View all veterinary jobs
VetSurgeon.org publishes a curated feed of veterinary news for practising veterinary surgeons, with a primary focus on the UK profession.
We select stories based on their practical relevance, clinical interest, or professional significance — filtering out noise so busy vets can stay informed quickly.
Our coverage includes:
We report across all areas of practice, including companion animal, farm, equine and exotic species.
Our editorial approach is deliberately selective and concise. We prioritise clarity and relevance over volume, aiming to make each story worth your time.
You can follow VetSurgeon News by subscribing to the daily, weekly or monthly email digest, or via our channels on Facebook and LinkedIn.
Alstoe is launching Vetergesic Multidose, a 10ml version of the opiate injection, in a new multi-use vial.
Alstoe Technical Director, Dr Ian Ryder said: "In addition to the new vial size the inclusion of a preservative enables Vetergesic Multidose to be used for up to 28 days following its initial use. Also the product is now licensed for intravenous administration."
Vetergesic Multidose should drastically reduce the amount of product wasted by practices using the old, smaller single-use vial.
Alstoe says that supplying Vetergesic in a multi-use vial was one of the first things discussed with the drug originators, Reckitt Benckiser, when it took over the marketing of the product. However, for a large scale medical pharmaceutical manufacturer to consider producing a veterinary product in a different pack and in much smaller production runs than their medical operating scales, the answer is normally no. But in this case, Reckitts gave the project its full support, so in addition to reduced wastage, the inconvenience of snapping glass necks will become a thing of the past.
Please contact Alstoe Ltd for further information at info@alstoe.co.uk or telephone 01347 878606.
The new presentation is honey-flavoured and is available in 30ml or 100ml bottles with a syringe for precise dosing.
It has a two-year shelf life and a broached shelf life of six months.
Dechra companion animal brand manager, Thomas Johnson, said: “The addition of Felimazole Oral to our product range will provide vets with the flexibility to prescribe Felimazole as either a tablet or oral solution to accommodate the preferences of both the cat and its owner.
"This, combined with our extensive endocrinology resources, will ensure that vets have all the necessary tools to support their feline hyperthyroid cases.”
https://www.dechra.co.uk/cushings-connect
https://www.dechra.co.uk/addisons-connect
https://www.dechra.co.uk/search?q=felimazole#/search=Felimazole
https://apps.apple.com/gb/app/dechra-endocrinology-app/id1660737534
For the study, 2,834 seizure incident cases were identified from a population of 455,553 dogs attending VetCompass participating practices in 2013.
The study found that that approximately 1 in 160 dogs under first opinion veterinary care are affected by seizures every year.
Many of those dogs will have underlying epilepsy, defined as dogs with two or more unprovoked seizures at least 24 hours apart. Seizures can be secondary to idiopathic epilepsy, structural epilepsy or epilepsy of unknown cause.
Until now, however, there has been little information on the classifications of seizures, diagnostic approaches, or clinical management of dogs with seizures in the veterinary first opinion population.
The main findings from the research were:
Dr Dan O’Neill, Senior Lecturer in Companion Animals Epidemiology at the RVC, and author of the paper, said: "Watching your dog undergo a seizure can be an incredibly scary moment for any dog owner. It is really important that dogs that seizure are rapidly diagnosed to decide whether they need no further treatment beyond careful monitoring or alternatively require a clinical work-up to define the cause of the seizures.
"There are now some excellent treatments for many seizure-related diseases. This study helps up to understand the current state of play for seizure management in dogs and identifies opportunities for improved care of these affected dogs."
Reference
The full paper is freely available from Journal of Veterinary Internal Medicine and can be accessed here: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/jvim.15911
The webinar will cover the entire disease process of MMVD in dogs from pathology to current treatment approaches and future advancements in therapy, and will include the following presentations:
https://us06web.zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_QyfUofLgRG-YsaXQbkT7Tw#/registration
The new editorial team is comprised of Gareth Arthurs and Rob Pettitt, both RCVS Recognised Specialists in Small Animal Surgery (Orthopaedics) and Gordon Brown (no, not that one), an RCVS Diplomate in Small Animal Surgery (Orthopaedics).
Given the considerable evolution in the diagnosis, understanding and treatment options for many orthopaedic disorders, this second edition includes the investigation of lameness, including the use of force plates and kinematics, the current understanding of elbow dysplasia and the wide array of available treatment options, and diagnostic and surgical arthroscopy.
New, advanced surgical techniques, such as tibial osteotomy for cranial cruciate ligament disease, cementless total hip replacement for hip dysplasia and replacement of the trochlear sulcus for patellar luxation have been covered, together with guidance on the level of training and experience necessary to achieve consistently good results.
The manual is divided into four principle sections:
Lameness investigation
Musculoskeletal disorders
Principles of orthopaedic surgery
Management of specific disorders, ordered by individual joints.
The joint-specific chapters all follow a similar format, comprising the main chapter and then, where relevant, imaging and operative techniques.
Gareth Arthurs, one of three editors, said: "We feel privileged to have worked with such a broad range of talented authors whose combined international skills, knowledge and experience is impressive and very difficult to match. It has truly been a privilege to work with such a team of inspiring veterinary surgeons with expertise in various fields, and we are confident that the talent of each individual shines through their chapter".
The second edition of the BSAVA Manual of Canine and Feline Musculoskeletal Disorders is available from the BSAVA website: www.bsava.com or by phone: 01452 726700. The online edition is available from: www.bsavalibrary.com
Ane’s research interests lie in the surgical correction of neurological diseases leading to chronic pain and epilepsy. Amongst other things, she has developed an international database and phone application to help dogs and owners affected by epilepsy.
Ane began her veterinary studies in her native Spain before transferring to the Veterinary School of Paris (Ecole National Veterinaire d’Alfort) where she completed a three-year European residency in neurology. She then spent eight years working as a neurology-neurosurgery specialist in the UK.
Ane, who speaks five languages, then moved to the USA, where she joined Tufts University, training students, interns and residents and continuing her passion for research.
Henry L'Eplattenier, clinical director at Southfields, said: “We’re absolutely delighted Dr Uriarte has agreed to join the team.
"She is a very talented neurologist with a passion for neuro-oncology and will bring a wealth of experience and knowledge, which will benefit our world-class team."
Ane said: “I’m thrilled for the opportunity of leading the neurology service of such an outstanding hospital.
"Pets are part of our family and having a neurological disorder can be devastation. I’m committed and looking forward to helping referring veterinarians and owners in such circumstances."
In the study titled “Outcomes of treatments for keratomalacia in dogs and cats: a systematic review of the published literature including non-randomised controlled and non-controlled studies”, a systematic review of the current literature was undertaken to determine the evidence base for the various treatments of keratomalacia in dogs and cats.
The aim of the review was to assess the evidence base and identify recommended treatment(s) based on globe survival, visual outcome, and time to resolution (while maintaining a globe).
An online literature search found 18 relevant studies which were then reviewed and assigned a level of evidence base as described in the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine (OCEBM) Levels of Evidence Working Group.
Each study was assessed for type of study described (e.g. retrospective, prospective, controlled, random/non-random, cohort study, case series/study), the number of animals included, criteria for assessing outcome (e.g. vision, corneal clarity, anatomic repair) and duration of follow-up and time to resolution.
Systematic reviews of randomised trials, randomised trials or observational studies with dramatic effects would have provided the most reliable evidence on which to base recommendations for treatment(s) but none were available for inclusion.
Only one study was classified as level 3 evidence (non-randomised controlled trial) and considered the use of corneal cross-linking (CXL) in the treatment of keratomalacia.
Most studies were level four evidence reporting the outcome of a single treatment, with three prospective studies and seven retrospective studies.
The remaining seven studies were level five evidence (mechanism-based reasoning) and were considered not to provide good evidence for answering the particular study question.
The findings of the study suggest that the evidence for improved outcome of one proposed treatment over another proposed treatment for keratomalacia in dogs and/or cats is very weak.
A combination of treatments – both medical and surgical – may be the most appropriate depending on the individual case.
Studies utilising mechanism-based reasoning would suggest that medical treatment with anti-collagenase treatment is a minimum requirement for keratomalacia cases to prevent globe loss through perforation, with associated pain and suffering.
Nicola Di Girolamo, Editor of JSAP, said: “The findings of this study highlight once more the infrequency of randomised controlled trials in the veterinary literature, and the need for such studies to expand the evidence base in this field.
“Focussing on collecting available evidence in well-conducted systematic reviews is a critical step in order to improve accessibility of the literature for general practitioners and specialists alike.”
The full article can be found in the October issue of the Journal of Small Animal Practice and can be read online here: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jsap.13326. It is open access and can be freely accessed by anyone.
Photo courtesy BSAVA
Apoquel chewable tablets were approved by the Veterinary Medicines Directorate (VMD) in November 2021.
Apoquel Chewable contains the same active ingredient, at the same dosing regime, for the same indications as original Apoquel, but in a palatable formulation which, in a field-study of client-owned dogs, was found to have a 91.6% acceptance rate.1
Dr Carly Mason, President of the British Veterinary Dermatology Study Group (BVDSG), said: “The new chewable form of Apoquel provides owners with a means of controlling itch using a tablet that can be given like a treat or mixed with a meal, making it much easier for owners and more acceptable to their pet.
“In many cases, the chewable formulation will be the obvious first-line Apoquel for veterinarians to prescribe to control canine itching while the underlying cause of allergic dermatitis is investigated.”
The awards celebrate the achievements of remarkable people who dedicate their lives to improving animal health and welfare both in the UK and abroad. They are open to vets, vet nurses, farmers, animal welfare professionals and animal welfare teams who can be nominated to receive an award by fellow peers, friends and family or the general public.
There are nine nomination categories including a new one this year to recognise an international individual or team that stands out from the crowd by influencing and significantly contributing to making a visible difference in the world of animal welfare.
The categories are:
Chris Laurence Vet of the Year supported by Vet Record.
Vet Nurse of the Year supported by Agria Pet Insurance
Charity Team of the Year supported by PDSA
Charitable Contribution of the Year supported by Blue Cross
International Cat Care Welfare of the Year supported by International Cat Care
Farmer of the Year supported by R.A.B.I. and Farmers Guardian
Farm Educator of the Year supported by NADIS and Farmers Guardian
Outstanding Contribution to Animal Welfare supported by Your Dog and Your Cat magazines
Outstanding International Contribution to Animal Welfare supported by Ceva International
Nominations can be made at https://www.cevawelfare.com/click-here-to-nominate with nominations closing on Tuesday 31 December 2019.
Finalists will be announced at the beginning of February and winners will be revealed at an awards ceremony in Birmingham in April on the eve of BSAVA Congress.
Cuneyt Seckin, Managing Director of Ceva Animal Health UK and Ireland, said: "As an animal health company, animal welfare is a huge focus for us. The Ceva Animal Welfare Awards are an opportunity to formally recognise and congratulate outstanding animal welfare teams and individuals who contribute to the protection and welfare of animals in their daily lives."
For more information, visit www.cevawelfare.com.
Ms Buttler was charged with having been under the influence of alcohol whilst at work on two separate occasions. On both occasions, she was working as a locum veterinary nurse.
The first occasion was between 25th and 28th April 2016 in Frome, and the second from 3rd July to 4th July 2016 in Salisbury.
It was also alleged that a prior conviction of drunk driving on 19th November 2013 rendered her unfit to practise as a veterinary nurse.
The Committee decided to hear the case in Ms Buttler’s absence as it was satisfied that she had properly been served with the notice of hearing and because she had stated that she was aware of the proceedings but did not wish to engage with the process. The Committee also noted that she had not requested any adjournment.
The Committee heard from five witnesses for the first charge, including three veterinary nurses and one veterinary surgeon. They gave testimony that they had had cause to suspect that Ms Buttler was under the influence of alcohol whilst at work due to her demeanour, and recalled Ms Buttler repeatedly retreating upstairs to her accommodation during the working day. Further, an open wine bottle was found in Ms Buttler’s accommodation and was observed to have been drunk during the course of her shift. The Committee found the first charge proved.
The Committee heard from four witnesses in respect of the second charge. Two of the witnesses stated that they smelt alcohol on Ms Buttler’s breath while she was on duty, with one of them stating that Ms Buttler had slurred speech and a flushed face at the end of a fourteen-hour shift. The other two witnesses also presented evidence to support the assertion that Ms Buttler was under the influence of alcohol whilst at work, while the Committee found that Ms Buttler lacked credibility because she had denied having any alcohol on the premises when originally confronted, but later admitted in an email to the College that she had had an open bottle of wine in her bag. The Committee found the second charge proved.
The Committee then considered the third charge, namely the conviction in 2013. The Committee considered the certificate of conviction obtained from the North East Devon Magistrates Court and was satisfied that Ms Buttler had been convicted of driving with excess alcohol as set out within charge 3.
When considering whether these all amounted to a finding of disgraceful conduct in a professional respect, the Committee was concerned about Ms Buttler showing no insight into her drinking, and the repeated nature of the offences. The Committee also considered that being under the influence of alcohol when working as a veterinary nurse was conduct which fell far short of the standards to be expected of members of the veterinary nursing profession.
It therefore concluded that Ms Buttler was guilty of disgraceful conduct in respect of charges 1 and 2.
The Committee then considered whether Ms Buttler’s conviction (charge 3) rendered her unfit to practise as a veterinary nurse. The Committee concluded that Ms Buttler had not acknowledged the seriousness of her actions in 2013, or learnt any lessons from it. Accordingly, it felt that she continued to pose a risk to animals and the public in the future. The Committee also felt that the conviction undermined the reputation of the veterinary nursing profession because the offence inevitably involved a risk of injury to herself and other road users.
Having found Ms Buttler guilty of misconduct, the Committee went on to consider sanction.
The Committee took into account aggravating factors, including that there was a risk of injury to an animal, the fact that the first two charges involved an element of premeditation, the fact that Ms Buttler was under the influence on more than one shift in each practice, that there is no evidence of insight from Ms Buttler and there is a future risk to animals if she continued to practice unrestricted.
They also considered mitigating factors, including the fact that this is the first disciplinary hearing she has faced, that she did not cause any harm to any animal and that she did not gain financially from her conduct.
In reaching its decision Jane Downes, chairing the Committee and speaking on its behalf, said: "The Committee noted that Ms Buttler said she had worked for twenty years without any problem and that she was previously of good character. However because there was no evidence that Ms Buttler would not repeat the conduct with regards to working whilst under the influence of alcohol she could continue to pose a risk to animals or the public in the future. The Committee therefore was bound to consider her removal from the register.
"Although it noted from the brief email correspondence Ms Buttler had sent to the College that she said she did not intend to practice in the future, the Committee decided that until she had shown insight into her behaviour in 2016, she remained a risk to animals. It therefore decided that the proportionate action was to instruct the Registrar to remove her name from the register of veterinary nurses forthwith."
If Ms Buttler chose to re-engage with the College, she could apply for restoration to the register after ten months.
PBD says Bovine tuberculosis (bTB) is a growing problem for zoos and wildlife parks, especially with the disease’s potential to spread from one species to another, creating a natural reservoir that is difficult to control.
bTB in zoos came to public attention last year when Devon’s Paignton Zoo detected a single case in one of its antelope. Without access to a test that would deliver rapid results, the zoo had to cull the remaining 10-strong herd of Kafue Flats lechwe.
PBD says the Actiphage test can identify bTB and other mycobacterial diseases in animals before clinical symptoms of infection are observed. It can detect with high specificity the presence of any mycobacteria in animal blood within 6 hours in comparison to culturing mycobacteria, which can take up to 12 weeks.
The technology has been successfully applied to blood samples from 17 different species so far, including deer, goats and badgers as well as exotic animals such as lions, giraffes, antelopes, elephants, tigers, kangaroos and camels. Trials have confirmed PBD Biotech’s assay can detect live mycobacteria in blood or milk samples at very high sensitivity, of less than 10 mycobacterial cells per ml of sample.
The test is being presented to delegates at the British Veterinary Zoological Society (BVZS) Congress in Birmingham today by Dr Ben Swift, Research Fellow at the Royal Veterinary College and R&D Director at PBD Biotech.
He said: "The Actiphage detection method provides a major step change in the detection of viable mycobacteria and has the potential to revolutionise the control and understanding of mycobacterial diseases in zoo animals, wildlife and a range of other species.
"The use of bacteriophage means the test can detect mycobacteria before an immune response is fully developed, giving vets, zoo-keepers and other exotics experts a head-start on the race to catch bTB and other diseases in the hope of preventing the unnecessary cull of protected animals."
Led by clinicians from Davies Veterinary Specialists, the Royal Veterinary College, and Willows Veterinary Centre and Referral Service, the study assessed the proportion of metronidazole use that was prescribed for non-antimicrobial purposes, and the rationale for it.
A survey was completed by 138 veterinarians, primarily in the UK and working in primary care small animal practice, who treated 332 cases (285 dogs and 47 cats) with metronidazole.
In 42% of cases, metronidazole was selected exclusively for non-antimicrobial targeted therapy, and was most commonly prescribed to treat acute diarrhoea, chronic diarrhoea, or giardiasis.
This, say researchers, is despite recommendations that antimicrobials are very rarely warranted for the management of acute and chronic diarrhoea.
The most common rationale cited by vets to justify metronidazole use was its supposed anti-inflammatory or immunomodulatory properties.
Other reasons included: treatment of suspected or confirmed anaerobic or susceptible bacterial infection, the patient being systemically unwell or having severe disease, treatment of protozoal infections, experiencing a previous positive outcome in a similar case or the same patient, anti-diarrhoeal action and owner or practice expectations.
Dr Justin Ng, lead author of the study, said: “These insights are alarming given that such practices frequently deviate from current antimicrobial use guidelines, potentially contributing to ongoing challenges with antimicrobial resistance and adverse effects on gastrointestinal health.”
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jsap.13910
The inquiry in regard to Karen Tracey Hancock took place in her absence in January, after she indicated that she was content not to appear or to be represented.
The charges against Mrs Hancock related to an injury she falsely claimed she sustained to her knee while moving a euthanased dog in August 2015 that was then exacerbated while moving another dog a couple of weeks later.
The charges also stated that she made entries in the practice’s accident book also stating that she had injured her knee at work and then aggravated it later.
The charges also stated that, in County Court civil proceedings against the practice in relation to the alleged injuries, she falsely:
The Committee noted that the County Court claim made by Mrs Hancock was listed for a trial and concluded with a consent order dated 21 June 2019 which stated that the claim was dismissed.
It also considered evidence from eyewitnesses regarding the two alleged events that led to and exacerbated her knee injury in August 2015. In doing so the Committee found that, though Mrs Hancock did have an injury to her right knee, this was due to a horse-riding incident a number of years earlier and that her account of the incidents on 13 and 29 August, and therefore her claims to have been caused injury by them, were false and that her conduct had been dishonest.
The Committee therefore found all charges against Mrs Hancock proven.
The Committee then considered whether the proven charges amounted to serious professional misconduct. In doing so it considered submissions made by Counsel for the RCVS that there were a number of aggravating factors in the case of Mrs Hancock’s conduct including that the misconduct was sustained over a long period of time, was premeditated and involved lying for financial gain.
In commenting on whether the conduct was serious professional misconduct Judith Way, chairing the Committee and speaking on its behalf, said: “The Committee found all of the aggravating factors set out… in this case applied to its decision on whether or not the conduct amounted to disgraceful conduct in a professional respect.
"Such conduct would bring the profession of veterinary nurses into disrepute and would undermine public confidence in the profession because the dishonesty was directly concerned with the respondent’s work as a veterinary nurse in the veterinary practice.
"The Committee concluded that the dishonest behaviour was serious misconduct, particularly so because it took place at the respondent’s workplace. It considered that honesty and trust between veterinary nurses and their employers is essential to the profession and that such conduct as set out in the charges would be considered deplorable by other members of the profession."
The Committee was therefore satisfied that all four charges individually and cumulatively amounted to serious professional misconduct.
Committee members then considered the appropriate sanction for Mrs Hancock, taking into account the aggravating factors, including a lack of insight in that, in correspondence before the hearing, she continued to deny the charges. In mitigation it noted that there had been a significant lapse of time and that she had a long and hitherto unblemished career.
On balance it decided that removal from the Register was the appropriate and proportionate sanction and requested Mrs Hancock be removed from the Register, particularly as dishonesty is considered ‘in the top spectrum of gravity’ for misconduct.
Judith Way added: “The Committee acknowledged that the respondent was physically unwell with her knee between 2015 and 2019. However there was no evidence that her health had caused her to commit the misconduct. It noted the representations that the respondent made regarding the need to support herself financially but the Committee determined that the public interest outweighed the respondent’s own interests in this case because the proven dishonesty in the circumstances in which it took place was fundamentally incompatible with continued professional registration.
“In the Committee’s judgment without any evidence of remorse or insight by the respondent a suspension order could not meet the public interest in this case. It therefore concluded that removal of the Respondent’s name from the register was the proportionate and appropriate sanction in this case.”
The service offers Galen myotherapy, a form of massage, together with diet, exercise, nutraceutical and weight advice, house management advice, and an owner awareness and pain indicator assessment.
Hannah, who spent 14 years in small animal practice, said: "During a very bad week in practice I put two dogs to sleep in quick succession who’d both gone off their back legs. They were mentally there but their bodies had given up. I realised that osteoarthritis needed to be approached much more thoroughly and at a much earlier stage in a dog’s life."
CAM’s home-visiting service assesses arthritic dogs in the calm of their own surroundings. Hannah says that treatment aims to improve a dog’s posture and movement, support their ability to exercise and give owners the tools they need to make life easier for arthritic dogs. She added: "In a consultation, it can be very difficult to get all the information across to an owner whose dog has just been diagnosed with arthritis. CAM is a unique service that fills a gap. It aims to go into a dog’s home and make adjustments that will be good for that individual long-term."
Hannah says that the new service is offered alongside the owner's existing veterinary surgeon, who will need to give consent and prescribe any other treatments, such as NSAIDs, which are needed as part of the larger treatment plan. In other words, it's an additional service that vets can offer to their clients, ensuring they are doing everything they can to help their many arthritic patients.
Hannah said: "Arthritis is a household name, it's massively prevalent in humans and there are huge support services for people dealing with the chronic pain associated with the condition. As a profession we know that dogs with arthritis suffer the same pain – it’s time we had a proper service for them too. CAM is that service – a tailored, multimodal approach to help successfully manage these patients."
Canine Arthritis Management (CAM) is currently available to dog owners throughout Sussex. If you would like to know more, email info@caninearthritis.co.uk
Furosoral contains furosemide and is indicated for the treatment of hydrothorax, hydropericardium, ascites and oedema, particularly in animals where these conditions are associated with cardiac insufficiency and renal dysfunction.
Furosoral replaces Dechra’s previous diuretic treatment, Frusedale.
It is available in both 10 mg and 40 mg double-divisable tablets.
The recommended daily starting dose for cats and dogs is 2.5 mg per kg of body weight.
Dechra says careful weighing is essential to ensure accurate dosing, but that the dosage can be doubled initially for severe or particularly resistant cases and adjusted to the lowest clinically effective dose for maintenance therapy if required.
Dechra companion animal brand manager, Charlotte Hill, said: “Furosoral offers a flexible treatment solution where dosage can be adjusted, depending on the needs of the patient and the underlying causes, to give vets more options for treating cats and dogs with fluid retention.
“To ensure it is as appealing to pet owners as it is to veterinary professionals, Furosoral is available in our innovative Smart Tab format, giving owners confidence that they are giving their dog or cat the right dosage and aiding compliance, leading to better outcomes for the animal.”
Furosoral 10 mg and 40 mg tablets are available in blister packs of 100 tablets for quick and easy dispensing. Divided tablets can be stored in the blister pack for up to three days, ensuring no waste.
https://www.dechra.co.uk/products/dog/prescription#/search=furosoral/.
This year the congress is being organised in collaboration with the British Veterinary Dermatology Study Group and will form the Group’s autumn meeting.
The main scientific topics are skin and ear surgery, skin biology, host-microbial interaction, dermatophytosis, exotics dermatology and clinical pharmacology. There will be a three-tiered programme:
Basic level: providing updates on the topics covered
Intermediate level: advanced information for those with a good grounding in veterinary dermatology
Advanced level: more specialist subjects, including human dermatology
For the first time, there will also be a dedicated nurses programme, taking place on Saturday 28th September.
Laura Buckley CertVD DipECVD MRCVS, Local Organising Committee (pictured right), said: "Congress is always a major event in the veterinary dermatology calendar, featuring some of the world’s leading specialists, and this year showcases some of Liverpool’s spectacular historic sites.
"As always there will be commercial and poster exhibitions featuring state-of-the-art veterinary products and leading research in veterinary dermatology respectively."
This year’s social programme includes the Welcome Reception on Thursday 26th and the Dinner Dance on Friday 27th September. The Welcome Reception will be held at Liverpool’s Anglican Cathedral, designed by Sir Giles Gilbert Scott. It is the largest Cathedral in the UK and the fifth largest in the world.
The Dinner Dance will take place at Revolución de Cuba overlooking the UNESCO World Heritage Site, the Albert Dock.
For further information and to register please visit the congress website: www.esvd-ecvdcongress.com
AniDent is a dental care range for cats and dogs - a rinse, a toothpaste and a gel - created with Virbac to help prevent periodontal disease.
Anident joins VetSoothe, a range of dermatology products which includes shampoos, ear cleaners and skin wipes, developed with Vetruus.
Earlier in the year, IVC also launched Joints & Mobility with Omega-3s, an addition to it's VetPro range, developed with one of the company's orthopaedic experts, Jamie McClement.
On the equine side, the company has also launched EquiXcellence, a range of equine nutritional health and wellbeing supplements.
VetSurgeon asked what longer term plans the company has for its exclusive brand product range.
An IVC Evidensia spokesperson said: "We're developing own brand veterinary products specifically where we think we can see areas we can add value for our practices, pet owners, and patients. In the case of Anident, we saw there was an opportunity to make oral care easier by offering a range of options to suit pet owners' needs.
"In the case of Joints & Mobility with Omega-3s, there is research which has shown that high levels of Omega-3s EPA & DHA can greatly support freedom of movement and pain, which was the key focus when developing the product.
"We plan to continually enhance our own brand portfolio across our UK and Europe practices with some exciting product launches on the horizon."
Photo: Gerhard Putter BVSc MRCVS MANZCVS (Veterinary Dentistry and Oral Surgery) Diplomate of the European Veterinary Dental College uses Anident on a big cat
Elanco Companion Animal Health has launched a competition to encourage veterinary professionals to showcase the company's new range of practice support materials for the company's parasiticides, Comfortis and Trifexin.
To enter the competition, you'll first need to order the support materials, which include: waiting room posters, client leaflets and a waiting room leaflet dispenser, modular window hangers, social media artwork and display kits which consist of 19 die-cut colour pieces for waiting room displays. Entry / order forms are available here.
Then create your display and email a digital photograph of it to Elanco before the 29th August 2014.
Matthew Rowe, Senior Brand Manager at Elanco said: "We're asking veterinary practices to use their creativity and imagination when putting up their parasite control displays. Last year's winner, the Animal Health Centre in Torquay, even composed their own song, so the more creative the better!"
The overall winner will win a team celebration worth £1000, and there are £250 Amazon vouchers for 11 regional winners.
For further information contact your local Elanco Companion Animal Health key account manager or email elancocahuk@elanco.com
Musculoskeletal therapists currently have their work underpinned by an Exemption Order to the Veterinary Surgeons Act 1966 which allows them to treat an animal under the direction of a veterinary surgeon who has first examined that animal.
The College says it has recognised that there has been confusion over whether musculoskeletal therapists need a veterinary referral for maintenance work, such as massage, in a healthy animal. This may lead to delays in animals receiving maintenance care.
The new guidance, found in Chapter 19 (www.rcvs.org.uk/unqualified) of the supporting guidance to the Code of Professional Conduct, sets out the existing rules for musculoskeletal treatment of illness, disease or pathology, and clarifies that healthy animals do not need a veterinary referral for maintenance care.
The guidance stresses that musculoskeletal therapists are part of the vet-led team, and that any animal, including healthy ones, should be registered with a veterinary surgeon and referred to a vet at the first sign of any symptoms that may suggest underlying health issues.
The guidance also says that vets should be confident that the musculoskeletal therapist is appropriately qualified; indicators of this can include membership of a voluntary regulatory body with a register of practitioners, and associated standards of education and conduct, supported by a complaints and disciplinary process.
In March 2019 the RCVS published the Review of Minor Procedures Regime (www.rcvs.org.uk/document-library/report-to-defra-on-the-review-of-minor-procedures-regime-and/) which noted that the existing exemption order was not suitable for underpinning the work of musculoskeletal therapists, and recommended that this be remedied by reform of Schedule 3 of the Veterinary Surgeons Act, alongside regulation by the RCVS through Associate status for musculoskeletal therapists.
This would allow the RCVS to set and uphold standards for musculoskeletal therapists in a similar way to veterinary nurses, giving further assurance to both the veterinary professions and the public. The recent Legislation Working Party Report recommendations builds on that recommendation, and is currently open for consultation at www.rcvs.org.uk/consultations
Boehringer Ingelheim Vetmedica has launched Pexion (imepitoin) a novel treatment for canine idiopathic epilepsy.
Canine epilepsy can affect up to 5% of dogs6. In most dogs diagnosed with idiopathic epilepsy no underlying cause for the seizures can be found. While the condition can affect any dog, it is more common in young (one to five year old), purebred dogs such as Labradors, Golden Retrievers, German Shepherds, Boxers, Vizlas, Beagles, English Springer Spaniels, Irish Setters, Poodles and Dachshunds.
Boehringer says Pexion has a highly targeted mode of action1-3 to suppress a dog's seizures. It starts to work within a few hours and reaches steady state within three days4,5. Boehringer claims this will make it easier to stabilise epileptic patients. It also says there is no evidence of hepatotoxicity or liver-associated enzyme elevation, so repeated blood tests for liver enzymes or therapeutic levels are no longer required.4,5
Pexion is available in 100 mg and 400 mg tablets. The tablets are white, scored and divisible in half. Both tablet strengths are available in 100 tablet packs from veterinary wholesalers.
Jemima Mead, brand manager at Boehringer said: "Pexion is a ground-breaking new product which gives vets a new first-line treatment option for dogs with idiopathic epilepsy, improving the lives of newly diagnosed epileptic dogs and their owners by reducing the number of seizures and their impact on the patient's life".
To support the launch of the new product, Boehringer hosted an epilepsy webinar presented by neurologist Dr Holger Volk DVM PhD DipECVN FHEA MRCVS, recognised RCVS and European Specialist in Veterinary Neurology. The webinar is now available on demand at www.bi-academy.co.uk.
For further information on Pexion visit www.pexion.co.uk, contact your local Boehringer Ingelheim territory manager or telephone +44 (0)1344 746959.
References
Amongst the speakers were Catherine Oxtoby MRCVS, Risk Manager at the Veterinary Defence Society, and Dr Huw Stacey, director of clinical services at Vets4Pets.
Dr Stacey explained how Vets4Pets and Companion Care practices are embracing a culture of sharing information when things don’t go according to plan in practice.
He said: "We all face challenges in the workplace, and this event focused on how different professions can share ideas and good practice and how they find solutions to any challenges.
"The culture of aviation and maritime is one of minimising risk and putting safety first, and it is fascinating to compare their approach to that found in medicine and veterinary.
"One common theme we discussed was the wellbeing of both professionals and patients or clients, with tiredness being at the top of the list of things that can negatively affect wellbeing and performance.
"Both aviation and maritime recognised that long shifts, particularly overnight, needed to be reduced in order to improve the outcome for everyone.
"In veterinary and human medicine, tiredness and long shifts are often worn as a badge of honour and being tired at work was something that should be admired, rather than addressed.
"But, tired vets are effectively neglecting themselves and their own wellbeing, which in turn leads to pets not receiving the best level of care in practice.
"This is something we’re taking seriously at Vets4Pets and Companion Care, and we’re currently looking at ways to decrease the risk of overworked and tired vets and vet nurses."
Another area of discussion was around the reporting of near misses and when things don’t go right, and how veterinary professionals need to identify and share the learnings from these events, not only within their practice, but with the wider profession too.
He said: "We need to continually emphasise the concept of a ‘just’ culture, to ensure our colleagues feel confident about reporting incidents open and honestly."
"It is not in the interests of the professional, the patient or the client to bottle things up, and at Vets4Pets and Companion Care we’re encouraging all of our practices to adopt the VDS VetSafe system, which provides a mechanism for sharing incident reports across the profession, enabling us all to learn from them to the benefit of our patients."
Ceva Animal Health has added to its joint care range with the launch of Meloxidyl Oral Suspension for Cats, licensed for the treatment of musculoskeletal disorders and alleviation of post-operative pain.
Meloxidyl Oral Suspension for Cats is available in 15ml bottles containing 0.5mg/ml meloxicam. Each pack contains a tailored maintenance dosing syringe with a 'kg scale' for all sizes of cat. In addition, Meloxidyl's sweet tasting formulation helps to maximise ease of administration.
Meloxidyl Injection complements Ceva Animal Health's joint care range, which also includes Meloxidyl Injection for dogs and cats and Meloxidyl Oral Suspension for dogs.
For further information, please contact your Ceva Animal Health representative or call 01494 781510.
Under the protocol trial, the RCVS can launch private prosecutions against unqualified people practising veterinary surgery or using the title 'veterinary surgeon'.
The College says that where breaches of the Veterinary Surgeons Act cross over to other criminal offences, for example, fraud by false representation, they will be more properly dealt with by the relevant police force.
Local authority trading standards agencies will also deal with issues around, for example, misleading courses that purport to lead to registration with the RCVS but do not; concerns about dog grooming businesses and concerns about dog breeding establishments (other than where there is illegal practice of veterinary surgery by unqualified persons).
Eleanor Ferguson, RCVS Registrar and Director of Legal Services, said: “This protocol recognises that there are constraints on the time, resourcing, and budgets of both the police and public prosecutors which means that the pursuit of these breaches of the Veterinary Surgeons Act, both of which carry minor criminal penalties, is not necessarily a priority.
“While we are always willing to work with the police and other agencies to pursue such breaches, the protocol details how we can act independently where appropriate and ensure we are fulfilling our stated ambition to safeguard the interests of the public and animals, as well as the reputation of the professions, by ensuring that only those registered with us can carry out acts of veterinary surgery.
“We would like to manage expectations around this trial period as we will only be launching private prosecutions where they meet the criminal evidential standards of ‘beyond a reasonable doubt’ and it is judged to be in the public interest to do so.
"We will also be relying on members of the professions and the public to report breaches and provide sufficient evidence to us, as we have no statutory investigatory powers.”
The trial period will last for one year and the College has set aside £50,000 to pursue private prosecutions.
The trial will be overseen by the Disciplinary Committee/ Preliminary Investigation Committee Liaison Committee while decisions on whether to pursue private prosecutions will lie with the Registrar/ Director of Legal Services.
Suspected breaches of the Veterinary Surgeons Act can be reported to the RCVS Professional Conduct Department on breachvsa@rcvs.org.uk.
Once a month, a new discussion will be posted by the site editor titled: "WHAT WOULD YOU DO (in xxx clinical situation)?"
In addition, VetSurgeon members are strongly encouraged to start your own "WHAT WOULD YOU DO?" discussion at any time.
All members are then invited to share what they would do for the case described, and we also use the opportunity to question which approach offers the best value for pet and owner, and brainstorm new ways of approaching the problem.
Importantly, criticising (as opposed to questioning) anyone's approach is strictly forbidden.
The aim is to share what most vets are doing, question whether there are better ways of doing things and brainstorm fresh ideas, something which is always a beneficial but perhaps especially so in a cost-of-living crisis when, for a variety of reasons, veterinary fees have escalated above and beyond inflation.
As a result, it has become increasingly important to question, for example, the value of certain diagnostics and whether a different approach could offer clients more value.
By way of example, the first discussion was: "WHAT WOULD YOU DO: cat over-grooming central abdomen?", which you can read and take part in here: https://www.vetsurgeon.org/f/clinical-questions/30842/what-would-you-do-cat-over-grooming-ventral-abdomen
The second discussion is now live, and asks: "WHAT WOULD YOU DO: Young dog presented having had its first single or cluster of seizures?
Come and share your thoughts here: https://www.vetsurgeon.org/f/clinical-questions/30875/what-would-you-do-young-dog-presented-having-had-its-first-single-or-cluster-of-seizures
Full rules here: https://www.vetsurgeon.org/f/clinical-questions/30841/what-would-you-do-discussions-rules-and-objectives
The RCVS Disciplinary Committee has dismissed a case against Duncan Davidson MRCVS, a South London veterinary surgeon accused of clinical failings in relation to his treatment of a cat and of keeping poor and misleading clinical records.
The Committee heard the case against Dr Davidson, who was the sole practitioner and owner of Mitcham Veterinary Clinic until his retirement from clinical practice in November 2014, at a hearing which concluded on 22nd January.
The first charge against Dr Davidson alleged that, between 7 November 2013 and 13 December 2013, he had failed to provide adequate care to Ameira, an Egyptian Mau cat. The charge was in four parts: that he had inappropriately administered corticosteroids; had failed to administer adequate fluid therapy; discharged the cat to its owner suggesting a referral when he should have suggested or arranged a same-day referral; and that he failed to communicate the urgency of referral/ further investigation of the cat’s condition to her owner.
The second charge was that, between 7 November 2013 and 17 January 2014, he dishonestly made retrospective alterations to Ameira’s clinical records and failed to keep clear, accurate and detailed clinical records.
From the outset Dr Davidson, who attended the hearing, did not admit the charges against him and denied that his conduct, if found proven, constituted serious professional misconduct.
A summary of the circumstances of the case were that the cat had been admitted to Dr Davidson’s practice on 8 November 2013 with poor appetite and a piece of thread in its mouth. The cat was later admitted, on 21 November, with dehydration and was diagnosed with a linear foreign body (ie the thread) on 25 November 2013. Dr Davidson continued to treat Ameira with corticosteroids and rehydration fluids at the practice but a second opinion was sought by Ameira’s owner from a nearby veterinary practice. This practice referred the cat to the Royal Veterinary College for treatment. Surgery to remove the linear foreign body was undertaken on 13 December 2013, albeit with a poor prognosis, and Ameira subsequently suffered two cardiac arrests and died on 14 December 2013.
In terms of its findings on the first charge, the Committee heard from an expert witness, Mr Hurst, regarding the use of the corticosteroids which were administered to the cat by Dr Davidson on 22, 27 and 30 November 2013 and 5 and 12 December 2013. Although Mr Hurst said that a minority of veterinary surgeons may have provided corticosteroids when the cat was first presented to Dr Davidson on 8 November; when it was determined by Dr Davidson’s colleague Mr Holden that the cat’s condition was due to it having ingested thread, the use of corticosteroids was inappropriate from then on and would be considered contra-indicated. The Committee found this charge proven.
The Committee did not find the charge against Dr Davidson that he failed to provide adequate fluid therapy proven. When the cat was presented to the practice on 21 November 2013 suffering from dehydration, fluid rehydration was given but not administered intravenously. The Committee concluded that intravenous hydration was not necessary because the clinical records from both Dr Davidson and the Royal Veterinary College indicated that Ameira was only moderately dehydrated.
Regarding the referral of Ameira, the Committee could not be sure that the cat was sufficiently unwell on 23 November that it required immediate referral. Dr Davidson had sent Ameira home with her owner on that date on the basis that she was stable and that he would arrange a referral for her on 25 November. There was conflicting evidence from Dr Davidson and Ameira’s owner on the matter of whether, on 23 November, Ameira’s owner was advised that the cat’s condition was critical or that a referral was urgently required. Dr Davidson accepted that he did not seek to make an urgent referral. The charge was not proven.
Regarding the communication of the urgency for further investigation of Ameira’s condition, the Committee found that there was insufficient evidence to suggest that Dr Davidson did not adequately communicate with Ameira’s owner after the diagnosis of a linear foreign body was made on 25 November. According to Dr Davidson, he explained the risk of further damage to the oesophageal and gastrointestinal tract and offered further radiography. This was strongly contested by Ameira’s owner. However, ultimately the Committee were unable to be satisfied as to which version was correct to the necessary standard of proof required.
Regarding the retrospective amendment of clinical records, the Committee found that although there were some “troubling aspects” about the case, particularly evidence of a telephone call with the RCVS Professional Conduct Department in which Dr Davidson said that no retrospective alterations had been made, it was unable to be satisfied so as to be sure of his motivation for changing the records. His contention was that changes had been made as he was concerned he would be subject to civil litigation by Ameira’s owner. However, the Committee found the charge not proven, also taking into account Dr Davidson’s good character and unblemished professional record over 40 years.
However, the Committee did find that Dr Davidson’s clinical records were illegible. Dr Davidson recognised the poor quality of his handwriting, which the veterinary surgeons to whom Ameira was referred were unable to understand. The Committee found this charge proven.
Taking into account the charges it found proven, the Committee then considered whether they constituted serious professional conduct either individually or cumulatively. Judith Webb, who chaired the Committee and spoke on its behalf, said: "It does not consider that on the facts of this case the administration of corticosteroids amounted to disgraceful misconduct."
She added: "The Committee has already emphasised the importance of making legible handwritten records but it does not consider that the failure to do so in this case amounts to disgraceful misconduct.... The Committee has found that Dr Davidson was wrong to make retrospective entries in this case without making it clear when such alterations were made. The Committee does not consider that in this case the making of those alterations was capable of being disgraceful misconduct. The case is dismissed."