MSD Animal Health has launched a new injector and nozzle kit to make it easier to administer its Bovilis Intranasal RSP Live calf pneumonia vaccine to multiple animals.

The kit contains the ergonomically designed Henke-Sass Wolf injector with an adjustable dose selector, five single piece Intranasal RSP nozzles – with ‘luer’ lock attachment, which supports easier removal, cleaning and/or replacement – and instructions for use.

For more information, contact your local MSD Animal Health account manager.

Dechra Veterinary Products has launched a new 50 ml bottle of its rapid acting dissociative anaesthetic licensed for cats, dogs and horses, Anesketin.

Anesketin solution for injection, containing Ketamine 100 mg/ml, is indicated for induction of anaesthesia.

Dechra Brand Manager Craig Sankey said: "Anesketin has proved to be a very popular product in our range due to its versatility. It can be used in combination with appropriate sedatives and analgesics in cats, dogs and horses for induction of anaesthesia.

"As it does not require any special temperature storage conditions it makes it a very portable product for vets on the move."

He added: "We are very pleased to be able to add the larger Anesketin product to our wide range of analgesics and sedatives. This demonstrates our commitment to offering high quality products that support vets in small animal and equine practice."

Dechra says the product can also be used as a sole agent for restraint and minor surgical procedures where muscle relaxation is not required in cats.

Anesketin is also available in 10 ml vials. For further information, visit www.dechra.co.uk

The RVC has published - open access - the results of a study investigating the effects of the pandemic on puppies bought in 2020. 

The study¹ took the form of an online survey of over 5,500 owners, which exploring the the early socialisation, health and behaviour of ‘pandemic puppies’ purchased in 2020 compared to 2019 puppies.

The study found that puppies bought during the pandemic in 2020, in comparison to pre-pandemic in 2019, were more likely to have been ‘designer crossbreeds’, for example a Cockapoo or Cavapoo, instead of Kennel Club registered purebred dogs.

The 2020 cohort of pandemic puppies were also more likely to already hold a pet passport at purchase, indicating they may have been imported from Europe – perhaps illegally – to meet the greatly increased demand and prices for puppies.

Amongst the positive findings was the fact that many of the health and socialisation experiences examined didn’t vary significantly between puppies purchased in 2019 and 2020.

However, researchers say there was still a concern that 2020 ‘pandemic puppies’ were less likely than 2019 puppies to attend puppy training classes or to have experienced visitors to their homes (under the age of 16 weeks in both circumstances).

This, they say, means pandemic puppies may be more likely to experience stranger-related fear and anxiety and other behavioural problems related to insufficient socialisation, from being unable to attend puppy classes under 16 weeks of age; a critical period for the development of puppies.

In addition, those puppies sourced from Europe may have been transported over long distances without their mother, a stressful experience which the researchers say could cause problem behaviours in the future. 

Pandemic puppies may therefore need extra support from the veterinary profession, particularly those specialising in animal behaviour.

Dr Claire Brand, Researcher in Canine Welfare at the RVC said: “Despite many owners’ concerted efforts to raise their puppies as well as possible, some puppies missed out on key experiences of puppyhood, such as going to puppy classes, or experiencing visitors in their homes.

"This has potential consequences for the future behaviour of ‘pandemic puppies’ and so we are encouraging owners to seek out training and behaviour advice from accredited professionals so that these now adult dogs can learn to live happily in our post-lockdown world.”

Reference

1. Brand, C.L.; O’Neill, D.G.; Belshaw, Z.; Pegram, C.L.; Stevens, K.B.; Packer, R.M.A. Pandemic Puppies: Demographic Characteristics, Health and Early Life Experiences of Puppies Acquired during the 2020 Phase of the COVID-19 Pandemic in the UK. Animals 2022, 12, 629. https://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/12/5/629 

Vetoquinol has just launched its Marbocyl 10% online case study competition in which veterinary surgeons are being invited to provide information about how they treat E.coli mastitis. Two winners (one in the UK and one in Ireland) will win a BCF EASI-SCAN cattle ultrasound scanner with goggles worth over £6000. 

Vetoquinol's large animal product manager, Susan Mitchell said: "We hope that this case study competition will help us gather further information on how E.coli mastitis is treated by veterinary surgeons in the UK and Ireland.  I would encourage large animal veterinary surgeons to be part of this UK and Irish survey to highlight the severity of the disease and share their success stories." 

The competition will run until the end of October 2011.

For your chance to win a BCF EASI-SCAN and goggles visit http://www.vetoquinol.co.uk/.

The RCVS has announced that it is to trial a new alternative dispute resolution scheme for users of veterinary services who have complaints which aren't serious enough to call into question a veterinary surgeon or nurse's fitness to practice.

The College says that although it is obliged to investigate all complaints, currently it can only deal with the most serious of complaints raised against a veterinary surgeon's or registered veterinary nurse's fitness to practise. This means that many of the 800 or so complaints received every year by the College's Professional Conduct Department are closed with no further action.

Nick Stace, RCVS Chief Executive Officer and Secretary, said: "It was clear from our consultations last year for the First Rate Regulator initiative that many animal owners who had made complaints were dissatisfied and frustrated with the fact that we were unable to take their, often very legitimate, concerns any further.

"It is for this reason that we decided to launch a trial in order to determine how we could develop an alternative scheme that, through conciliation, would try and resolve these disputes in a way that would be acceptable to both parties.

"Although this trial is small-scale we hope that it will provide the framework for a permanent ADR scheme which I believe would both increase consumer confidence in the profession and help maintain and preserve its reputation.

"We hope that the profession will actively support the trial, and any future scheme, as a way of resolving those intractable disputes which we know can hang over veterinary surgeons and practices and that they recognise that, ultimately, what is good for the consumer can be good for the profession."

The trial will be administered by the Ombudsman Services, an independent and not-for-profit complaint resolution service, and limited to no more than 150 concerns raised about veterinary surgeons in regards to the treatment of a small animal. In most cases concerns referred to the trial will have no arguable case for serious professional misconduct. The trial is free to the users and voluntary, and consent will be sought from both parties before the concern is referred to the Ombudsman Services. The costs of the trial will not exceed £120,000.

Recommendations will be determined through conciliation between both parties and the Ombudsman Services will only be able to suggest, rather than impose, a solution that each party is entitled to accept, or not. Solutions could include, for example, financial accommodation up to the small claims court limit of £10,000 (although the average recommendation is around £100), the issuing of an apology or other practical action to remedy the situation.

The Ombudsman Services will be assisted in its investigations by veterinary advisers who will provide guidance on clinical and other veterinary matters.

The results of the trial, which will end in May 2015, will be presented at the June 2015 meeting of RCVS Council where steps will be considered for the development of a permanent scheme.

More details about the trial can be found at www.rcvs.org.uk/adr

Suffolk veterinary surgeon Gerhard Putter is appealing for support for a gala evening on 14th March 2015 to raise funds for a bucket list set up by his colleague, vet Lisa Milella, who has been diagnosed with incurable Motor Neurone Disease.  

Lisa, one of the world’s few specialist animal dental surgeons, has volunteered for charity International Animal Rescue (IAR) for many years. She is also a trustee of the charity. During her time working with IAR, she has worked in countries including India and Indonesia, treating animals including abused bears, orangutans and slow lorises, which have suffered cruelty at the hands of humans. Now, as her health deteriorates, she is unable to work herself, but she is devoting her remaining time to fundraising for IAR to ensure her work can continue when she is no longer here.  

Gerhard, who works at the Mulbery Court Veterinary Centre in Sudbury and is also a specialist veterinary dental surgeon, has worked with Lisa many times. He is now hosting the gala evening at Stoke by Nayland Golf Club to support her fundraising efforts.  Tickets cost £25.00 per person and include a buffet, entertainment, raffle and other attractions.

He said: "Lisa helped 'dancing bears' which had had their teeth knocked out with iron bars to make them easier to control; slow lorises which had their teeth clipped off by illegal traders before being sold as pets and even orangutans, which are sometimes beaten by their captors, leaving them with broken teeth and bruises. I've seen at first-hand how important her work is and have worked with her on a number of volunteer projects.  

"Her diagnosis with MND is a terrible personal tragedy for her but she is focusing on the positive and trying to do what she can for these animals while she still can. The teams at Mulberry Court and the All Animal Dental Centre are determined to support her but the success of our Gala Evening depends on the generosity of people willing to support Lisa’s Mission to raise as much money as possible.

"We hope everyone will get behind us and buy tickets.  We would also welcome gifts for our raffle and any other offers of help."

For more information, please email Gerhard Putter, at Mulberry Court Vet Surgery, allanimaldentalcentre@gmail.com or contact him on 01787 881888.

The Disciplinary Committee of the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons has postponed judgment on sanction for 12 months in the case of a Hampshire veterinary surgeon found guilty of serious professional misconduct for cumulative failures to provide adequate professional care, and insufficient regard for animal welfare whilst treating a dog.

At a hearing which concluded last Thursday, Peter Ardle MacMahon MRCVS faced a six-part charge after working as a locum for Vets Now at North End in Portsmouth where, on the night of 14/15 July 2009, he treated Wilfred, a Cocker Spaniel who had ingested broken glass along with raw mince. 

The Committee found that, having decided that surgery was an appropriate treatment, Mr MacMahon had not removed the glass identified on a radiograph. Nor had he even superficially searched the stomach contents he had evacuated to check that a large piece of glass he had previously identified on the radiograph had been removed. He had also not taken adequate steps to prevent contamination of Wilfred's abdominal cavity prior to the incision to the stomach.

Mr MacMahon admitted he knew there had been considerable spillage of stomach contents into Wilfred's abdomen. The Committee found that, with this knowledge, for Mr MacMahon to use only 250ml of fluid to lavage the abdomen was inadequate. This contributed to the Spaniel developing chemical peritonitis which might have developed into septic peritonitis but for a second operation the next morning, after the dog had been returned to the care of his usual veterinary practice. The Committee also expressed concern that Mr MacMahon had failed to effectively communicate the abdominal contamination to Wilfred's usual vets when he was handed back into their care. 

Taken as individual allegations, these would not, in the opinion of the Committee, constitute serious professional misconduct. However, the Committee was of the view that, taken cumulatively, the charges were proved, and therefore the treatment given to Wilfred, fell far short of the standard to be expected in the profession.

When considering mitigating and aggravating factors, the Committee accepted that Mr MacMahon and the veterinary nurse assisting him were unfamiliar with the premises in which they were working, resulting in a difficulty in locating important equipment, and there were also multiple urgent cases during the evening the operation took place. The Committee also noted that 17 months had passed since the operation, and no further complaints against Mr MacMahon had been received by the RCVS.

The Committee further took into account that Mr MacMahon had little recent experience, having returned to practising veterinary medicine in January 2009, following almost ten years spent outside the veterinary profession. During this hiatus he undertook no continuing professional development (CPD), and completed only a five-week period of supervised practice prior to re-entering the profession. 

Mrs Caroline Freedman, Chairman of the Disciplinary Committee said: "The Respondent placed himself in this situation: he knew that he had been out of practice for ten years, had not done any formal CPD during that time and chose to accept an appointment to work as a locum in a sole-charge out-of-hours emergency clinic. A foremost aggravating factor is that animal welfare was adversely affected. A non-critical patient was placed at risk by the Respondent's failures."

The Committee reiterated that the purpose of sanctions was not to be punitive, but to protect animal welfare, to maintain public confidence in the profession and to maintain professional standards.  "A postponement of judgment, with suitable undertakings from the Respondent, is the correct course of action," said Mrs Freedman. Mr MacMahon has subsequently signed undertakings relating to CPD in both surgical and medical disciplines, and the Committee has postponed for 12 months its judgment as to any further sanction.

Pfizer Animal Health has launched Poulvac, the first modified live vaccine against E.coli in chickens.

The company claims that the vaccine, which can be used from one day of age, is set to bring major benefits in safeguarding the health of broilers, pullets for egg laying and breeding stock.

According to Pfizer, E.coli is one of the most significant bacterial pathogens found in chicks during the first week, leading to problems throughout the life of a flock including inferior performance, lack of uniformity and increased mortality. It is a costly, widespread problem for the UK poultry industry.

The vaccine was developed from research beginning in the 1990s at the Government's veterinary laboratories at Weybridge (now AHVLA) in the UK, employing genome technology to produce an avirulent strain of E.coli that induces protective immunity to the pathogenic strains of the bacteria.

The vaccine is completely non-pathogenic, and does not persist in the bird or the environment for any significant period of time. A gene deletion in its development restricts in vivo replication and leaves behind activated macrophages ready to respond to pathogenic E.coli strains.

Dr Stuart Andrews, poultry technical manager of Pfizer in the UK and Ireland said: "Poulvac E. coli provides broad cross protection against the key serotypes of E. coli infecting chickens. It is the only modified live, nonreactive vaccine proven to meet the European regulatory requirements for efficacy and safety.

"Trials have confirmed that Poulvac E.coli does not persist in the bird and proves to be self-limiting. The vaccine can survive in the environment for only a short time, and spread to in-contact birds is also limited."

The vaccine is administered as a coarse spray with onset of immunity 14 days afterwards and duration of immunity for up to 12 weeks. It can be used from day-old up to six weeks before the onset of lay, and has a nil day withdrawal period.

In the USA where Poulvac E coli has been available for six years field experience has shown the considerable benefits. In the Midwest where average layer mortality at 50 weeks of age was 2.31 per cent, this was reduced to 1.51 per cent with three doses of the vaccine*. In Eastern USA flock mortality compared with five previous flocks was reduced from over three per cent to one per cent.

A field trial in the USA with more than 300,000 broiler breeders vaccination before lay reduced mortality from 2.8 to 1.9 per cent - with only two out of 28 flocks needing antibiotic treatment compared with 13 of the 28 unvaccinated flocks.

On a broiler field trial in Georgia over four million birds were vaccinated with Poulvac E. coli at hatch. The vaccinated birds had a better feed conversion (1.79 against 1.84 for the controls) and with condemnations at the processing plant down from 1.22 to 0.73 per cent the result was a lower production cost of 0.51¢ per lb. 

In another broiler trial covering more than two million birds in Arkansas livability was improved from 95.20 to 95.77 per cent and feed conversion improved from 1.95 to 1.90, gaining 0.45¢ per lb.

* Pfizer says it is important to note that in these studies carried out in the USA more than one dose of the vaccine was often administered. A single vaccination is licensed in the Summary of Product Characteristics however, where clinical disease requires and at the discretion of a veterinary surgeon, the vaccination schedule may be re-started as there is no contra-indication on the SPC.

The RCVS Disciplinary Committee has dismissed a case against a Kent veterinary surgeon convicted of tail-docking and also charged with misleadingly altering an owner's record relating to tail dockings.

At the outset of the four-day hearing, David Smith, of Lakeview Veterinary Centre, Deal, admitted he had been convicted of an offence of tail docking on 14 December 2010 at the Channel Magistrates Court.

He said that, in 2008, he had misinterpreted the legislation about tail docking and as a result had removed the tails of a litter of 13 Rottweiler puppies. He was subsequently convicted of illegal docking.

Mr Smith also accepted he had altered the owner's record, at the owner's request, when the RSPCA was investigating the circumstances of the docking by adding the words "for law enforcement", but maintained this alteration was to clarify the record to which he had initially added the words "for security selection"; he denied any attempt to mislead, or that he ought to have known it may mislead.

The Committee accepted that Mr Smith misinterpreted the legislation and had taken some steps to satisfy himself that the tail docking was legal, namely: he had asked an employee colleague to make enquires of the College and, as advised, he had downloaded a copy of the AWA 2006 to read and to make his own decision with regard to legality; some enquiry had been made by the practice of the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) at Reigate; and, Mr Smith had himself researched dog breeds on the Kennel Club website.

The Committee also accepted that he had asked and been told that the client had previously supplied dogs to the police.

However, the Committee found that these steps were inadequate; in particular, he should have contacted the College and Defra himself and not delegated this to administrative staff. Furthermore, that he should have obtained confirmation of the advice given in writing.

Regarding the alteration of the owner's record, the Committee was satisfied that this annotation was added for clarification. The Committee was not satisfied that the addition 'for law enforcement' altered the meaning of what was already stated on this form, and found the wording confirmed Mr Smith's misapprehension at the time of the legality of the tail docking.

This charge, which alleged that the alteration had been carried out misleadingly, was dismissed. 

The Committee also said that Mr Smith's reluctance to engage with the police and the RSPCA during their later investigation had been regrettable: as a professional he had had a duty to co-operate fully. However, it concluded that this had been "of little probative significance".

The Committee would like to make it clear that it is the responsibility of every practising veterinary surgeon to ensure that tail docking is legal in each and every instance before carrying out the procedure. If there is any doubt, then tail docking should not take place.

In deciding whether Mr Smith was fit to practise, the Committee took into account two previous RCVS Disciplinary Committee findings involving tail-docking.

It concluded these were significantly different. In the first case, the respondent knew that the tail docking he had carried out was illegal. On the contrary Mr Smith had misguidedly believed the docking he carried out was permitted.

In the second case there had been several charges, in addition to the charge of tail docking.  In this case no charges other than those related to tail docking had been alleged against Mr Smith.

It further noted that no issues of clinical competence were raised, and that the dockings were undertaken less than 12 months after the new legislation came into force. 

Speaking on behalf of the Committee, Vice-Chairman Beverley Cottrell, who chaired the hearing, said: "The Committee has expressed its disapproval about Mr Smith's failure to make adequate investigations of the College and of Defra, and his erroneous interpretation of the Act. 

"In reaching its decision, the Committee has paid particular attention to issues of animal welfare, maintaining public confidence in the profession and the upholding of proper standards of conduct.

It has concluded that Mr Smith's conduct fell short of that to be expected of a veterinary surgeon but does not consider that it fell far short." 

After directing that the case should be dismissed, Mrs Cottrell added: "The Committee would like to make it clear that it is the responsibility of every practising veterinary surgeon to ensure that tail docking is legal in each and every instance before carrying out the procedure. If there is any doubt, then tail docking should not take place."

Cave Veterinary Specialists in Somerset has installed a new £1.2M Phillips Ingenia 1.5T Evolution MRI scanner for shorter anaesthetics for its patients, and more detailed and accurate diagnosis of complex neurological conditions.

The new scanner takes scans 50% faster and at a far higher resolution than the outgoing model. 

It also boasts a wide bore magnet, simple coil arrangement and large number of channels, which means clinicians can scan different organ systems in patients of all shapes and sizes. 

Cave says the new equipment allows it to expand into emerging fields such as cardiac MRI and advanced musculoskeletal imaging. 

Tom Cardy, head of neurology, said: “It’s not often in your career you get to work with a truly class-leading piece of equipment such as this.

“The new scanner will greatly improve the patient and client experience we provide. This investment significantly increases the capability of our neurology service and the whole team are excited to get to grips with this amazing piece of kit.” 

For more information, visit https://cave-vet-specialists.co.uk. 

Photo: L-R Radiographer Tracy Down and imaging nurse Staci Finn

The RCVS and British Veterinary Chronic Illness Support (BVCIS) have published the results of a survey which reveal the scale of chronic illness and disability in the veterinary profession. 

All veterinary surgeons, nurses and students over the age of 18 were invited to participate by email, which elicited 2,781 complete responses and a further 631 partial responses, 1682 from vets, 328 from vet students, 1,369 from nurses and 553 from student vet nurses.

80% of respondents were female, 16.8% male, 1.4% non-binary, 0.8% genderfluid and 0.9% preferred not to say or to self describe.

93.3% were white, 2% were Asian or Asian British, 0.6% were black, black British, Caribbean or African.

The remainder identified as 'other ethnic group', mixed or multiple ethnic groups, or preferred not to say.

90.4% of participants worked within clinical veterinary practice, three-quarters in small animal practice. 

Almost two-thirds worked part time. 

Paradoxically, although around 50% of respondents described their physical or mental health as 'good' or 'very good', 75.6% considered themselves to have at least one disability or chronic condition (61% chronic, 48% physical, 39% mental health and 30% neurodivergent).

Female veterinary surgeons were significantly more likely to suffer from a mental health condition (48.3%) than males (19.2%).

Mental health conditions were far more common amongst the young (51% of those aged 18-29), than the old (28% of 50-59 year olds, declining to 9% of 70-79 year olds)

Veterinary nurses were more likely to say they have a mental health condition (47.3%), than veterinary surgeons (27.9%).

As with mental health, the proportion of respondents identifying as neurodivergent decreased with age (42.3% of respondents aged 18-29 vs 6.7% of those in the 70-79 age group).

Whilst overall, 29.8% identify as neurodivergent, the figure was notably higher (83.3%) amongst those who identify as non-binary or genderfluid.

The number of people with a physical condition varied less with age and gender, although of course, broadly speaking, age brings with it an increase in physical problems.

60% of participants said they are affected by their disability/chronic condition every day, and 68% agreed or strongly agreed that they had to make significant changes to their life to continue working.

The most frequently reported symptoms of disability/chronic condition were mental health (45.2%), pain (36.4%), learning, understanding or concentrating (33.8%), and stamina or energy limitations (32.3%).

When asked if they were treated different at work because of their disability or chronic condition, 49.5% said they had not and 34.7% said they had.

Of those who felt they had been treated differently, 45% thought that disclosing their condition had contributed to this.

18% of those in education and 36% of those in work said they had experienced discrimination, bullying or harassment because of their disability/chronic condition.

Discrimination, bullying or harassment was more likely to be reported by those with a mental health condition or who identify as neurodivergent (47% and 46%), than those with a physical or chronic condition (38% and 37%)

Perceived discrimination, bullying or harassment was most likely to have come from managers (76%) and colleagues (64%) compared to clients and 'other' (15%).

63% of respondents believed there was a strong or moderate understanding of the Equality Act at their workplace but 12% thought their employer had no knowledge or understanding.

45% thought their employer had strong or moderate understanding of the Access to Work scheme, while 27% reported no understanding at their workplace.

Examples of good practice were given by some respondents about their existing or previous workplaces. These included reasonable adjustments such as adjusted working hours, environment and task adaptations, alongside good communication, support (from colleagues, managers and external sources), and additional resources.

Gurpreet Gill, Leadership and Inclusion Manager at the RCVS, said: “While there are some sobering elements in this report, and some clear and unfortunate examples of poor practice and discrimination, the overwhelming feeling is that there is goodwill and a desire to help people out there in the professions, but sometimes a lack of understanding and knowledge on how best to do this.

"Of course, there are also some excellent examples of good practice in terms of putting in place adjustments and accommodations for employees and staff with disabilities, as well as for students on placements.

“Overall, this should be taken as a call for more members of the professions to familiarise themselves with the Equality Act 2010 (https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/equality/equality-act-2010) and its provisions.

Under this legislation, it is unlawful to discriminate against people with protected characteristics, including disability.

"The act sets out the legal requirement for workplaces and educational institutions, among others, to make reasonable adjustments to avoid disabled people being placed at a disadvantage.

“We will now be considering how we, as the regulator and Royal College, can best support members of the professions in understanding their rights and responsibilities under the Equality Act 2010, and what further training and education can be provided, looking at the RCVS Academy as a potential vehicle for doing so.”

Olivia Anderson-Nathan, a Director of BVCIS added: “Overall, the report demonstrates that although there are systemic issues that require a shift in workplace culture, there may be some relatively ‘easy wins’.

"For example, improving line manager knowledge of the Equality Act and providing reasonable adjustments that are typically inexpensive and simple to implement, such as providing seating and ergonomic equipment, and rota or shift changes.

"Many changes, like flexible working, will actually benefit everyone.

"Most importantly, employers and educators need to make sure that those with disabilities, neurodivergence, and chronic illnesses understand their rights and are given positive support to identify their needs.

"This means co-designing individualised adjustments and avoiding a one size fits all approach.

“BVCIS will continue our work to educate the profession, offering support and guidance for anyone not sure where to start.

"We also offer community support through our Veterinary Spoonholders Facebook page for disabled, chronically ill and/or neurodivergent people in the veterinary world so – please do come and join us if any of the experiences detailed in the report resonate with you.”

www.rcvs.org.uk/publications

Horiba UK is hosting a free webinar about overcoming the challenges of head tilt and ‘spinning’ rabbits on Wednesday 10th April from 7:30-9pm.

“Tilts, Spins, and Tears: Approaches to head tilts in rabbits” will be presented by Dr Madonna Livingstone BVMS MRCVS, who will discuss a range of approaches, diagnostic and treatment options for rabbits presenting with head tilt symptoms. 

Madonna has over 20 years experience in veterinary practice, and as Head Vet and Head of Exotics at Ark Veterinary Clinics Ltd, she speaks widely on exotic animal medicine and surgery.

She also delivers clinical exotic lectures and practicals at Glasgow Vet School, holds a diploma in parrot behaviour and is publishing a textbook on rabbits and small exotic mammals this year.

The webinar aims to help veterinary staff to recognise the differential diagnosis list, know how to achieve a diagnosis, or most likely diagnosis within a restricted budget; know the available treatment options; and know how to manage owners’ expectations.

https://horiba.link/head-tilts-in-rabbits 

Ceva Animal Health has Douxo Care Auricular Lotion, an ear cleaner to remove excess ear wax and debris from the ear canal and skin in cats and dogs.

Douxo Care Auricular Lotion can be used for routine ear cleaning and removal of ear wax and as an ear cleaner prior to treatment in order to clean the ear canal of debris. Ceva says it is fast drying and pleasant to use and the lotion can also be adapted for the routine cleaning of skin folds and around the eyes.

Andrew Fullerton BVSc (Hons) MRCVS, Douxo product manager at Ceva Animal Health, said: “Following requests from dermatologists to launch this product in the UK, we are very excited to add Douxo Care Auricular Lotion to the UK Douxo range. It will provide a gentle yet effective and soothing option for dogs and cats needing regular ear cleaning and all under the Douxo brand we know and love.”

To support the launch of Douxo Care Auricular Lotion, the company is running a buy one, get one free offer (used once and up to a maximum of five units ie pay for five and receive five free of charge). For information on the offer, which runs until 31 October, contact cevauk@ceva.com, use the offer QR code or call 01494 781510 to request an order form or to process an order.

For more information, contact cevauk@ceva.com, call 01494 781510 or visit www.douxo.com/uk.