A new study carried out by academics at the University of Bristol's Animal Welfare and Behaviour research group has revealed that chickens empathise. So, if you've wondered why the chicken crossed the road, it was probably to help a friend.

More specifically, the research - funded by the BBSRC Animal Welfare Initiative and published online in the Proceedings of the Royal Society B. - demonstrated that domestic hens show a clear physiological and behavioural response when their chicks are mildly distressed.

Researchers say the study is the first to demonstrate that birds possess one of the important attributes that underpins empathy, and the first study to use both behavioural and physiological methods to measure these traits in birds.

During one of the controlled procedures, when the chicks were exposed to a puff of air, the hens' heart rate increased and eye temperature decreased. The hens also changed their behaviour, and reacted with increased alertness, decreased preening and increased vocalisations directed to their chicks.

Some of these responses have previously been used as indicators of an emotional response in animals. In domestic chickens, time spent standing alert is associated with higher levels of fear.  Previous research carried out by the same group has shown that hens also selectively avoid surroundings associated with high levels of standing and low levels of preening.

Jo Edgar, PhD student in the School of Veterinary Sciences, said: "The extent to which animals are affected by the distress of others is of high relevance to the welfare of farm and laboratory animals.

"Our research has addressed the fundamental question of whether birds have the capacity to show empathic responses.

"We found that adult female birds possess at least one of the essential underpinning attributes of 'empathy'; the ability to be affected by, and share, the emotional state of another."

The researchers say they used chickens as a model species because, under commercial conditions, chickens will regularly encounter other chickens showing signs of pain or distress due to routine husbandry practices or because of the high levels of conditions such as bone fractures or leg disorders.

Reference:
'Avian maternal response to chick distress', J L Edgar, J C Lowe, E S Paul, C J Nicol, published online ahead of print Proceedings of the Royal Society B, 9 March 2011.

Picture:
Gemma Richards, University of Bristol

Dechra Veterinary Products has announced that Sporimune (ciclosporin), its treatment for atopic dermatitis in dogs, has now been licensed for the symptomatic treatment of chronic allergic dermatitis in cats.

Sporimune is the first ciclosporin oral solution to be licensed for use in both cats and dogs.

In cats with allergic dermatitis, ciclosporin has proved to be an effective alternative to prednisolone¹ Dechra says it has a long-term safety record for chronic treatment of canine atopic dermatitis and remains one of the most important tools within a multi-modal strategy.

Sporimune is available with two dosing syringes per bottle – one for cats and one for dogs – that are graduated in body weight and ml. 

There are three bottle sizes to allow for flexibility in dispensing and broached bottles last six months. 

Dechra Brand Manager Claire Morgan said: "We are delighted to be able to introduce this popular and effective treatment for cats.

"Allergic skin disease can be challenging to diagnose and manage effectively for both owners and vets, with around 20 per cent of all small animal consultations involving skin conditions.

"Sporimune is a key component of a multi-modal approach involving guidance on allergen and flare factor avoidance and improving skin and coat hygiene to minimise clinical signs and the effects on quality of life for both animal and owner."

Reference

1. Palmeiro, B.S. (2013) Cyclosporine in Veterinary Dermatology, Vet Clin Small Anim 43, 153-171

The International Society of Feline Medicine (ISFM) has announced the launch of two new cat friendly courses aimed at individuals working in veterinary practice.

The Cat Friendly Veterinary Professional course is aimed at veterinary surgeons and nurses and covers all aspects of being cat friendly over six modules, including understanding where cats come from, their behaviours, stress free handling, how to be more cat friendly in practice and client communication.

The four-module Cat Friendly Veterinary Receptionist course is aimed at receptionists and includes everything a receptionist needs to know about cats and how to be cat friendly, including their role in making the practice cat friendly.

Both are 3 month online courses, with students working through the modules at their own pace. There is a short assessment at the end of each module and on successful completion of the course students will receive a certificate and badge.

Sarah Endersby, ISFM’s Veterinary Development Manager, said: "We are very excited to offer cat friendly training for individuals. The courses are suitable for all members of the practice team, and you do not have to work in an accredited Cat Friendly Clinic to study with us, meaning that there is something for everyone."

For more information and to sign up, visit https://icatcare.org/cat-friendly-courses. 

Somerset-based Nikolay Kirilov Radev MRCVS has been found not guilty of serious professional conduct by the RCVS Disciplinary Committee.

Dr Radev faced three charges concerning his treatment of an American Bulldog in 2021. 

The first charge, which contained a number of sub-charges, was that he failed to provide appropriate and adequate care to the animal.

The second was that he failed to keep adequate records.

The final charge was that his failure to keep records was misleading and dishonest.

At the outset of the hearing Dr Radev admitted that, having recognised free fluid in the dog’s abdomen, he failed to take adequate and appropriate action and failed to aspirate the dog’s abdomen with regards to the possibility of it having septic peritonitis.

He also admitted writing the clinical notes approximately two months after the event.

After considering and rejecting an application by the RCVS to amend and withdraw elements of the first charge, the Committee then considered each of the remaining sub-charges in turn.

Sub-charge 1(a) was that Dr Radev repeatedly administered meloxicam to the dog when it had recently undergone intestinal surgery and had a recent history of vomiting.

The Committee found that this was not proven.

Dr Radev said it had been administered just once and the Committee was not satisfied so as to be sure that it was repeatedly administered.

Sub-charge 1(b) (i) was that Dr Radev failed to recognise free fluid in the dog’s abdomen as shown on an ultrasound scan.

The Committee found this not proven.

 Sub-charge 1(c) (i) was that Dr Radev failed to recognise the possibility of septic peritonitis in the dog.

The Committee found this not proven.

Sub-charge 1(e) was that Dr Radev failed to provide a full medical history when referring the dog to a different practice.

The Committee found the charge not proven.

Regarding charge 2 (ii), that Dr Radev had failed to include in clinical records a reference to the colonotomy surgery, the Committee found this charge not proven as it had been provided with clinical records disproving this charge.

Finally, regarding both aspects of charge 3, namely that Dr Radev had acted misleadingly and dishonesty, the Committee found this not proven.

The Committee then considered whether the charges that Dr Radev had admitted amounted to gross misconduct in a professional respect.

In all cases it found that, while Dr Radev’s conduct had fallen below what was expected of veterinary professionals, it did not fall so far below as to constitute serious professional misconduct.

www.rcvs.org.uk/disciplinary

The RCVS Disciplinary Committee has suspended Aberdeenshire-based James Gracey from the Register for six months after he was found guilty of conduct that risked undermining procedures designed to promote  public health and animal welfare.

At the beginning of the hearing legal applications were made to rule that the whole proceedings should be stopped as an abuse of process on various grounds including the delay that had occurred in the matters being referred to the RCVS, and that there had been flaws in the original investigatory process.

There was also application that the evidence of one of the College’s witnesses should be excluded on the grounds that the witness had been convicted of bribery.

The Committee decided that the proceedings should continue but ruled that the statement and evidence of one witness should be excluded from the hearing based upon their conviction.

Mr Gracey faced five charges, all of which he was found guilty of. They were:

• that he signed a Food Chain Information form in relation to a cow without declaring that there was a conflict of interest because the cow belonged to his father and without including his and his practice’s contact details with his signature
• that he signed a Food Chain Information form in relation to a cow, also without declaring a conflict of interest or leaving sufficient contact details;
• that he signed an Emergency Slaughter form for a cow without declaring a conflict of interest as above, and that he stated that he hadn’t not administered any treatment to the cow within the previous seven days of signing the form when he himself had
• that he signed a Food Chain Information form stating that a cow was fit for travel when it was not;
• that his conduct in relation to the proven charges risked undermining public health and animal welfare, and in relation to the Emergency Slaughter Form his conduct was dishonest and misleading. 

Three other charges were found not proven and one allegation was withdrawn by the RCVS.

The Committee then considered if the proven charges amounted to serious professional misconduct.

In doing so it made reference to the Code of Professional Conduct and its supporting guidance, particularly in relation to the 10 Principles of Certification.

Dr Hazel Bentall MRCVS, chairing the Committee and speaking on its behalf, said: “The Committee considered individually and cumulatively all matters it had found proved.

"It concluded that the public relies on veterinary surgeons to be honest and transparent when completing and signing forms.

"There is a public interest in being able to trust the profession to uphold high standards of probity because veterinary surgeons are trusted to play an important role in the promotion of animal health and welfare and associated human health.

"The Committee therefore concluded that cumulatively Charges 1, 2, 3 and 4 amounted to serious professional misconduct because the respondent had failed to meet the necessary high standards of honesty and transparency.

"In particular the fact that there were four separate events relating to animal welfare and public health was significant when considering what sanction to impose.”

“The Committee is satisfied that such conduct, when taken together, would be considered deplorable by other members of the profession.

"The respondent’s conduct on four occasions in respect of four animals and three conflicts of interest called into question his competence in relation to completing such forms.”

In considering the appropriate sanction for Mr Gracey, the Committee took into account both mitigating and aggravating circumstances, as well as a number of character witnesses for the respondent who highlighted his positive personal and professional qualities.

In mitigation, the Committee considered that Mr Gracey has hitherto been of good character with no previous disciplinary findings, that he had admitted some parts of the charges against him at the outset of the hearing, that he had made efforts to avoid repeating the misconduct and remediate it – this included making alternative certification arrangements for his father’s farm and taking more appropriate care with record keeping.

The Committee also acknowledged the significant lapse of time between the date of the misconduct and the hearing and the stress that had caused to Mr Gracey, as well as the insight he had shown into his misconduct.

Taking into account all the factors, the Committee decided that imposing a period of six months suspension from the Register of Veterinary Surgeons was the appropriate sanction for Mr Gracey.

Dr Bentall added: “The Committee concluded that suspension of the respondent’s registration for a period of six months was proportionate.

"The Committee considered whether a shorter period was appropriate bearing in mind the mitigating factors it had found applied in this case.

"It decided that a period of six months was proportionate and the minimum length necessary to meet the public interest balancing the seriousness of the misconduct and the mitigation.

"It decided that a shorter period of suspension would be insufficient to uphold proper standards within the profession, or to have a deterrent effect.

“The Committee was satisfied that the respondent had shown sufficient insight and efforts to remediate his misconduct and it concluded that at the end of this period of suspension he would not pose a further risk to animal welfare or public health.

"The Committee considered that the respondent was a valued veterinary surgeon with extensive farm animal experience and that a more severe sanction such as removal from the RCVS Register would not properly reflect the Committee’s findings on the scale of dishonesty and would not take account of the respondent’s mitigation.”

www.rcvs.org.uk/disciplinary  

The RCVS Disciplinary Committee has reprimanded one veterinary surgeon and suspended another for four months, following a joint hearing regarding their professional conduct while they were in practice in Slough, Berkshire in August 2016.

The Disciplinary Committee considered a number of charges against Javier Salas Navarro MRCVS and Roman Kristin over 35 days.

The charges against Dr Navarro concerned his treatment of a kitten named Marnie. They included: 

• In August 2016, failing to read the anaesthesia consent form in relation to a surgical spay he performed;

• When Marnie was readmitted for surgery, failing to read the anaesthesia consent form, failing to undertake adequate assessment of Marnie’s condition; performing surgery without adequately considering her condition; subjecting Marnie to anaesthesia without recognising the seriousness of her illness; failing to obtain informed consent from the owners; administering medication which was contra-indicated; and failure to make an adequate record of his involvement in Marnie’s care.

The charges against Dr Kristin also related to his treatment of Marnie. They included:  

• In August 2016, failing to undertake an adequate assessment of her condition; failure to recognise and record the fact that Marnie could not pass urine; failure to refer or offer her for specialist treatment; and failure to ensure Marnie received care and treatment overnight. 

• When admitting Marnie for surgery, that he made a number of clinical mistakes including failure to gain informed consent; and failure to recognise the seriousness of her illness;

• that there were a number of failings in relation to Marnie’s care, including failure to arrange adequate overnight care, failure to monitor and record her condition, and failure to gain informed consent for the overnight care.

• that he failed to advise Marnie’s owners that he suspected her uterers had been ligated during the spay, failed to advise Marnie’s owners that she required specialist veterinary treatment; and advised that Marnie undergo further surgery at the practice in spite of this meaning her having to undergo further anaesthesia in a week and with poor chances of survival;

• that the above conduct was misleading and dishonest.

The Disciplinary Committee found a number of the facts in the charges against both Dr Navarro and Dr Kristin proven (the full details can be found in the documentation at www.rcvs.org.uk/disciplinary). 

The Committee found that Dr Navarro breached a number of aspects of the Code of Professional Conduct for Veterinary Surgeons including: making animal health and welfare the first consideration when attending to animals; the provision of appropriate and adequate veterinary care; responsible prescription, supply and administration of medicines; communication with professional colleagues to ensure the health and welfare of the animal; being open and honest with clients and respecting their needs and requirements; effective communication with clients; keeping clear and accurate clinical records; and working with the veterinary team to coordinate the care of animals. 

Of the proven charges, the Committee found that his initial failure to read Marnie’s anaesthesia consent form on 5 August did not amount to disgraceful conduct in a professional respect, but that the repetition of this failure on 9 August did amount to disgraceful conduct. It also found that Dr Navarro’s failure to undertake adequate assessment and perform surgery without this assessment amounted to serious professional misconduct. Furthermore, the Committee found that subjecting Marnie to anaesthesia in spite of her being unwell, failure to obtain informed consent and failure to keep adequate records also amounted to serious professional misconduct. 

For Dr Kristin, in summary, the Committee found not proven the allegation that he had failed to respond on 5 August 2016 to concerns from Marnie’s owners about her condition while she was recovering from a surgical spay and also all the allegations relating to Dr Kristin’s admission of Marnie to the practice on 9 August on the basis that it was not satisfied so as to be sure that Dr Kristin had been the veterinary surgeon who admitted Marnie on that day. 

The Committee found proven the remaining charges and found he breached the following parts of the Code of Professional Conduct for Veterinary Surgeons: making animal health and welfare the first consideration when attending to animals; keeping within area of competence and referring responsibly; providing appropriate and adequate veterinary care; responsible prescribing, supply and administration of medicines; communication with colleagues to ensure the health and welfare of the animal; being open and honest with clients and respecting their needs and requirements; communicating effectively with clients and obtaining informed consent; keeping clear and accurate clinical records; and working with the veterinary team to coordinate the care of animals.

Of the proven charges, the Committee determined that his failure to adequately assess Marnie’s health, to obtain a clinical history, to undertake blood tests and recognise that she was seriously ill, amounted to disgraceful conduct in a professional respect and led to “Marnie’s underlying condition going undetected and undoubtedly contributed to her eventual death two days later”. 

The Committee also found that Dr Kristin’s decision to hospitalise Marnie without adequate overnight care, place her on IV fluids without monitoring the treatment or her condition, and failure to obtain adequate informed consent – among other things – amounted disgraceful conduct in a professional respect.

Stuart Drummond, chairing the Committee and speaking on its behalf, said: "As a direct result of Dr Kristin’s acts and omissions, Marnie was left alone overnight on fluids when those fluids had nowhere to go. Had he done his job properly he would have known that and Marnie could have avoided the prolonged suffering caused by the chosen course of treatment that did not address the underlying condition. Every element of Dr Kristin’s behaviour was catastrophic for Marnie, and yet he took no personal responsibility for her welfare and just went home.” 

Following its findings on disgraceful conduct in a professional respect, the Committee then went on to consider its sanction for both Dr Navarro and Dr Kristin.

In respect of Dr Navarro, the Committee considered the mitigating factors including previous good character, admissions to some of the facts of the case from the outset; genuine insight and remorse into the seriousness of the actions; his youth and inexperience; and relevant and good-quality testimonials from colleagues. The Committee noted that the testimonials were universally positive and demonstrated that Dr Navarro had reflected on his conduct, had become more mature and confident in his practice and made efforts to rectify the areas in which he had fallen below standards. 

Stuart Drummond said: “Although the consequences for Marnie and her owners were clearly devastating, the Committee considered that Dr Navarro’s part in her demise has to be seen in the context of all the evidence. In light of the extensive mitigation, including significant evidence of insight and remediation, the Committee was able to conclude that Dr Navarro did not represent a future risk to animals or the public. In such circumstances, the Committee considered that it was not necessary to restrict Dr Navarro’s registration and that a reprimand was the appropriate and proportionate sanction in his case.”

In relation to Dr Kristin, the Committee took into account positive character evidence from Mr Karel Daniel, a semi-retired veterinary surgeon and Vice-President of the Czech Republic Veterinary Chamber, a similar body to the RCVS in that country, as well as other testimonials on his behalf. In mitigation, the Committee considered Dr Kristin’s previously unblemished career, the fact that it was a single case involving a single animal; some development of insight into his conduct; no evidence of repetition; expressions of remorse; the impact of a family bereavement during the course of proceedings; and his financial position.

However, the Committee also took into account aggravating factors including a lack of candour from Dr Kristin when he was giving evidence, demonstrated by a tendency to blame others rather than take responsibility, as well as his recklessness in suggesting a third operation on Marnie that was not in her interests, rather than referring her into specialist care.

The final decision of the Committee on the sanction for Dr Kristin was that, given the seriousness of the misconduct, it was satisfied that this warranted a six-month suspension period. However, given the mitigating factors, the Committee decided that four months was appropriate and proportionate. 

Commenting on the sanction Stuart Drummond said: “The Committee determined that it was important a clear message be sent that this sort of behaviour is wholly inappropriate and not to be tolerated. It brings discredit upon the respondent and discredit upon the profession and, most importantly, caused harm to Marnie and great distress to her owners.

"The Committee did consider whether to remove Dr Kristin from the Register. However, in light of the mitigation in this case, the fact that this was a single case in an otherwise unblemished career, together with the unlikelihood he would repeat his disgraceful conduct, the Committee decided that, in all the circumstances, to remove him from the Register would be disproportionate.

"The Committee therefore decided to order that the Registrar suspend Dr Kristin’s registration…. The Committee was satisfied that a period of four months was appropriate and proportionate in all the circumstances."

The full facts and findings from the case can be found at www.rcvs.org.uk/disciplinary 

The RCVS Practice Standards Group (PSG) has published the results of its five-year review of the Practice Standards Scheme (PSS), with major changes surrounding the role of nurses, clinical governance and staff health and wellbeing.  

From now on, accredited General Practices will need to employ at least one Registered Veterinary Nurse (RVN), whilst at Veterinary Hospitals all patients should now have a nursing plan in place, and an RVN will need to be on duty at all times. 

Other changes to the PSS requirements include:

• General Practices will need to demonstrate the use of clinical audit, significant event audits and the development of guidelines and protocols around clinical governance. 
• At all accreditation levels there are new requirements on the provision of infection control, including risk-based deep cleaning and the minimisation of cross-infection.
• Animal owners will have to provide signed consent to demonstrate they understand the level of overnight care that will be provided for their animals as in-patients. Core Standards practices will need to have provisions to ensure the welfare of patients if left unattended overnight, whilst Veterinary Hospitals, now need protocols and checklists for handovers between day and night teams.
• General Practices will now need to have a computerised Practice Management System, with records being accessible from and transferable between all branches. They will need to provide written discharge instructions and show regular recording of bodyweight and Body Condition Score.
• There are several changes to the requirements for surgical facilities and protocols, including the need to avoid any outdoor clothing or footwear in the operating theatre for practices accredited at General Practice level. There are further requirements for the investigation of surgical site infections, including the use of bacteriology for General Practice and Veterinary Hospital accredited practices. Surgical lighting is required for Core Standards practices, and must be directable for General Practice level.

The full list of changes to the Practice Standards Scheme, together with the new module and award documents, can be found at: www.rcvs.org.uk/PSSreview.

David Ashcroft leads the team of PSS Assessors responsible for undertaking practice visits and assessing if they meet the required standards. He said: “The changes will come into force later in the year, at the same time as we are planning to return to in-person assessments, and so timings will be subject to government guidance on coronavirus and the easing of lockdown restrictions.

“As the PSS returns to in-person assessments, practices will have the usual three-month period between booking the assessment and the assessment taking place with which to familiarise themselves with the changes and the modules documents relevant to their accreditation.

“If anyone has any questions about the changes then please make sure to contact the Practice Standards Team on pss@rcvs.org.uk and we will be happy to help in any way we can.”

Vétoquinol has launched a competition to promote its NSAID Cimalgex, in which a veterinary surgeon or nurse will win (get this) an Aston Martin DB9.

In addition, Vétoquinol will be offering the winner a day's performance driving course at the Millbrook Proving Ground and £1,000 towards the costs of insurance.

To enter you need to answer some questions relating to Cimalgex. Until the end of BSAVA Congress, you can do this at the Cimalgex stand (821). Thereafter, you can enter the competition by visiting: www.CiMyDog.co.uk and answering the same questions online.

This competition will close and the winner will be announced on the last day of London Vet Show 2014.

Robert Simpson, Cimalgex Product Manager said: "Giving this beautiful DB9 to a vet or nurse in the UK is an incredibly exciting opportunity. This competition stands out as one of the most sensational and audacious I have heard of in the veterinary industry and hopefully it will create a lot of fun and excitement both at BSAVA and beyond."

Dechra Veterinary Products has launched an organic line of its 'Specific' pet food aimed at owners looking for a more sustainable way to feed their pets.

The new line, which is available from veterinary wholesalers, is described as a complete feeding solution with everyday wet and dry food and treats. It is made with a minimum of 95% fresh, organic ingredients from controlled and certified origins, presented in an eco-friendly packaging. This, says Dechra, means it is tasty, nutritious and better for the environment.

The wet diets for cats contains organic chicken or fish whilst the dog food contains organic beef or fish.

The Specific treats are made with more than 80% fresh chicken, beef and pork. Dechra says that in taste tests, nine out of ten cats, and 100% of dogs accepted the treats¹.

Dechra highlights that unlike competitor products, which use layers of different plastic in their packaging which cannot be recycled, Specific uses single layers of the same plastic with a gas barrier in between. This makes its dry pet food bags fully recyclable, as well as lighter and stronger than PET/PE laminates of the same thickness².

Once Specific dry pet food bags have been used and recycled, they can be processed into granules and made into a film which can be used to make new things – including dry pet food bags. 

Dechra Brand Manager Claire Morgan said: “The exciting new range of organic food that’s as kind to the environment as it is to pets. 

"The Specific organic range provides a new option for owners who are committed to providing their animals with the optimum chance of good health. The tried and trusted Specific brand is already available for vets to stock so this is a useful addition for practices looking to add value to the service they provide to pet owners. 

"We have committed to making all of our packaging fully recyclable by 2023, starting with the Specific organic range. As well as providing a more ethical and environmentally sound choice for eco-conscious pet owners, it’s part of Dechra’s ‘Circle of Good’ commitment to reduce our business’ impact on the world.” 

For more information visit: www.specific-diets.co.uk.

References

1. In three-day palatability trials with 20 dogs and cats - 90% of the cats accepted their treats, eating an average of five in a minute and 100% of the dogs accepted theirs eating nine in a minute. 
2. When comparing SPECIFIC recyclable dry pet food bags to competitor PET/PE laminates of the same thickness. 

Invicta, the new, independent veterinary pharmaceutical company, has launched ChroMyco Duo, the first duo plate dermatophtye fungal test to help veterinary professionals identify the source of skin abnormalities in-house without the delay and cost of sending samples to a laboratory.

According to the Sussex-based company, ChroMyco Duo has been designed to aid practices in the accurate identification of fungal skin infections in dogs, cats, horses and all small animal species. 

ChroMyco Duo is a dual plate test with dermatophyte test media (DTM) on one side and an Enhanced Sporulation Agar (ESA) on the other. Invicta says it's this dual test capability which greatly reduces the risk of false positive results. The test is performed by veterinary staff taking a pluck of fur or skin scrape from the lesion and innoculating both sides. After three to six days, if dermatophytes are present, the DTM will turn red and the ESA will turn blue-green.

Once a colour change is identified, a sample of the culture can be taken from the ESA, a media prolific in growing dermatophytes. Veterinary staff are then able to examine the fungus microscopically and identify the species of dermatophyte before advising on treatment.

Invicta has prepared a free fungal identification chart to assist practices with the identification of cultures and is providing free updates to subscribers, as images of new fungi are submitted by practices using the kit.

The ChroMyco Duo test is supplied in boxes of five units, each individually wrapped to allow a one year shelf life. It costs £5 per unit, which Invicta says makes it very cost-effective when compared to laboratory charges. It is incubated at room temperature so no specialist equipment is required.

Rob Watkins, Managing Director of Invicta, said: "The incidence of fungal infections in practice is significant and growing. Antifungal treatments already account for more than £1m sales in the UK veterinary sector. The problem is that dermatophyte presence is often misdiagnosed.

"Until recently vets have had to rely on either single test kit, or for a full diagnosis, by sending a sample to laboratory where tests cost up to £20 and can take 14 days to complete.

"With the launch of ChroMyco Duo, we're giving practices the capability to test reliably, simply and cost-effectively for the first time."

For further information on ChroMyco Duo or Invicta, please contact the company on 01403 791313 or email them at mail@invictavet.com.

RCVS Knowledge has announced the launch of a CPD roadshow covering quality improvement (QI) for equine professionals and QI in the clinical management of hip dysplasia in dogs, starting in October.

The equine events will initially take place at Rossdales Equine Hospital in Suffolk on 22^nd October and at Ashbrook Veterinary Hospital in Cheshire on 5^th December.

The roadshow will see a range of speakers renowned in the fields of equine veterinary medicine and QI share practical examples of improving outcomes for equine patients. Interactive workshops, real-life scenarios and case studies will show how QI techniques can be applied in practice to help teams prevent and respond to errors.

Confirmed speakers include Professor Debra Archer, Head of Equine Surgery and Professor in Equine Surgery at the University of Liverpool, Dr Alice Bird, Senior Clinical Anaesthetist at the Animal Health Trust and Dr Rachel Dean, Director of Clinical Research and Excellence in Practice, VetPartners.

President Elect of BEVA, Tim Mair, said: "There are many challenges to being an equine vet and running a successful equine practice. Even in large practices and equine hospitals, there is a risk that we operate in our own little bubble and assume that what we are doing is best practice, whereas in reality we could often do a better job.

"Clinical governance and quality improvement are tools that allow us to critically appraise our day-to-day work and identify ways in which we can continuously improve what we do – to the benefit of our patients and clients, as well as to ourselves."

The canine hip dysplasia roadshow will begin on 9^th October in Gatwick, Surrey.

The event will review the condition prevalent in dogs, how best to investigate it and the available treatment options. Case examples will be used to show how the evidence can be evaluated, explain how to measure treatment outcomes and show how the use of checklists can help minimise potential errors.

It will be hosted by Mark Morton, RCVS Specialist in Small Animal Surgery (Orthopaedics). He said: "As vets we probably all undertake bits of QI on a day-to-day basis (whether we realise it or not!) but there is so much more we can do to embed it into our clinical work. Checklists, treatment guidelines and clinical auditing significantly improve our patient care and our outcomes.

"Whilst looking at hip dysplasia and the treatment options in detail, hopefully this roadshow will show how we can apply these ideas to improve our management of this condition as well as using them elsewhere.”

For the full programme of each event and to buy tickets, visit bit.ly/RCVSKnowledgeEvents.

Anyone interested in booking an RCVS Knowledge roadshow for their region can do so by contacting ebvm@rcvsknowledge.org.

A former pet industry nutritionist has created a stir in the national newspapers with the launch of whichdogfood.co.uk, a website which dismisses veterinary diets as no different to the "awful" standard pet foods sold in pet stores and supermarkets.

According to reports in the Daily Mail, Daily Telegraph and Daily Express, David Jackson says the objective of his website is to change the way people buy pet food because "pet food manufacturers have been able to get away with producing frankly awful foods for our pets."

Explaining why veterinary surgeon sell prescription diets, Mr Jackson trots out some well known arguments which will be familiar to anyone who has followed the propaganda put out by the raw meaty bones (RMB) lobby: that veterinary surgeons are not taught enough about nutrition; that those training modules that exist are largely sponsored by manufacturers, and that veterinary practices benefit from 'massive cash incentives' from the manufacturers and distributors of veterinary diets.

Mr Jackson does say that there are exceptions to the rule, notably those veterinary diets developed to help pets with intolerance, allergies or uroliths.

Daniella dos Santos MRCVS from ParkVet Hospital in Kent is to run the London Marathon in an ostrich costume next month, to raise money for the BVA's Animal Welfare Foundation of which she is a trustee.

A 2012 RVC graduate, Daniella is the Principle Exotics Vet at ParkVet Hospital and is studying towards a certificate in Zoological Medicine. She said: "Despite their amazing work, the AWF struggles for funds to continue its vital work, so I have decided not only to be the first ever person to run the London Marathon for the AWF, but to run it in costume!

"Those who know me will be aware that running is not among my favourite activities, but I am stepping up to the challenge to raise much-needed funds for this fantastic charity that’s making a real, tangible difference to animals worldwide."

"Working full time in clinical practice, including being part of an out-of-hours rota, means training must be factored in with military precision: so far, some of my longer runs are planned for 4 am!

"I also entered the Hastings Half Marathon on 18 March, and my final training run prior to the big day is scheduled for when I will be in Queensland, Australia for my brother’s wedding.

"If I can manage 22 miles in those hot and humid conditions, the London Marathon should be a breeze!”

Chris Laurence. AWF Chair of Trustees, said: "I am delighted that Daniella has chosen to raise funds for AWF in what is arguably one of the biggest sporting events in the world. On behalf of the organisation, I’d like to thank her for her support and wish her all the best for the marathon."

To support Daniella’s fundraising, visit: https://uk.virginmoneygiving.com/DaniellaDosSantos

For updates on her training and to find out more about AWF, visit www.bva-awf.org.uk