On 9 April, the College published a flowchart to help veterinary professionals to decide whether or not to carry out a particular type of work, whilst ensuring the health of their teams and clients, and working to uphold animal health and welfare.
The flowchart has been updated as follows:
Firstly, the box that previously said:
‘Can you effectively support the case while maintaining social distancing for your team and the public?’
now says:
‘Can you effectively support the case while abiding by the appropriate social/physical distancing guidance for workplaces to protect your team and the public?’
The College says this new wording better reflects the different language and varying guidance in place across devolved nations. It also recognises that the new government guidance is not just about maintaining a 2m distance, for which ‘social distancing’ appears to become a shorthand, but accepts that other biosecurity measures might be appropriate if the 2m rule cannot be followed in the workplace.
Secondly, the box that previously said:
‘Could the planned intervention have animal health and welfare or public health implications if not carried out within two months?’
‘Could the planned intervention have animal health and welfare or public health implications if not carried out?’
This change recognises that this phase of lockdown-exit may carry on for longer than a two-month period; it therefore leaves it to the clinician’s professional judgement in terms of the implications versus the risk, rather than seeing it within a specific time-period.
RCVS President Niall Connell said: "I’m grateful to the members of our Covid-19 Taskforce for continuing to keep under review our key guidance to the profession during the ongoing pandemic. Whilst these latest changes do not represent any significant changes for vets and vet nurses as they continue to care for the nation’s animals, it is important that we continually keep our guidance in line with that of the UK’s governments."
The updated flowchart is available to view and download from www.rcvs.org.uk/coronavirus.
As part of its review, the College had planned a series of focus groups of veterinary surgeons and nurses across the UK. However, these have had to be delayed both because of social distancing rules and because of the pressures that practice teams are currently working under. However, the agency tasked with hosting the focus groups is now exploring alternative options and it is hoped there will be a revised timetable soon.
In the meantime, the College says it now plans to commission an additional independent agency to survey veterinary surgeons about their experience of remote prescribing during lockdown.
In March, RCVS Council agreed to temporarily allow veterinary surgeons to prescribe prescription-only veterinary medicines remotely, without first having physically examined the animal, subject to a number of conditions and safeguards being in place.
This position is due for review by 30th June, and the College will be looking for feedback and data from veterinary surgeons about your experience of remote prescribing, in order to determine whether these arrangements can continue, with or without any extra safeguards.
Because remote prescribing is also one of the most important aspects of the planned under care review, feedback gathered now will help inform future discussions too.
RCVS President Niall Connell said: “We recognise the current conditions that veterinary practices are working under in no way represent normal practice life. Most practices will not have been set up to offer remote services and remote prescribing in a way that they might have chosen, given sufficient time and appropriate detailed guidance, if indeed there are any future guidance changes after the review.
"However, we feel it would be remiss of us not to seize the opportunity arising from this current crisis to ask about the experiences – good or bad – of those on the frontline of clinical veterinary practice in providing remote services to their clients.
"Whilst this will be no substitute for the formal evidence gathered by the research agency in due course, whatever data and feedback we can collate from veterinary practices at this unique time for our professions will, I’m sure, be extremely valuable to our ongoing discussions."
The survey was held between the 1st and 5th May and was sent to the 3,139 UK veterinary practices for which the RCVS holds a unique email address. In total it gathered 251 responses (a response rate of 8%) compared to the 532 responses to the initial survey conducted between 3rd and 7th April (a response rate of 17%).
The main changes compared to last month's survey were:
Lizzie Lockett, RCVS CEO, said: "This latest survey has identified some positive trends in terms of a slight uptick in business, including turnover, and fewer incidences of staff having to take time off with COVID or COVID-like symptoms.
“I am glad to see that the framework we published in April has, so far as we can see, provided veterinary professionals with greater guidance and reassurance regarding the fact that if it is feasible to do something safely under social distancing guidelines, then they can go ahead, if they choose to.
"We left plenty of scope for veterinary professionals to use their clinical judgement as to what services actually offer, depending on their facilities, level of staffing, availability of protective equipment, local disease pressures and so on.
"However, it is also clear that we are, by no means, out of the woods and that veterinary businesses are still struggling financially, with some of them reporting a very acute impact of the coronavirus and the associated restrictions on their businesses.
“We will continue to monitor the situation via these regular surveys, with the next one planned for early June. I would urge as many practices as possible to continue to complete them, so that we can build up a stronger evidence-base on how veterinary businesses have been affected. This information is not only vital for our own policy decisions but also allows us to present a stronger case to the Government and other public bodies where we wish to influence the decisions they make that will impact the veterinary professions and businesses.”
The survey results can be read in full at www.rcvs.org.uk/coronavirus-resources.
8,834 of the 33,857 eligible voters cast their votes, a turnout rate of 26.2%. This compares to a 25.5% turnout in the 2019 election and 22.7% in 2018.
The results of the election were as follows:
Dr Kate Richards (pictured right) – 4,399 votes (elected)Dr Richard Stephenson – 3,943 votes (elected)Dr Melissa Donald – 3,807 votes (elected)Professor Stephen May – 3,121 votesDr Kit Sturgess – 2,816 votesPeter Robinson – 2,642 votesJohn Davies – 808 votesDr Tom Lonsdale – 535 votes
Eleanor Ferguson, RCVS Registrar and Returning Officer for both elections, said: “Many congratulations to all those who were elected this year and we look forward to welcoming them to their places on Council at our Annual General Meeting later this year.
“I would like to thank both Professor Stephen May and Dr Kit Sturgess for their many years of combined service, both as members of RCVS Council and for serving on numerous committees, subcommittees and working groups. In Stephen’s case this includes his service as President of the RCVS in 2017-18 and for Kit as Treasurer of the RCVS from 2017 until the present.
As Dr Sturgess had been elected to the position of Junior Vice-President of the RCVS for 2020-21 earlier this year, a new election for the position will need to take place amongst RCVS Council members during their June meeting. An election for a new Chair and Vice-Chair of VN Council will take place take place amongst VN Council members at a meeting in June.
The company says it has made the test available in response to customer demand and growing evidence that in rare cases pets living with COVID-19-positive humans can be at risk of infection.
The test will be available to veterinary surgeons in North America this week and will roll out across most of the world in the coming weeks, via the company's worldwide network of laboratories.
Jay Mazelsky, President and Chief Executive Officer of Idexx Laboratories said: "We have continued to monitor the rapidly evolving public health crisis worldwide, paying special attention to the effects on pets.
"While there is currently no evidence that dogs or cats play a role in transmitting the disease to humans, it became clear offering the test was the right thing to do when we saw clinical evidence that pets—especially cats and ferrets—can in rare cases be at risk for infection. And, we heard from our customers around the globe that veterinarians needed a testing option."
Idexx recommends the test is used when three specific criteria are met:
Idexx says leading health authorities agree with the company that transmission of the SARS-CoV-2 virus is primarily person-to-person and advise against testing asymptomatic pets. Since mid-February, the company has tested over 5,000 specimens for the virus, from cats, dogs, and horses with respiratory symptoms in 17 countries. To date, it has found no positive results, suggesting that dogs and cats living with infected people generally remain uninfected, except in rare and isolated cases.
For information about the Idexx SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) RealPCR Test for pets, visit idexx.com/covid19-pet-test.
532 veterinary practices responded to the survey, which was sent to 3,096 veterinary practices for which the RCVS had a unique email address, on 3rd April.
The survey found that:
Three-quarters of those who responded to the survey answered a question on how the RCVS could better support veterinary practices through the crisis. The most frequent response (27%) was that the RCVS needed to provide clearer guidance, in particular as to what services it was permissible for veterinary practices to provide [the College published its updated guidance and flowchart on 9 April].
Of those who responded to the question, 15% felt that the RCVS was doing a good job or that there was nothing more it should do, while just 2% of responses expressed negative sentiment towards the RCVS.
Lizzie Lockett, RCVS Chief Executive, said: “I would like to thank all those practices who took the time in what is already a very fraught situation to respond to our survey and provide the evidence we need to gain a holistic picture of coronavirus’ impact on the business and economics of veterinary practices. We plan to continue running these surveys on a regular basis in order to gauge impact over time and the findings will feed into our policy and decision-making.
"This ongoing research will also be a vital tool when we are talking to Government and other bodies about the impact of policy on the veterinary sector. On this note, we are aware of the challenges of a minimum furlough period of three weeks given the need for practices to take steps to offer 24/7 emergency and critical care, and have written to government on this with some case studies around the impact this is having.
"To those on the ground it won’t come as too much of a surprise that the impact of the coronavirus has been profound in areas such as practice turnover and staffing, with many vets, veterinary nurses and other support staff being furloughed with the aim of signing them up to the Government’s Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme.
"There are some bright spots in the data we’ve gathered – very few practices reported that they had made or were planning to make staff redundant, and many practices reported mitigating the challenge of social distancing by carrying out consultations with new and existing clients remotely.
"Since the survey took place we have also taken steps to meet some of the requests for greater clarity and guidance from the RCVS with the publication of our flowchart helping practices to decide what treatments it is appropriate to carry out safely amidst the COVID-19 pandemic."
The survey results can be read in full at www.rcvs.org.uk/publications.
The next practice impact survey is planned for early May.
Earlier this month, the government had exempted veterinary surgeries from the requirement to close their doors during the pandemic. Strictly speaking, the exemption meant that practices could carry on offering the same level of service as before, provided they followed further government guidelines on social distancing.
However, the College then advised that non-essential treatments should not be carried out until further notice, and that animals should only be seen in emergency, or if their health was likely to deteriorate as a result of inaction.
This included vaccination, where RCVS advice stated that whilst routine vaccinations were considered not urgent, there "may be scenarios where, in your professional judgement, vaccines are being given to reduce a real and imminent risk of disease; this includes in the face of an animal disease outbreak, or in a scenario where part of a vaccine course has been given and the animal may be exposed to the disease."
The updated College guidelines, issued last Thursday evening, appeared little changed, except to say that its advice concerning vaccinations is under review. Meanwhile, its new flowchart gives a very clear framework for veterinary professionals to work within, essentially leaving it to your own professional judgement to weigh up the risks.
However, the BVA went further, declaring amongst other things, that:
Vaccinations – we are now recommending that primary vaccinations and year 1 boosters in dogs and cats go ahead due to the increased risk of disease outbreak over a longer period of time, and annual leptospirosis vaccination due to the zoonotic risk. If additional component of the core vaccine is due at the same time, it should also be administered. In addition, we’re recommending rabbit vaccinations go ahead due to the seasonal disease risks. Rabies vaccinations should be carried out if required for certification reasons
.... leading to an outcry that the BVA's advice appeared to be being relaxed at precisely the point when the government is imploring the public to stay at home, and that:
To add further fuel to the flames, the British Small Animal Veterinary Association then issued a statement to the effect that it had not been consulted during the preparation of the new BVA guidelines, which BVA past President Robin Hargreaves felt was so economical with the truth that he resigned his BSAVA membership on the spot.
COMMENTAt the end of it all, there is but one simple truth for every veterinary surgeon who is working in these difficult times, and it is this: The government and the RCVS guidance gives you the freedom to exercise your professional judgement concerning whether or not an animal needs to be seen for whatever reason. Provided you can explain why you reasonably concluded that an animal should or should not be seen, that is all that matters. It trumps everything else.
This whole farago has highlighted a number of important issues in the profession, starting with the social media conspiracy theories that the new guidance came after pressure from corporate practices when as far as I can tell, it appears to have been driven by a genuine concern that that failure to vaccinate could cause significant welfare issues in the future.
That seems a reasonable argument, and very much in line with the College advice. But that in turn raises a far bigger question, which is what on earth the BVA (a voluntary membership organisation) was doing issuing what appeared to be instructions ostensibly for all members of the profession. Notwithstanding the fact that BVA recommendations have no legal weight, having all these chefs running around with different recipe books is itself a recipe for muddled communications and confusion over leadership.
In turn, that raises the even bigger question of what the BVA's role should be. Should it be snuggling up in bed with the RCVS, issuing joint edicts? Or should it instead be holding the College to account, challenging its decisions and demanding clarification where clarification is necessary. I would argue the latter. In this situation, the ONLY organisation issuing guidelines about vaccinations for practising vets should be the regulator. And it is the role of the BVA to challenge those guidelines if necessary, or to demand clarification.
Which leads me on to the next thing, which is that increasingly, members of the profession seem to demand explicit rules or guidelines to operate within. There are lots of hypotheses for why this might be true. Perhaps because we live in a more (or seemingly more) litigious world and veterinary professionals like the reassurance rules provide. Perhaps it is because the younger cohort of vets lack the self-confidence needed for decision-making. Perhaps corporatisation has a part to play, in that employees of larger organisations tend to play more by the rules. Or perhaps it is a consequence of the growth in the 'refer everything’ culture which means vets take fewer clinical risks.
Whatever the reason, it seems clear that in some cases, the RCVS tack of "you're a professional, decide for yourself" is perfectly reasonable, whereas on other occasions, such as Schedule 3, more explicit guidelines are demonstrably necessary. Once again, surely the role of the BVA as the "Voice of the profession” is not to issue its own advice, but to press the College for more explicit guidelines as necessary.
Lastly, there is the role of Facebook in all of this. Quite obviously vets are no more immune to conspiracy theories than members of the public who think that coronavirus is spread by 5G telephone masts. Sadly, the truth is usually far less exciting. However, the problem at the moment is that the growth in social media and Facebook groups has left the regulator and the representative associations on the back foot, such that it is often left to individuals from those organisations who 'happen to come across OK online' (rather than having any properly defined role) to firefight.
Photo: https://www.scientificanimations.com/wiki-images/
The measures agreed by RCVS Council will allow UK-practising members to spread the cost of renewal over three instalments: paying 50% of the full cost by 30th April, 25% by 30th September, and the remaining 25% by 31st December.
Kit Sturgess, Treasurer, said: “We recognise that most veterinary businesses will be seeing a downtown during the coronavirus (COVID-19) lockdown, especially as veterinary practices reduce their workloads to emergency-only procedures or those that can be classed as urgent. Furthermore, we understand that many individual veterinary surgeons will no longer be working, and that this will cause financial difficulties for many vets and their families.
"We appreciate that this is a very difficult time for the profession, and as part of our compassionate approach to regulation we wanted to do our bit to help people manage the difficult financial consequences of the coronavirus crisis, and to help them to return to work as soon as Government advice allows. While fees for veterinary nurses are not due until the end of the year, we will keep the impact of the coronavirus pandemic under review on an ongoing basis.”
Any UK-practising member wishing to switch to the payment-by-instalments system should cancel their existing Direct Debits immediately (the College has already temporarily deferred these direct debits for around 10-14 days to allow time for them to be cancelled).
The College says that any member who does not pay the first instalment of 50% of the total fee by the end of April will need to pay the full amount in one instalment by the end of May. Should they then fail to make this payment, the College would then have to remove their name from the Register.
Those who pay the initial 50% instalment but fail to pay one or both of the subsequent 25% instalments will be moved to the non-practising Register for up to one year. This would mean that they could transfer back to the UK-practising Register without incurring a restoration fee. However, they would no longer legally be entitled to practise as a veterinary surgeon while on the non-practising Register until they had paid the retention fee in full and been transferred back to the UK-practising Register.
RCVS Council also agreed that the higher fee that usually applies for late payments, ie those made between 1 May and 30 May, will not be applied to any category of membership this year.
Members can opt to move to the new arrangements or continue with full payment. Details of how to pay under the new arrangements will be sent to members shortly. Any member who has already paid their fee in full and would like to switch to the payment-by-instalments mechanism should contact the College on refunds@rcvs.org.uk.
Further details about the scheme are available in a detailed Frequently Asked Questions guide via www.rcvs.org.uk/coronavirus.
COMMENTIt has been argued that at a time when many veterinary surgeons have lost a significant part of their livelihood, the College should have gone further and reduced the renewal fees, at least for the period of time that vets' earning ability is compromised. I'm not qualified to judge whether the College could have afforded that, and a spokesman would only say: "...we have to work within the framework of the legislation and the statutory instrument and, given this, the measures that RCVS Council has put in place is a reasonable outcome and will assist veterinary surgeons who may be struggling during these very tough times."
The annual minimum requirement for vets will be reduced from 35 to 26 hours of CPD, while that of veterinary nurses will be reduced from 15 to 11 hours. The reduction comes into force immediately.
A similar 25% reduction will also be introduced for veterinary surgeons holding Advanced Practitioner or RCVS Specialist status.
The decision to reduce the hours was made by the new RCVS Council COVID-19 Taskforce, chaired by RCVS President Dr Niall Connell, which was set up in order to make temporary policy decisions related to the pandemic in a quicker and more agile way. The proposal had previously been considered and supported by the RCVS Education Committee, VN Council and CPD Policy Working Group.
Niall said: “A number of veterinary surgeons and veterinary nurses expressed concern that it may be difficult to undertake CPD at present and so, in order to give the professions some breathing space, we decided we would reduce the minimum hours required for 2020. We also recognise that some practices are having to make the difficult decision to reduce their CPD budgets this year in response to falling footfall.
"However, it is worth reiterating that CPD need not be expensive or require physical attendance at lectures, congresses or other events. There are many online providers of CPD and other resources such as articles and webinars, some of which may be free. The key is that the CPD is relevant to you and enhances your professional practice and so we would still encourage all our members to undertake CPD as and when they can."
The policy will be under regular review and may be extended further if the circumstances demand. Those with any questions on the policy change should contact the RCVS Education Department on cpd@rcvs.org.uk
A full range of FAQs on the COVID-19 pandemic and the impact on the veterinary profession are available to view at www.rcvs.org.uk/coronavirus
On 23rd March, the Government demanded that the majority of public-facing businesses close their doors. Veterinary surgeries, however, have been exempted and are allowed to remain open.
However, the number of clients seen face-to-face should be kept to an absolute minimum and veterinary teams must insist on strict social distancing measures at all times.
In addition, the RCVS/BVA say that:
The College has updated its FAQs for veterinary professionals, which can be found here: https://www.rcvs.org.uk/setting-standards/advice-and-guidance/coronavirus-covid-19/
The BVA is now developing some further guidance to provide examples of what constitutes routine, urgent and emergency care.
There are eight veterinary surgeons standing in this year’s RCVS Council election, including three existing Council members eligible for re-election and five candidates not currently on Council. They are:
John DaviesDr Melissa DonaldDr Tom LonsdaleProfessor Stephen MayDr Kate RichardsPeter RobinsonDr Richard StephensonDr Kit Sturgess
Ballot papers and candidates’ details for both elections have been posted to all veterinary surgeons who are eligible to vote. Voters have also been emailed unique links the secure voting websites.
All votes must be cast, either online or by post, by 5pm on Friday 24 April 2020.
All candidates were invited to produce a video in which they answered up to two questions submitted to the RCVS by members of the electorate. The videos received so far have been published on the RCVS website at www.rcvs.org.uk/vetvote20 and on the College's YouTube channel (www.youtube.com/rcvsvideos). The candidate statements and biogs, and the questions submitted by members of the profession have also been published on the vetvote20 page.
Eleanor Ferguson, RCVS Registrar and Returning Officer, said: “With all that is happening currently, we are glad to say that we have been able to continue with business as usual as far as the RCVS and VN Councils elections are concerned, albeit with some minor delays on publishing the candidate videos.
Those who are eligible to vote in the RCVS Council election but have not received either an email or ballot paper should contact Luke Bishop, RCVS Media Manager, on l.bishop@rcvs.org.uk
The relevant section of the Government advice states: "This [key worker status] includes those involved in food production, processing, distribution, sale and delivery, as well as those essential to the provision of other key goods (for example hygienic and veterinary medicines)."
The RCVS/BVA statement, which is intended to help veterinary surgeons decide whether or not they can claim ‘key worker’ status and ask for their children to continue to be taken into schools, reminds veterinary surgeons to consider the wider societal picture and ensure that they only claim ‘key worker’ status if absolutely necessary.
The statement also stresses that the RCVS Code of Professional Conduct responsibility of the veterinary surgeon to take steps to provide 24-hour emergency first aid and pain relief to animals according to their skills and the specific situation continues, and veterinary practices will need to continue to carry out this work. It is important that animal owners are able to focus on their own health, and not need to worry about their pets. Both the RCVS and BVA believe that veterinary surgeons who are providing this essential work can be considered key workers.
The statement in full is as follows:
Veterinary surgeons as key workers in relation to school closures
RCVS and BVA appreciate that veterinary surgeons will feel a great deal of uncertainty at the present time, and that many will be facing considerable difficulties due to the closure of schools for most pupils.
The official government advice can be found here: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/coronavirus-covid-19-maintaining-educational-provision/guidance-for-schools-colleges-and-local-authorities-on-maintaining-educational-provision.
The guidance emphasises that if children can be at home then they should be, in order to help to prevent the virus from spreading.
The government has granted key worker status by sector rather than profession. Some veterinary work will definitely fall into the ‘key worker’ category. RCVS and BVA are therefore providing some additional advice below, following consultation with the UK Chief Veterinary Officer:
SummaryAt this time the provision of public health and the maintenance of food production need to take priority, and veterinary surgeons working in these areas should be considered key workers.
Veterinary surgeons working in emergency care can also be considered key workers. This will not apply to every veterinary surgeon in clinical practice, and practices may need to consider rationalising their services to achieve this.
The guidance has been welcomed by both the BSAVA and BEVA. David Mountford, Chief Executive of BEVA said: "As veterinary professionals we are duty-bound to provide essential care, relieve suffering and protect the health of the public. Recognition as key workers in such circumstances is welcomed but we would encourage vets to only add to the burden faced by schools where animal welfare is at risk and all other avenues have been explored."
The College says it will, however, continue to operate as close to normality as possible, with the main support services for veterinary surgeons and veterinary nurses such as advice, lifelong learning (including qualifications and the new 1CPD platform), finance and Practice Standards available as usual over the phone, on email or via the website.
The College’s main statutory activities around accreditation, registration and regulation of the professions will also be largely unaffected, with most Committee, Sub-Committee and working group meetings held by telephone or video conference.
Apparently, however, the April meeting of RCVS Council was going to be too big to be held remotely, so it has been cancelled.
The things that were up for discussion, such as the standard of proof and the report of the Legislation Working Party, will be moved to a subsequent meeting. Should there be any urgent business to consider, Council members have been asked to remain available via email on the date originally scheduled.
The College says it will be deciding whether to proceed with forthcoming DC hearings on a case-by-case basis, to balance maintaining the health and welfare of all involved with the College’s responsibility to protect animal health and welfare and public health.
The College is having to postpone or cancel an increasing number of its events; latest updates and advice for the profession is at: www.rcvs.org.uk/coronavirus.
RCVS Chief Executive Lizzie Lockett, pictured right, said: "We have been planning for this eventuality for some time, so whilst Monday’s announcement from UK Government came a little sooner than expected, we are in a strong position to be able to operate as close to normal as possible.
"We have an excellent and highly committed team of staff and Council members at the College, who I know will continue to work hard from kitchen tables, studies and living rooms over the coming days and weeks to serve the veterinary professions and the animal-owning public.
"Whilst we are fortunate that much of our work can be carried out remotely, we fully appreciate that this is not the case for most veterinary professionals who themselves are currently facing many significant challenges in their daily work to care for the nation’s animals whilst also prioritising the health and welfare of their own teams."
The College is urging all veterinary surgeons, nurses and practices to check they have supplied it with their most up-to-date email address via www.rcvs.org.uk/myaccount so it can relay its latest advice as the situation evolves.
Pam Mosedale, Lead Practice Standards Scheme Assessor, said: “We are very sorry for any inconvenience this may cause, but based on the UK Government’s advice and our duty of care to our team of Assessors, as well as team members and clients at veterinary practices, our only option was to postpone and reschedule all visits in the short-term.
"Although we have cancelled all assessments until the end of April, we will be constantly monitoring the situation over the coming weeks, and it is likely that there may be some further postponement of assessments planned for May and beyond."
The Veterinary Medicines Directorate, which carries out assessment inspections of veterinary premises that are not within the ambit of the Practice Standards Scheme, has also confirmed that it has postponed its forthcoming inspections. Further information can be found here: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/the-vmd-remains-open-for-business.
The RCVS Practice Standards Team can be contacted on pss@rcvs.org.uk or 020 7202 0767 for further advice.
Normally, students would be required to complete a minimum of 38 weeks of EMS throughout their degree programme in order to gain real-life work experience to enhance their university-based studies.
Under the circumstances, however, Council has decided to allow a temporary flexibility around completion of EMS:
RCVS President Niall Connell said: “Extra-Mural Studies (EMS) are an important and valued part of the veterinary programme, and all students are required to complete a total of 38 weeks across the full programme.
“However, the health and safety of students and staff are paramount, and we are aware that a number of restrictions are being put in place at this time to ensure their safety and minimise the risk of Covid-19 transmission.”
These measures will be subject to further review/extension depending upon the prevailing situation with the COVID-19 pandemic. The RCVS will monitor the impact of this through EMS completion data provided by UK veterinary schools.
Regarding final exams and assessment, the College says it may be necessary for UK veterinary schools to consider alternative methods to assess students in certain areas, but that UK veterinary schools should continue to ensure that any alternative assessment methods continue to be robust, valid and reliable, and ensure students have met the RCVS Day One Competences.
The review, which had been due to start in late 2019, will now start in April 2020.
Melissa Donald, Chair of the RCVS Standards Committee (pictured right), said: "Regretfully, as the scope and complexity of the review became clearer following Council’s approval of the project, it was also apparent that the original methodology, and the timetable set for it, was not going to be suitable to the task.
"Therefore, over the past few months, the Standards Committee and College staff have been working hard with the external research agency to revise the methodology and we have now reached the stage where we are confident we have got it right, and can now proceed with the review.
“While we regret the delay, as this review relates to fundamental principles about the provision of veterinary care, it is vital we get it right and that the process is as comprehensive as possible. It is better that it is right than rushed.”
Under the new methodology the review has been split into the following stages:
Melissa added: “Invitations to our regional focus group discussions, which will be selected randomly from amongst the professions by our research agency, will be going out soon and I would urge anyone who receives an invitation to come along and share their views and ideas.”
For further information, see: www.rcvs.org.uk/undercare
Kit, who has served on Council as an elected member since 2013, is currently the Chair of the RCVS Finances & Resources Committee and has been RCVS Treasurer for the past three years.
He is also a member of a range of committees and project groups across the RCVS including: the Audit and Risk Committee; the PIC/ DC Liaison Committee; the Certification Subcommittee; the Estate Strategy Project Board; the RCVS Knowledge Board of Trustees; and the Advanced Practitioners Panel.
Since 2003 Kit has been working as an internist (he is an RCVS-recognised Specialist in Small Animal Medicine) in private referral practice. In 2006 he became a founding partner in a multidisciplinary referral centre that he saw grow from five to 65 members of staff within five years.
His interests include workforce issues, communicating the diverse clinical and non-clinical skills of veterinary surgeons to the general public and government, and facilitating life-long learning through achievable further professional qualifications and effective CPD.
Kit said: "It was a great honour to be elected as the next Junior Vice President by my fellow council members. I feel that I can make a positive contribution to the work that the RCVS is already undertaking in ensuring the veterinary team remains healthy and respected. In particular I am keen to look at how the RCVS can help find solutions to our workforce issues - improving retention as well as encouraging and facilitating vets and nurses back into the profession."
In addition to Kit being elected as JVP, the current holder of that office, Dr Mandisa Greene, was confirmed as President for 2020-21 and current President, Dr Niall Connell, was confirmed as Senior Vice-President for this period.
Professor Susan Dawson was voted in as RCVS Treasurer, and she will be formally invested in this role at Royal College Day on Friday, 10 July.
Professor David Argyle has been elected as Chair of Advancement of the Professions Committee for a second year, Dr Susan Paterson has been elected as Chair of Education Committee for her second year, and Dr Melissa Donald has been elected Chair of Standards Committee for her second year.
Kit and Melissa's positions are subject to their successful re-election in the 2020 RCVS Council Elections
More information on the RCVS Council and its members can be found on the RCVS website: https://www.rcvs.org.uk/who-we-are/rcvs-council.
The Working Group, which was formed in January, is chaired by Nigel Gibbens (pictured right) and composed of representatives from BVA specialist divisions and affiliate groups, and others with relevant expertise and knowledge.
As the Association says, the RCVS review will potentially have a far-reaching impact on the future of the veterinary profession, animal health and welfare, and the relationships vets have with their clients.
Of particular concern are the impact of remote prescribing on animal welfare and how limited-service providers (ie those offering online consultations only) will affect the commercial viability of full-service providers.
It is therefore hugely important that the BVA's response represents the opinions and evidence of as many people in the profession as possible.
Information about the BVA Working Group, including the minutes of meetings held so far and the 'themes' document which reflects the group's current thoughts, can be found here: https://www.bva.co.uk/about-us/our-structure/working-groups/
Nigel said: "I encourage you to look at this information carefully, and feed in any evidence that you wish the group to consider along with your thoughts on the content of the BVA response to the RCVS. You can do this via BVA’s Head of Policy & Governance Amelia Findon (ameliaf@bva.co.uk) who will ensure that comments are collated and considered by our group.
"The breadth of opinion across the profession means that the BVA response cannot please everyone, nor should it attempt to. However, it will be based on available evidence and a good understanding of the full scope of views. BVA policy will thus reflect the majority view whilst embracing the positive potential of technological innovations that will inevitably change the way we interact with clients. I urge you to take the time to consider the implications and let us have your thoughts."
Last year a cohort of 1,010 veterinary surgeons responded to the CPD audit, which took place in September 2019 and included a random sample of 658 vets sourced from across all UK postcode areas.
The audit found that 820 (or 81%) of respondents met the annual requirement – a 13% increase from the 2018 audit. This followed a decline in compliance rates from 82% in 2014 to just 68% in 2018.
Amongst veterinary nurses, 79% of respondents were compliant, a 7% increase on last year’s compliance rate and the highest compliance rate ever from a veterinary nursing CPD audit.
Dr. Linda Prescott-Clements, RCVS Director of Education (pictured right), said: "It is fantastic to see that this year’s results demonstrate a significant increase in CPD compliance rates after a number of years in decline for vets and a largely static rate for veterinary nurses and I hope that it is part of a long-term trend towards the professions recognising the value of keeping their clinical and non-clinical skills up-to-date.
"This year we have made a number of changes that should make CPD compliance even easier now, including a clearer and simpler annual CPD requirement of 35 hours for vets and 15 hours for vet nurses, and the 1CPD platform and app which can be signed into through the My Account area and provides the professions with the ability to record, plan and reflect on their CPD."
Further information about the changes to the College’s CPD policy and the 1CPD platform can be found at www.rcvs.org.uk/cpd2020.
The 1CPD app can be downloaded through the Apple App Store, Google Play and via the RCVS website at https://onecpd.rcvs.org.uk/accounts/login/
The Committee had found Dr Elefterescu guilty of serious professional misconduct in relation to a number of charges which covered issues such as dishonesty, poor record-keeping, and failure to carry out adequate clinical examinations.
The full charges and findings of the RCVS Disciplinary Committee can be found at: www.rcvs.org.uk/disciplinary.
The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council held the appeal hearing in October last year with three Justices of the Supreme Court - Lord Kerr, Lord Carnwath and Lord Kitchin – comprising the Board.
The basis of the appeal to the Privy Council was that the Committee’s findings on the facts of the case were flawed, with his counsel saying that Dr Elefterescu 'strenuously disputes the findings by the Committee of his dishonesty and lack of professional competence and submits that there is no adequate basis for them in the evidence’.
His counsel also told the Board that the Disciplinary Committee’s sanction failed to take into account mitigating factors and that the decision to remove Dr Elefterescu from the Register was disproportionate.
In relation to the appeal against the Disciplinary Committee’s findings on the facts, the Board was not persuaded by any of the arguments put forward on behalf of Dr Elefterescu. These arguments included that the RCVS had failed to call relevant witnesses and had failed to make Dr Elefterescu aware of the significance of some evidential matters, disclosed to him.
In respect of the sanction, the Board was also unpersuaded by the arguments put forward by Dr Elefterescu’s counsel, namely that it was too harsh in its assessment of aggravating factors, did not give adequate weight to mitigating factors, and that it failed to distinguish lack of competence from misconduct.
In its judgment on the arguments put forward by Dr Elefterescu’s counsel, the Board said: "It is the opinion of the Board that these criticisms are not well founded. The Committee considered with care Dr Elefterescu’s proven and admitted conduct in relation to each of the charges and whether it fell below or far below the standard to be expected. It is to be noted in this regard that a number of the charges which were either admitted or upheld were not the subject of any challenge on this appeal.
"Overall, the Committee found that Dr Elefterescu’s clinical failures were very serious, involved failures in the basics of animal care, resulted in animal suffering and involved widespread breaches of the respondent’s [RCVS] code of professional conduct. It also expressed particular concern about its findings of dishonesty, and rightly so. That conduct was, in its view, ‘at the top end’ of disgraceful conduct in a professional respect. What is more, Dr Elefterescu had a lack of insight into his failings and a wholly unjustified confidence in his abilities which constituted an ongoing risk to animal welfare."
"These were findings which the Committee was clearly entitled to make and, in the light of them, the Board is firmly of the view that the decision of the Committee to direct the removal of Dr Elefterescu’s name from the Register cannot be impeached. The Board rejects the criticisms made of the Committee’s reasoning and the conclusions to which it came. The direction that Dr Elefterescu’s name must be removed from the Register was appropriate and proportionate."
The Judicial Committee’s full findings can be found at www.jcpc.uk/cases/docs/jcpc-2018-0060-judgment.pdf.
The College says the aim of the programme, which will replace the current Professional Development Phase (PDP), is to ensure that new graduates are fully supported in their new role and able to progress from day one competencies into confident and capable independent practitioners.
The new programme builds on the results of the Graduate Outcomes Consultation, a consultation which reported in 2019 to gather the views of the profession with regards to day one competencies, the PDP, extra-mural studies and clinical education for general practice.
The Graduate Outcomes consultation found that the profession felt that support mechanisms for new graduates needed to be strengthened, and the proposal to develop this new programme of support was approved by RCVS Council in January.
The first of the two working groups is the EPA Working Group, which is tasked with assisting the development of a bank of Entrustable Professional Activities (EPAs). EPAs describe the everyday professional tasks carried out by vets in practice, covering a wide range of areas of clinical and professional practice which graduates and their mentors can access to build into their own e-portfolio.
The second working group is the Mentor Working Group, which will assist in shaping the role of the mentor in the new programme and create a training package for workplace mentors.
Sue Paterson, Chair of RCVS Education Committee said: "It is incredibly important for us to have input from veterinary surgeons who are working in general practice as they are well positioned to comment on how the development programme can effectively support graduates on a day to day basis."
The College is looking for veterinary surgeons working in practice and who have an interest in helping new graduates gain the best possible experience to join as members of these new working groups. It would be beneficial for applicants to have experience with mentoring and/or workplace training.
Successful applicants would be required to visit the RCVS for three half-day meetings over the period of a year and the RCVS would cover travel and subsistence expenses. There would be an additional time commitment to review and feedback on material via email.
Those general practitioners who are interested in applying should email Britta Crawford, RCVS Education Manager, via b.crawford@rcvs.org.uk giving a brief description of their current position and why they feel they would be an asset to the working group. The closing date for applications is 6 March 2020.
Eight veterinary surgeons have put themselves forward to compete for the three available places. They are:
The RCVS has uploaded each of the candidates’ biographies and election statements on to its website, at: www.rcvs.org.uk/vetvote20.
The elections will start from Monday 16th March when the ballot papers and candidates’ manifestos will be posted and emailed to all members of the profession who are eligible to vote.
All votes, whether postal or online, must then be cast by 5pm on Friday 24 April 2020.
As with previous years, the RCVS is also inviting members of the profession to get a better idea of why each candidate is standing by taking part in 'Quiz the candidates' and submitting a question which will then be put directly to the candidates.
Each candidate for both elections will be invited to choose two questions to answer from all those received, and produce a video recording of their answers.
Recordings will be published on the RCVS website and YouTube channel (www.youtube.com/rcvsvideos) on the week the election starts.
The College says only question per person is allowed, and any which it deems offensive, inappropriate, misleading, libellous or otherwise unlawful will not be distributed to the candidates.
Vets should email their question to vetvote20@rcvs.org.uk or send it to the College’s Twitter account @theRCVS using the hashtag #vetvote20 by midday on Friday 28 February 2020.
COMMENT
With the veterinary profession facing two of the biggest regulatory changes seen in most people's lifetimes, namely changes to the rules over remote prescribing without performing a physical examination and a possible change to the standard of proof used in disciplinaries, there has never been a more important time to make sure that practising veterinary surgeons are properly represented on Council. Nor has there been a time I can remember when a protest vote would represent such a shocking waste. Don't forget, you don't need to use all your votes. Use them wisely.
The new Order will come into force on the 18th February 2020, from when students who graduate with the University of Surrey’s veterinary degree will automatically be able to join the Register of Veterinary Surgeons and to practise veterinary medicine in the UK.
The university’s Bachelor of Veterinary Medicine and Science (BVMSci Hons) degree will enter the College’s cyclical accreditation process and be subject to annual monitoring for quality assurance.
Accreditation of the degree was a five-year process during which the RCVS worked with the University of Surrey to ensure that its curriculum and programme met the College’s quality standards, including two interim accreditation visitations in 2017 and 2018 and a final accreditation visit in 2019.
Dr Niall Connell, RCVS President, said: “We are very glad that the University of Surrey’s veterinary degree has now cleared the last hurdle and that, as of next month, it will join the roster as the UK’s eighth recognised veterinary degree. I commend the hard work that the faculty, students and the university’s clinical partners have put in to develop the course over the past five years and we look forward to continue to work with them to ensure that the high standards are maintained."
Professor Chris Proudman, Head of the School of Veterinary Medicine at the University of Surrey, said: "I am delighted that the University of Surrey’s School of Veterinary Medicine has become the UK’s eighth provider of veterinary education. The support and enthusiasm of our partner practice network has been essential in delivering our vision of competent, confident and compassionate veterinary graduates."
The full RCVS accreditation standards for veterinary degrees can be found here: www.rcvs.org.uk/setting-standards/accrediting-primary-qualifications/accrediting-veterinary-degrees/accreditation-standards/
Photo: (from l-r) Susan Paterson, Chair of the RCVS Education Committee, Professor Chris Proudman, Head of the School of Veterinary Medicine at the University of Surrey, and Niall Connell, RCVS President.
The Disciplinary Committee, chaired by Dr Martin Whiting, considered two charges against Mr Shah.
The first charge alleged that in June 2018 Mr Shah allowed a kitten to be anaesthetised for a castration without having first undertaken a clinical examination.
Then, having failed to locate a second testicle during the surgery, it was alleged that Mr Shah failed to contact the owner to inform her of this failure and to discuss the treatment options arising as a result, before ending his attempts at the castration.
The charge then alleged that Mr Shah failed to devise an adequate plan for the completion of the castration, failed to take adequate steps to ensure that the owner was fully informed of the details of the surgery, and failed to make adequate clinical notes in relation to the kitten.
The second charge alleged that, in relation to the conduct in charge one, Mr Shah failed to have adequate regard to previous advice and warnings from the RCVS about his conduct in relation to neutering surgery and related clinical note-keeping and communication with clients.
In particular, this related to a reprimand issued in September 2016 by the Disciplinary Committee following its finding of disgraceful conduct with regards to his discharge of a dog following castration in 2014, and advice issued to Mr Shah by letter of 21 March 2018 by the College’s Preliminary Investigation Committee with regards to circumstances surrounding canine spay surgery performed by him in 2016.
At the outset of the hearing Mr Shah denied all of the charges.
Nevertheless, the Committee found the following charge one sub-charges proved: that Mr Shah allowed the kitten to be anaesthetised without having first undertaken a clinical examination of the kitten and/or ensuring that they had undergone a clinical examination by another veterinary surgeon; that Mr Shah failed to devise an adequate plan for the completion of the castration, that he failed to take adequate steps to ensure that the owner was fully informed post-operatively of the details of the said surgery; and that he failed to make adequate clinical notes in relation to the findings of his examination under anaesthesia, his surgical approach, post-operative communication with the owners and his plan for completion of the castration.
The Committee also found all of charge two proved.
The Committee then went on to consider whether or not, in relation to the proved charges, Mr Shah’s conduct amounted to serious professional misconduct.
In considering the aggravating factors, the Committee took into account the risk of injury to an animal, the contravention of previous advice given by the College, lack of insight, and the previous adverse findings of the Disciplinary Committee and the Preliminary Investigation Committee.
With regards to mitigating factors, the Committee accepted that the conduct was not premeditated, that there was no financial gain and that, notwithstanding the contents of charge two, the first charge was a single and isolated incident.
Considering both the aggravating and mitigating factors, the Committee was satisfied that Mr Shah’s conduct fell far below the standard expected of a registered veterinary surgeon and consequently that it amounted to serious professional misconduct.
The Committee then considered what sanction to impose on Mr Shah. The Committee first considered lesser sanctions, including postponement with undertakings and a reprimand and warning. Neither would be sufficient to protect animals and the wider public interest and uphold proper standards because Mr Shah had already been given a reprimand and warning in 2016, which appeared, to the Committee, to have had no effect.
Speaking on behalf of the Committee, Dr Whiting said: "It is clear to the Committee that in this case, the respondent has failed to demonstrate any insight into the seriousness of his misconduct.
"In this case, the Committee considers that there is evidence of a harmful deep-seated personal attitude problem so far as the respondent is concerned. His pervasive denial of wrongdoing and lack of insight, in spite of the findings of this Committee, is of grave concern.
"The respondent’s persistent abdication of personal responsibility and accountability for anything that went wrong, coupled with his sustained blaming of the nursing staff with whom he worked, displays an attitude which is fundamentally incompatible with being a member of the veterinary profession.
"The Committee cannot be confident that there is no significant risk of repeat behaviour in the event that suspension was found to be the appropriate sanction and that the respondent is fit to practise after any period of suspension.
"This is particularly due to the fact that Mr Shah has failed to have adequate regard to previous advice and warnings from the RCVS, coupled with multiple previous adverse findings of the Disciplinary Committee and the Preliminary Investigation Committee. The Committee has reached this conclusion having regard to the seriousness of its findings in this hearing, and the previous advice and warning given to the respondent, none of which appears to have been recognised or heeded."
The Committee therefore concluded that the only sanction which reflects the seriousness of this case, in the light of the previous findings and advice given to the Mr Shah by the College, is to remove him from the Register.
The Committee’s full facts and findings can be found at www.rcvs.org.uk/disciplinary.
The College says that 1CPD has been designed to facilitate the new outcomes-focused CPD model which was introduced in 2020 and becomes mandatory from 2022.
An important part of this new model is reflection, so 1CPD encourages vets to reflect on the quality, relevance and impact of their CPD activities.
Dr Linda Prescott-Clements, RCVS Director of Education said: "Although the outcomes-focused element of these changes won’t become mandatory until January 2022, we recommend that you incorporate reflection in your cycle of planning, doing and recording CPD as soon as possible, and our new 1CPD app makes this much easier to do than before.
"Research has found that reflection enhances the quality, impact and relevance of CPD as professionals consider what they have learned, how they will apply their learning and how it will improve their practice. To support this CPD model, which research has shown has a positive impact on both professionalism and patient outcomes, the 1CPD platform facilitates reflection by allowing you to record your reflective notes on your recorded CPD activities, through a variety of means including text, audio or uploading a document."
The old PDR was taken offline last Friday and all of the data saved in the PDR has been transferred to 1CPD.
The 1CPD app is now available for both Apple and Android devices, available on and off line, and through a new dedicated website, all of which is now accessible using the same credentials used to access My Account.
Richard Burley, RCVS Chief Technology Officer, said: "1CPD provides a range of enhancements to RCVS’ previous offerings in this space and represents an important step forward in the College’s digital approach. Built on the latest best-practice technologies, it improves on every aspect of our previous approach to CPD support, delivering the first stage of a new, integrated, career-long CPD support capability for members.”
The launch of 1CPD also coincides with a change to the way that the College assesses CPD compliance, moving to an annual CPD requirement of 35 hours a year for veterinary surgeons and 15 hours a year for veterinary nurses.
More information on the CPD changes, along with accompanying resources, can be found on the RCVS website: http://www.rcvs.org.uk/cpd2020.
So that practices can make sure everyone in their team is aware of the changes, the RCVS has also produced a poster which can be downloaded at: https://www.rcvs.org.uk/news-and-views/publications/cpd-poster/.
For more information, contact the Education team on 0203 795 5595. For technical advice about 1CPD, email the RCVS at onecpd@rcvs.org.uk.