinical ability as a veterinary surgeon. It concluded that she had acted out of character and that there was no financial motivation for her actions. It also found it “highly relevant that the facts admitted and found proved related to a single pre-purchase examination.”
It also noted that Ms Lewis has now put in place a practice management system and has shown insight into her actions, by taking active steps to better comply with her obligations under the Code of Professional Conduct. She had also made early admissions of guilt and made a full apology to both Mrs Grieve and the RCVS both at the outset of the hearing, and in her evidence.
Chitra Karve added: “Having had the opportunity of observing her demeanour at this hearing, the Committee believes that it is unlikely that she will repeat her conduct.... The Committee has concluded that an appropriate and proportionate response in this case is to reprimand Ms Lewis.”
The definition agreed by VN Council is as follows:
Veterinary nursing aims to ease the suffering and pain of animals, and to improve their health and welfare.
This includes providing any medical treatment or any minor surgery (not involving entry into a body cavity) to animals under the direction of a veterinary surgeon who has that animal under their care.
Veterinary nursing can be either proactive or reactive, and autonomous or collaborative. It is carried out in a wide variety of settings, for animals at all life stages, and considers the background and needs of the animal’s owner or keeper.
Matthew Rendle RVN, the Chair of VN Council, said: “Although it is just a few short lines, this definition of veterinary nursing has been in the pipeline for some time.
"While we as veterinary nurses have always been able to define ourselves by the type of tasks we carry out, or our relation to veterinary surgeons in terms of delegation, there hasn’t necessarily been a clear statement articulating the art and science of veterinary nursing.
“With the RCVS looking to expand its regulatory remit to include other veterinary paraprofessionals over the long term, we thought it was particularly important that we set out the stall for veterinary nursing and we hope that this clear statement will, in particular, aid the public in understanding the role of a veterinary nurse.
“It should be noted that this definition is VN Council’s own considered interpretation of the art and science of veterinary nursing.
"Other interpretations from other organisations, provided they conform with both Schedule 3 of the Veterinary Surgeons Act and the RCVS Code of Professional Conduct, could sit comfortably alongside ours, and we hope there continues to be healthy discussion about the contribution of the profession to the veterinary team, as our role evolves.”
Chair of the Standards Committee, Dr Melissa Donald, said: “We were very aware of the likelihood that both practice staff and clients will increasingly have to isolate over the coming weeks due to direct infection or positive contacts, particularly with the rise in cases amongst school children.
“Added to this, we know there are already workforce pressures across the profession, which will be exacerbated by reduced staffing levels over the Christmas and New Year period.
“We therefore felt it was appropriate to reintroduce these temporary remote prescribing measures at this time to help relieve pressure on practising professionals, and to provide them with the means to continue to look after the health and welfare of their patients in all circumstances.”
As before, the temporary dispensation is subject to the specific guidance found in FAQ4 (www.rcvs.org.uk/covidfaq4), including that veterinary surgeons must be able provide a 24/7 follow-up service involving physical examination, for example where the animal does not improve, or suffers an adverse reaction, or deteriorates, subsequent to the remote prescription of medicines.
The Committee agreed that the position should be reviewed in February 2022 at its next meeting.
Mandisa qualified from the Royal (Dick) Vet School in Edinburgh in 2008 and has since spent much of her career working in emergency and critical care.
She served as the first black president of the RCVS in 2020/21 and has also worked for Harper Adams University as a lecturer in veterinary sciences.
Mandisa will replace Laura Playforth, who is joining IVC Evidensia as group QI director, on the Vets Now board.
She said: “I’m delighted to be joining the Vets Now family at such an interesting and challenging time for the veterinary professions.
“I look forward to working together through innovative approaches to ensure our teams continue to deliver the highest standards of clinical care and client services.”
Nick Stace, CEO of the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons (RCVS), has issued a swift and robust response to the call by Unite for a shake up for the profession's regulatory system.
"Unite's suggestion that veterinary regulation should be under the scrutiny of the Professional Standards Authority (PSA) is misguided, because the PSA is there to oversee regulation in the human healthcare sector and the RCVS already has Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) and Privy Council oversight.
"Its further thoughts around the RCVS disciplinary process are out of date and missing the point. We would be very happy to help put them right and to hear any legitimate concerns they may have.
"Unite is calling for the College to no longer 'set the rules and hand down judgments', when in fact last year we successfully achieved a Legislative Reform Order, backed by the profession, to ensure that our Disciplinary and Preliminary Investigation Committees will become independent from Council.
"Unite also talks about the profession's disquiet about last year's Disciplinary Hearing into Mr Chikosi, something we are well aware of and are currently responding to by looking at the biggest area of concern, the provision of 24/7 emergency cover. Our fact-finding mission is seeking views from the profession and the public.
"More broadly, though, feedback from our First Rate Regulator initiative has shown that the profession does have confidence in our disciplinary procedures and that they are certainly not subject to 'long-standing discontent'.
"The First Rate Regulator initiative is also leading to significant improvements in the way that complaints are handled, including speed to resolution.
"Unite is seeking to recruit members of the veterinary team as members of its union and it may be more successful in that pursuit if it was to start to understand the profession better, perhaps beginning with getting its facts right.
"We would be delighted to meet with Unite to put them right where they are factually wrong, and hear what they have to say."
The first is the introduction of Specialist training and status for general practitioners in primary care, for which the RCVS project will now develop a new five-year curriculum and an implementation plan.
The RCVS will also be looking closer at the definition of veterinary clinical roles and developing guidance for the profession and wider public on the different clinical career statuses available to veterinary surgeons.
Thirdly, the College will identify different ways in which vets can access the teaching and learning opportunities, clinical experience/cases, supervision and support that is required for them to complete specialist training and obtain RCVS Specialist status.
This will include looking at how access to specialist training can be widened beyond the typical internship/residency model, to include training models more accessible from primary care practice, and for those at different career and life stages.
Kate Richards MRCVS, Chair of the RCVS Education Committee, said: “These exciting and progressive proposals are visionary as far as the career and development structure of the veterinary clinical profession is concerned.
“It means there will be new prospects for those in general practice and those who want to achieve Specialist status by different means, as well as a more defined career structure for the profession that will be clearer to the profession and general public alike.
"With around 75-80% of veterinary professionals working in clinical practice this project will deliver a substantial positive impact.
“These are the early pages of a very exciting new chapter for veterinary clinical careers, and we will be asking for your help to write it, as we will be holding a number of consultations in the coming years, including on the programme for Specialist in Primary Care and the definition of clinical roles.
RCVS President Dr Sue Paterson FRCVS added: “There are two aspects of the project that I particularly welcome.
"First is the impact this could have on both recruitment and retention as vets are offered additional, and more diversified, career options and expanded roles in a variety of clinical settings.
"Second, as a specialist dermatologist myself, I really value the fact that we will be looking at ways to widen participation and increase accessibility to specialist training from primary care practice, as the residency/internship route is very intensive and not necessarily suitable for everyone.
A similar process to develop and enhance clinical career pathways for veterinary nurses is now also being considered, this would include the development of an ‘Advanced Veterinary Nurse’ status and clearer information on the veterinary nursing role and what it entails.
The Action Plan presents what the College is doing to tackle the issue and explains how collaboration, culture change, career development and leadership, among other things, could help with workforce shortages by improving retention of current members of the professions, encouraging more people to join, and making it easier for those who have left the professions to return.
The report lists seven main areas to be addressed:
The full list of actions, with context about what has fed into ambitions, can be found in the Action Plan which is downloadable at www.rcvs.org.uk/publications.
Dr Sue Paterson FRCVS, Junior Vice-President and Chair of the RCVS Advancement of the Professions Committee, said: “This is a very complex, broad and multi-faceted area of concern so the Action Plan has been a long time in the making to ensure that we adequately capture what needs doing and how, in order to enable us to work collaboratively with all veterinary organisations going forward.
"This is not a finished list, but gives all within the veterinary sector the ability to look at the key areas of work that need to be done and prioritise the ones that most suit their organisational needs."
The case against Jose Ignacio Messa MRCVS related to two heads of charge against him.
The first charge was that, on 13th September 2015, Mr Messa failed to provide adequate and appropriate care to Barney, a border collie. The second charge was that on 14th September 2015 Mr Messa failed to ensure adequate and appropriate on-going care for Barney after his examination of him, including failing to take sufficient steps to ensure that Barney was referred urgently to the care of a referral practice and failing to ensure there were adequate arrangements in place for his ongoing care.
Barney was presented to the Basingstoke practice where Mr Messa was employed having suffered a severe 'stick injury' to his jaw on 12th September.
The Committee heard that, on 13th September, Mr Messa re-examined Barney, administered medication and then discharged him to be cared for at home by his owners. During the examination the owners alerted Mr Messa to the condition of the skin on Barney’s neck, but the Committee heard Mr Messa had felt the area and reassured them it was not something to be concerned about.
The Committee heard that at some point on 13th September, after he was discharged, Barney developed a foetid smell from his mouth caused by an infection and the next day his owners went back to the practice because Barney’s condition had deteriorated – he was unable to walk and had laboured breathing.
On 14th September Mr Messa admitted and sedated Barney and examined him again, noting a hole in the side of his throat that was infected. He recommended referring Barney to a referral practice for further treatment, which was agreed by his owners.
The Committee heard that the referral practice was contacted by a veterinary nurse at the practice and that an appointment for 9am on 15th September 2015 was booked directly with the owner. It also heard that, during his time at Mr Messa’s practice, Barney did not receive intravenous fluids or any further antibiotics.
Barney’s owners said they met with Mr Messa again at around 5pm on 14th September when they came to collect Barney, this was disputed by Mr Messa, and the Committee were not satisfied so as to be sure that it had been Mr Messa who had met the owners and discharged Barney although the Committee found that all the witnesses had been honest and reliable.
Barney was admitted to the referral practice on 15th September but, as a result of sepsis, he suffered a cardiac arrest and died at 10.30pm.
In respect of the first charge the Committee concluded that, on 13th September, Mr Messa made only a rudimentary examination of Barney, and the absence of such basic clinical examination of the temperature, the respiration rate and the pulse of Barney was a failure on the part of Mr Messa and that, furthermore, he did not choose the best course of antibiotic treatment for the wound and infection.
In respect of the second charge Mr Messa admitted that he did not provide fluid therapy to Barney on 14th September before he was discharged.
With reference to the remaining aspects of the charge the Committee took into account the Code of Professional Conduct, particularly in respect of the need for veterinary surgeons to refer cases responsibly and the Code’s supporting guidance on referrals.
The Committee determined that, having delegated the arrangements of the referral to a veterinary nurse, Mr Messa made no attempts to follow up and ensure it was a same-day appointment when this would have better suited the severity of Barney’s condition. The Committee found that he was unaware of Barney’s location or of the time of the appointment and did not make provision for antibiotic or fluid therapy.
Having found the majority of the charges against Mr Messa proven, the Committee then considered whether this amounted to serious professional misconduct.
Disciplinary Committee member Stuart Drummond, who was chairing the Committee and speaking on its behalf, said: "In the light of the facts found proved and considering that disgraceful conduct in a professional respect is that which is conduct falling far below that expected of a veterinary surgeon, the Committee had concluded that the heads of charge, when taken individually, or collectively, do fall below the standard expected.
"However, as a matter of judgement, the Committee did not conclude that Mr Messa’s conduct fell far below the requisite standard and therefore did not amount of disgraceful conduct in a professional respect.
"Whilst the Committee did not find Mr Messa’s actions fell far below the requisite standard, there were concerns expressed about several aspects of this case. There were a number of missed opportunities which occurred; in particular the Committee notes the failure of the care plan and to take adequate steps to ensure that the referral process has been timeously effected."
The College has confirmed that it has now received an official complaint about the matter and it is now investigating under its normal 'concerns' investigation process.
Professor Argyle made a private statement about the allegations to RCVS Council at its meeting today, having already answered written questions from a number of Council members in the preceding days.
The Council did not ask Professor Argyle to step aside, but acknowledged that this was his choice, made for personal reasons.
The College said that in line with its normal protocols, and to ensure fairness for all parties, it will not make any further public comment about the investigation for the time being. However, it wanted to stress that it remains firmly committed to following due and proper process in all its regulatory activities.
The changes follow a jointly-funded research project by the RCVS and the British Small Animal Veterinary Association to evaluate how effective the PDP is in supporting graduates during the transition from veterinary school to veterinary practice.
The research was carried out by the Work Psychology Group and included online surveys, telephone interviews and a focus group with recent graduates and representatives from practices that are currently employing recent graduates.
The aim was to understand both positive and negative experiences of the PDP amongst veterinary graduates and their employers considering existing obstacles to learning and development, any gaps in support provision and common areas of confusion, anxiety and concern.
Christine Warman, RCVS Director of Education, said: "We are really grateful to everyone that took the time to give us their views and are pleased that this report gives us such a solid foundation on which to base necessary changes. What came across very strongly from the feedback we received was that the overall purpose and aims of the PDP were welcomed by graduates, employers and other stakeholders as something that is useful and good for the profession.
"Most agreed that having a formal support mechanism for graduates is essential for navigating the transition between the structured environment of veterinary school to the ‘coalface’ of veterinary practice.
"However, it was clear that there are issues with the PDP in its current format, including comments around it being a 'tick-box' or 'check-list' exercise in which the number of tasks completed was seen as more important than a focus on qualitative aspects such as confidence and progression as well as a lack of focus on development of non-clinical skills.
"As a result the Work Psychology Group came up with a series of recommendations which were approved by our PDP Working Group in December 2017 and then our Education Committee in February 2018. Some of these recommendations, as set out below, can be actioned in the short-term and we hope that these will rectify some of the concerns that were raised.
"In the longer-term the future of the PDP and the further recommendations of this research are also being considered as part of our Graduate Outcomes Project which is taking a more holistic view on the skills and competences of future veterinary professionals."
The short-term recommendations accepted by the RCVS Education Committee are:
Developing guidance to support graduates and employers through the process of reflection on their progress.
Considering how to build opportunities to capture and record reflective learning into the PDP.
Making it a requirement of the PDP that every graduate who is participating in the PDP has a named workplace mentor assigned to them, as well as a Postgraduate Dean.
Asking assigned mentors to sign-off their graduate’s progress on the PDP on a regular basis (eg every other month) and write a short commentary on the graduate’s progress on a six-monthly or annual basis.
Sharing resources between the BSAVA and RCVS looking at where further resources can be developed.
Gaining feedback from other professions as well as the veterinary schools regarding platforms that have been used for similar purposes and have been successful. This process would consider the key requirements of a PDP platform and ensure that the right questions are asked to gain feedback.
Sheldon Middleton, Chair of BSAVA’s PDP Committee, said: "We’re really pleased with the start we’ve made to help graduates and their employers take positive steps to tackle the challenges of transitioning between university and practice, and we have a plan to improve further, working with RCVS to really make a difference.
"We are also pleased to have this opportunity to reflect on such comprehensive feedback after our first year, this empirical evidence from those involved is invaluable, we have learnt lessons and highlighted areas for further development, so now we’re looking ahead to make sure we implement our improvement plan."
"The BSAVA Resource Bank received positive feedback (1.5.4) however, the majority of stakeholders and graduates were unaware of this resource and we will work to address this."
The full report from the Work Psychology Group can be downloaded from the RCVS website at: www.rcvs.org.uk/lifelong-learning/professional-development-phase-pdp/pdp-research/
The letter outlines how the organisations want to work with the government to ensure the best possible outcome for animal health and welfare, public health and the veterinary profession post-Brexit, but also voices concern that perceptions of ‘anti-foreigner’ rhetoric may already be having an impact on the veterinary workforce.
Here is the full text of the letter sent to the Prime Minister on the afternoon of Tuesday 18 October 2016:
Dear Prime Minister,
Like all professions and sectors, we are currently involved in detailed debates regarding how Brexit is likely to affect our members and how we can best harness the opportunities it may present. We are very keen to work with the government to make a success of Brexit within our sector. The veterinary profession plays a crucial role in protecting public health, relies heavily on EU graduates and is already feeling the impact of the EU referendum.
The UK veterinary profession is made up of over 26,000 veterinary surgeons and over 11,000 veterinary nurses, working to improve the health and welfare of animals, to monitor and control the spread of diseases, and to assure the safety of the food we eat. Each year around 50% of veterinary surgeons registering to practise in the UK are from overseas, with the vast majority coming from the EU. EU veterinary surgeons make a particularly strong contribution to public health critical roles such as working in the Government Veterinary Services. In the meat hygiene sector some estimates suggest 95% of veterinary surgeons graduated overseas. Consequently, Brexit and accompanying changes to the mutual recognition system or immigration restrictions could have a profound impact upon the veterinary workforce.
We are currently considering how best to manage the potential impact on the veterinary workforce, and will be very pleased to discuss these issues with the relevant government departments in due course. However, even before Article 50 is triggered we are experiencing a negative impact on the existing veterinary workforce.
We have received reports that the increasing focus on foreign workers is causing personal distress to individual members of the veterinary profession who live and work in the UK. There are also reports of a negative impact on recruitment and retention: those involved in public health critical roles, such as meat hygiene, are having increasing difficulty recruiting much needed EU veterinary surgeons to work in the UK; leading experts from overseas are turning down employment offers from top UK universities; and many others are considering leaving the UK due to a feeling it is no longer welcoming to foreigners. There is a danger that the language and rhetoric around Brexit, alongside the ongoing uncertainty for non-British EU citizens, could seriously impact the veterinary profession’s ability to fulfil its essential roles.
The government has encouraged professions like ours to present factual data on the EU migration issues so that you can fully understand the challenges the country faces. The RCVS has begun the process of commissioning detailed research into the impact that Brexit is having upon those working in the profession and the implications this could have for the veterinary workforce. We will keep your officials informed as to the results of this research.
In the meantime, we reiterate our call for the government to protect the status of non-British EU vets and vet nurses currently working and studying in the UK, and urge Ministers to be mindful of the negative impact of what may be perceived as ‘anti-foreigner’ rhetoric.
We are committed to working with you to identify opportunities created by Brexit for animal health and welfare, public health and veterinary research and to realise our joint vision for the UK to continue to lead in these areas, and we are keen to maintain close communication with you and your colleagues as the negotiations develop.
Yours sincerely,
Chris Tufnell, President, Royal College of Veterinary SurgeonsGudrun Ravetz, President, British Veterinary Association
From the start of 2016, the RCVS will no longer allow veterinary surgeons or veterinary nurses to enter undocumented continuing professional development (CPD) on their records.
Under the RCVS Codes of Professional Conduct, veterinary surgeons are required to record a minimum of 105 hours of CPD over a three-year period, while veterinary nurses are expected to carry out 45 hours of CPD over the same period.
Historically, vets and nurses have been able to record 10 and 5 hours as undocumented private study per annum respectively. The RCVS Education Committee decided to discontinue the allowance for vets in May and the Veterinary Nursing Committee followed suit in June.
Julie Dugmore, RCVS Head of Veterinary Nursing, said: “As with the veterinary surgeons, this decision was made because it was felt that all CPD, including private study, should be properly documented on the CPD records of veterinary nurses.
“This change, however, is not intended to discourage private study which we recognise extends across a range of different types of learning, including reading, and can be very valuable for personal development, but merely that it should be properly documented.”
The College says it hopes the changes will also clear up uncertainty around the respective allowances for veterinary surgeons and veterinary nurses, as some were under the impression that private study, even if it was documented, could only be classed within that category.
The Education Department is also in the process of reviewing the information available to veterinary surgeons and veterinary nurses regarding what counts as CPD, in order to clear up uncertainty and provide more specific examples for each learning category.
Information about CPD for veterinary surgeons can be found at www.rcvs.org.uk/cpd, while for veterinary nurses the information is available at www.rcvs.org.uk/vncpd
The RCVS has published Fitness to Practise - A Guide for UK Veterinary Schools and Veterinary Students, a guide for veterinary students which aims to introduce them to the concept of fitness to practise and help prepare them for professional life.
The guide was developed by an RCVS working party in conjunction with the UK's seven veterinary schools that currently offer an RCVS-approved veterinary degree. It has also received approval from the Veterinary Schools Council, a new body which represents the interests of the country's veterinary schools.
The guide is split into two parts: the first part provides guidance for veterinary schools on how to recognise and address fitness to practise concerns; the second part sets out the broad principles of fitness to practise that students should follow and which veterinary schools should uphold.
Laura McClintock, an Advisory Solicitor from the RCVS Professional Conduct Department, said: "While we don't regulate veterinary students themselves, we hope that this guidance will prepare future vets for the requirements and standards that we expect from members of a regulated profession and for adhering to our Code of Professional Conduct and its supporting guidance.
"The guide also recognises that each university will have its own specific disciplinary guidelines and procedures, but we hope that this will help promote consistency in their fitness to practise regimes.
"Although we expect any adverse findings made in university fitness to practise proceedings to be declared to us upon application to register, we would take into account the fact that a student is not a fully-fledged professional and would therefore make some allowance for any mistakes and poor judgement when considering whether or not they should join the Register."
The guide can be downloaded for free from www.rcvs.org.uk/studentguide
The RCVS is also in the process of forming a working party to produce equivalent guidance for student veterinary nurses.