The Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons has launched an online quiz to test its members' knowledge of the Guide to Professional Conduct.
The Guide outlines what is acceptable professional and ethical behaviour for veterinary surgeons. It is developed and maintained by the Advisory Committee of the RCVS, which, in addition to veterinary members of RCVS Council, also includes lay members, a member of the Veterinary Nurses Council, and independent (ie non-Council) veterinary surgeons. The Guide is the benchmark against which a veterinary surgeon is judged, by both the Preliminary Investigation and Disciplinary Committees.
The quiz, which was road-tested at the London Vet Show on 6-7 November, is anonymous, but the College will be collating data on results to help focus future communications activities and see where extra guidance may be required.
On completion of the quiz, it is possible to review answers and view the relevant section of the online Guide.
The quiz is aimed at veterinary surgeons: if it's a success, a version for Registered Veterinary Nurses will follow.
To try the quiz, visit www.rcvs.org.uk/guidequiz It will initially be online for three months and reviewed thereafter.
A survey carried out in 2008 by the British Veterinary Association and its student branch, the Association of Veterinary Students (AVS) has found that that one in three students find themselves in difficult or severe financial situations, more than half have suffered from stress, over a fifth from depression, over a quarter from anxiety and one in every 14 from an eating disorder.
The survey also found that some veterinary schools have almost doubled their intake of overseas veterinary students since the survey was last conducted in 2005.
Other key findings from the survey included:
The AVS suggests that there are opportunities for veterinary schools and the veterinary profession to improve the bleak financial picture for students. BVA already provides support meetings for young professionals and has put together a position statement which will kick-start a lobbying process for:
BVA President Nicky Paull said: "The BVA/AVS survey, a part of the BVA's continuing work on behalf of veterinary students, once again continues to highlight the growing problem of debt. This is a particular problem for veterinary undergraduates whose five year course by definition will attract more debt than the average three year undergraduate course.
"The impact of this increasing debt is twofold. Firstly, new graduates are more likely to choose their first jobs on the basis of salary and reducing debt rather than individual professional development. Secondly, we are concerned that as school leavers make career decisions on financial grounds, only those from relatively affluent backgrounds will choose the veterinary profession. This is contrary to the aims of Government to promote the DfES/Gateway to the Professions initiative. It would be sad to see such a vitally important undergraduate course become one which can only be undertaken by talented young people from families who feel they can afford to help with the long term costs.
"The veterinary undergraduate course is not only training future veterinarians on animal health and welfare but also in the essential role vets play in food safety and the health of the nation."
The full survey results can be downloaded here.
ITV's Tonight programme broadcast last night portrayed a veterinary profession in which overcharging is commonplace.
Researchers for the programme took three healthy animals (a cat, a dog and a rabbit) to a number of different vets, telling them that the animals were off their food. The advice they were given varied. In the case of the rabbit from no treatment necessary, to dental work under general anaesthetic.
TV vet Marc Abraham then looked at each animal and told viewers that the correct advice in each case would have been the least expensive.
The programme also highlighted the substantial savings that pet owners can make by buying drugs online, and questioned whether the penalty meted out to a vet that had committed malpractice was sufficient (the vet had been struck off for 14 months, where presenter Jonathan Maitland argued it should have been for life).
Veterinary business consultant Mark Moran said: "So often, vets rely to a large degree on what owners are telling them, and the degree to which they insist the animal is ill, or off its food, will affect the advice and treatment given. Marc Abraham had the luxury of being presented three animals that he knew to be perfectly fit and well."
However he agreed wholeheartedly with the response from RCVS President Jill Nute this morning, that the thing both vets and pet owners need to learn from the programme is "the importance of communicating with each other".
Mark said: "It's a question of managing people's expectations. There'll always be a variance in the advice being given, but being up-front and open will help mitigate the risk of being accused of overcharging".
Click here to watch the programme. Click here to read the reactions to Marc Abrahams' blog
Merck, part owner of Merial, has announced a merger with Intervet Schering-Plough.
However, rumours that Merck plans to sell its 50% stake in Merial and move forward with Intervet Schering Plough are incorrect, according to Merck spokespeople.
They'll have to start thinking about what to call themselves soon. Merial-Intervet-Schering-Plough is a bit of a mouthful.
Results for the 2010 RCVS Council elections have been released today and, following a slight increase in turnout for the second year running, four existing Council Members and one former Member have been returned for another four years. However, new to Council this year and securing the most votes was Preston-based veterinary practitioner David Catlow.
4,232 veterinary surgeons out of a possible 22,541 cast their votes this year, an increase of 0.6% from 18.2% in 2009. The results of the voting are as follows:
CATLOW, David Frederick. 2,383. Elected. TAPSFIELD-WRIGHT. Clare Joan. 2,352. Elected.SHIELD, Christine Fiona. 2,133. Elected.MOLYNEUX, Jacqueline Rosina. 2,111. Elected.SMITH, Neil Christopher. 2,089. Elected.PARTRIDGE, Robert Duncan. 1,971. Elected.NELL, Adi. 1,781. ANDERSON, Roy Paxton. 1,455. GODDARD, Philip Campbell. 1,385. LONSDALE, Thomas, 380.
Terms of office for the six successful candidates will (re)commence at RCVS Day on 2 July 2010.
Following a successful partnership last year, the RCVS again teamed up with this website to allow voters more opportunity to quiz the candidates directly and find out more about their views.
Once again, this seemed to prove popular with the electorate although it presented candidates with a large increase in their workload during the voting period. Page views in the election section rose 23% to 28,347 this year; 48 discussion threads were started (slightly down from 53) and total responses rose dramatically by 47% to 988.
A new incentive for members to vote this year was a pledge to donate 20p per voter to the DEC Haiti Earthquake Appeal. A donation of just over £845 will therefore be made shortly.
RCVS Registrar Jane Hern said: "An increase in turnout, if only a small one, is to be welcomed and I hope we can continue to increase members' interest in the composition and activities of RCVS Council. I'd like to thank all ten candidates who stood for election this year; my congratulations to those elected and my commiserations to those who weren't successful this time."
Note: there was no VN Council election this year as only two nominations were received for the two available places. These will be filled by Suzanne May RVN and Hilary Orpet RVN.
ECM, a French manufacturer of ultrasound devices, has launched Exago, a new mobile veterinary ultrasound device which the company says is particularly suited for use with horses and pets.
ECM says the main features of the new device are:
For more information, visit: http://www.agroscan.com/
An Oxford woman has launched Veterinary Thermal Imaging Ltd, a company which claims to be the first in the UK to use thermal imaging to help identify and monitor injury and illness in domestic pets.
Helen Morrell, 34, uses an FLIR infrared camera to detect physiological changes in animals. She says the technique is traditionally only used in top competition and racing stables, and can highlight health problems, including tendon, joint and nerve damage, which would otherwise be undetectable without invasive and expensive procedures such as x-rays and MRI scans.
Helen said: "I became interested in thermal imaging after being made redundant from my job in financial services. I'd studied Animal Science at Newcastle University when I was younger and I viewed the redundancy as the perfect opportunity to return to the industry.
"I realised that there were only a few people in the country who offer thermal imaging, and then only to horses. It's a really emerging technique that has huge potential and is already widely used in the US across all animals, including domestic, livestock, zoo and wildlife. It seemed that there was a huge gap in the market in this country."
Helen contacted leading experts in the US and became the first British woman to be accepted onto the thermal imaging course at Florida University. She said: "I knew I wanted to use the technique on domestic pets and the experts in the field were all in America. It made sense to me to get the training there and make sure I was at the top of my game."
Helen says she is currently working with a three-year-old terrier called Jack who is suffering from muscular atrophy caused by a locking patella. Although the thermal imaging didn't diagnose the problem, she says it is allowing the monitoring of his treatment and providing an objective assessment of the muscles affected by the injury.
The five talented winners of the "Vets in your daily life" competition were announced today by DG SANCO, the European Commission's Directorate General for Health and Consumers and the World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE).
DG SANCO launched the worldwide photography competition earlier this year, to coincide with World Vet Year 2011, celebrating the 250th anniversary of the veterinary profession. The five winners are: Somenath Mukhopadhyay (Winner for Asia), Genoveva Kriechbaum (Winner for Middle East), Molly Feltner (Winner for Africa), Ariel Alejandro Corvalán Herrera (Winner for the Americas) and István Konyhás (Winner for Europe). István Konyhás, European winner and leader of the Hungarian Working Group of Cranes said: "The photo I took in Hortobagy's Bird Hospital (a foundation set up for healing injured wild birds) highlights the care put into healing an injured stork. It also reflects the meticulousness of Dr János Déri trying to re-instate the lost parts of the stork's beak with dental treatment. As a volunteer of the foundation I have taken photos of their work for years so I am pleased to be one of the winners and with the prize money, I hope to be able to take even more interesting and striking photos."
István Konyhás' winning photograph highlights the care put into healing an injured stork. © European Commission.Molly Feltner, African winner and Communications Officer for the Mountain Gorilla Veterinary Project (MGVP) commented: "I am delighted to be one of the winners of this photo competition and am particularly proud of what this photos highlights. Working with the MGVP in Rwanda, Uganda and the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) we are dedicated to saving the lives of mountain gorillas. This photo beautifully depicts the doctor-patient relationship between MGVP's veterinarians and gorillas."
Molly Feltner's winning photograph depicts the relationship between Mountain Gorilla Veterinary Project veterinarians and gorillas. © European Commission.
Ariel Alejandro Corvalán Herrera's photograph won the Americas category. © European Commission.
The winning image for the Asia Pacific region was taken by Somenath Mukhopadhyay. © European Commission.
Genoveva Kriechbaum was the winner for the Middle East. © European Commission.
This year's Veterinary Week, from Monday 16th to Sunday 22nd May, aims to highlight the contribution of the veterinary profession to society under the slogan "Vets in your daily life." This includes a conference on 'Crisis Management in the Food Chain' (organised by the European Commission) today and tomorrow, during which Commissioner John Dalli will present the prizes to the regional winners of the international photographic competition organised jointly with the World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE). Events to celebrate Vet Week will be taking place across the European Union.
The RCVS has extended its alternative dispute resolution (ADR) trial until October 2015 and broadened its remit, allowing more cases to be considered.
The idea of the ADR is to provide an alternative form of resolution for the many concerns raised with the RCVS which do not meet the College's threshold for serious professional misconduct and are, therefore, not taken through its disciplinary process.
The trial, which was originally due to end in May 2015, aims to gather evidence needed to develop a permanent scheme.
As well as the time-frame being extended, the trial will now also be widened to include concerns raised about the treatment of horses and other equines - in addition to those raised about small animals.
The RCVS has also lowered the maximum financial award that can be recommended by the Ombudsman Services, a not-for-profit complaints resolution service which is administering the trial, to £3,000 for small animal cases. The maximum financial award that can be recommended by the Ombudsman Services in relation to equine cases remains at £10,000.
Nick Stace, RCVS Chief Executive, said: "The trial got off to a slower start than we expected and so we have decided to extend its length and breadth to allow more time and scope to gather the evidence and testimonies which we need to assess the trial.
"It's important to stress again that the trial is free, voluntary, as both parties must agree to take part, and that the recommendations made by the Ombudsman Services are not binding - it is up to either party as to whether they accept them."
The results of the trial will now be reported to the November 2015 meeting of RCVS Council. For further information about the ADR trial please visit www.rcvs.org.uk/adr
The Veterinary Record has published new research which shows that one in seven vets is likely to be burnt-out within 10 years of qualifying.
The study was conducted by a team of Dutch researchers led by Nicole Mastenbroek (pictured right) from the Faculty of Veterinary Medicine at Utrecht University.
They noted that veterinary surgeons' psychological wellbeing has been the subject of several studies in different countries in recent years, with some evidence suggesting that male vets are less prone to distress, anxiety, and depression. They wanted to gauge the level of burn-out and engagement with work among vets that had graduated within the past decade, and to assess whether gender or years since graduation are influential factors.
The researchers say they based their approach on the job demands-resources (JD-R) questionnaire, which balances out negative (burn-out) and positive (engagement) aspects of wellbeing associated with work. However, they tailored it specifically for veterinary surgeons, on the grounds that every profession has unique risk factors for burn-out.
The questionnaire was emailed to 1,790 vets who had qualified in The Netherlands between 1999 and 2009, with the final analysis based on the responses of 860, almost three quarters (73%) of whom were women.
Levels of exhaustion and cynicism - both of which are associated with burn-out - were significantly lower than those in a random sample of the Dutch working population. But so too was the level of work engagement.
The responses showed that one in seven respondents (14%) was burnt-out within 10 years of qualifying.
The researchers say that if the criteria for burn-out that are normally used for the Dutch workforce are applied, then the responses would indicate that 27% of the survey respondents were burnt-out.
Women also seemed to reach burn-out faster. Almost one in five (18%) of the female respondents was burnt-out within five years of graduating.
Male vets tended to be less exhausted and more engaged with work than their female peers. Job demands associated with exhaustion were work/home life balance and workload, while job resources linked to engagement included opportunities for professional development and "skills discretion" - the ability to use and develop skills on the job.
Researchers says that behavioural traits explained more of the variance in levels of work engagement between male and female vets than in levels of exhaustion.
Self-belief in one's abilities (self-efficacy) and a proactive stance are linked to work engagement in the JD-R approach. But women vets rated themselves as less effective, optimistic, proactive and assertive than did their male peers.
British Veterinary Association President Robin Hargreaves said: "These findings are worrying but sadly not surprising. We know that a burn out and other manifestations of poor mental wellbeing in veterinary professionals of both sexes are a well-recognised problem in the UK and they are a constant concern to BVA.
"The suggestion of an increased susceptibility to burn out amongst female vets adds to that concern with the increasing proportion of women in the profession."
The RCVS Disciplinary Committee has dismissed a case against a Southampton veterinary surgeon after finding him not guilty of serious professional misconduct, saying at all times that he acted in the best interests of a dog under his care.
At the start of the five-day hearing, the charges against Edward Gillams MRCVS were that, whilst in practice at Vets Now in Southampton in 2011, he discharged a dog that he knew or ought to have known was in no fit state to be discharged, and, at the same time, failed to provide adequate advice and information to the dog's owners, particularly with regard to an alternative plan to discharge and treatment options.
The dog, an Italian Spinone called Zola, had first been taken to the Vets4Pets veterinary clinic in Southampton at 4.30pm on 2 November 2011, where gastric torsion was diagnosed. During a subsequent gastrotomy, 3kg of sausages and plastic wrappings were removed. Zola was discharged three days later, with a guarded prognosis from the operating veterinary surgeon. Zola's condition deteriorated that same evening, so his owners called the Vets4Pets practice and were referred to their out-of-hours provider, Vets Now, where Mr Gillams was on duty. On admitting Zola, the only information available to Mr Gillams was what the dog's owners were able to tell him.
The Committee heard differing witness accounts from the dog's owners and from Mr Gillams regarding what tests and examinations were to be performed, and what advice and options were suggested. Ultimately, Zola was hospitalised overnight (despite some reluctance for this from one of his owners), given pain relief and antibiotics and placed on a drip; he was then to be collected by his owners first thing for transfer back to Vets4Pets. The next morning, Zola was described as 'sternally recumbent but responsive', holding his head up but not moving and not making any attempt to get up. Mr Gillams carried Zola to his owner's car for transport back to the Vets4Pets practice. He considered that he had discharged his duty to provide advice, as this was given the night before and in the circumstances prevailing in the morning there was no obligation to repeat this. Zola died on the journey between the two practices.
Before reaching a decision, the Committee considered, in detail, the expert evidence of witnesses for both the College and Mr Gillams, which provided some conflicting views on Mr Gillams' actions. It also referred to the RCVS guidance available to Mr Gillams at the time through the RCVS Guide to Professional Conduct 2010.
The Committee noted that both experts agreed that Mr Gillams could not have known Zola was about to die when he discharged him and that it was a difficult decision for Mr Gillams to make, but expressed differing views about the fitness of the dog to be discharged and whether it was in its best interests to be discharged. The Committee rejected the contention that Mr Gillams ought to have known that Zola was not fit to be discharged, and instead considered appropriate his decision to discharge him into the care of his original veterinary surgeon. It felt that continuity of care would actually be better maintained in this manner, rather than a third veterinary surgeon taking over the case.
Regarding provision of adequate advice, the Committee accepted Mr Gillams' evidence that he was frustrated that the owners refused him permission to undertake the diagnostic work necessary to treat Zola effectively, and that he had no other clinical information to work with.
Chairing and speaking on behalf of the Disciplinary Committee, its Vice-Chairman, Ms Judith Webb, said: "The Committee expresses its sincere condolences to [the owners] for the loss of their much loved family pet Zola and recognises that this loss caused the family great distress."
Ms Webb added: "The Committee accepts that [Mr Gillams] discharged his obligations to Zola and to [his owners] in a manner wholly consistent with the standards of a competent veterinary surgeon in difficult circumstances. He leaves with no stain on his character or professional ability."
The full detail of the Committee's decision is available on the RCVS website (www.rcvs.org.uk/disciplinary).
Vets4Pets has unveiled its latest national TV advertising campaign, which airs for the first time during Coronation Street on ITV tonight.
The 30-second commercial was shot at five different locations around the UK and features John Davies-Riand MRCVS Vet Partner at Vets4Pets Leeds and Sarah Scott Vet Nurse Partner at Vets4Pets Kettering.
The commercial is running nationally until 28th March and forms part of a national campaign offering owners of elderly pets a discounted £25 senior pet health check with a vet and a half price bag of senior pet food.
Gill Hammond, Head of Brand Marketing said: "It was really important to us when planning this new campaign that we feature our real partners, they are at the end of the day the core of our business and the faces that our clients see when they visit us. The offer itself, focusing on senior pets is testament to our partners' and their teams' commitment to on-going pet health care."
Lee Ashton, founder of Bugler Smith, the agency behind the new ad said: "Working with Vet4Pets on this project has been a really exciting process. Having got under the skin of the brief, and carried out some initial research within Vets4Pets practices nationwide, the overwhelming and consistent theme from everyone we spoke to, was how they have a real passion for pets and making every difference they can.
"This was key to our message, and we felt it was really important to use their best brand ambassadors (their own vets and veterinary nurses) to introduce the brand to the public, to really demonstrate in a straight forward way what makes them different to other vet practices, and we're really pleased with the outcome."
Pawz Ltd, a UK company founded by Diwaker Singh, Radu Georgescu and Francesco Cardoletti has launched PawSquad, a new on-demand veterinary video consultation service for pet owners.
The service offers pet owners a 15 minute online consultation with a veterinary surgeon for £15, any time from 6:00am to midnight, seven days a week.
PawSquad points out that the service cannot offer a diagnosis - apart from the fact that it would be contrary to the CoPC, it's obviously not possible without a physical exam - so the service is designed to offer more general health advice concerning such things as behaviour, nutrition and the management of long-term, non-emergency conditions.
Andrew Francis BVSc CertVC, DipECVIM-CA MRCVS ex-Head of Cardiology at Anderson Moores Veterinary Referrals is the company's Chief Veterinary Officer, sitting alongside Andrew Ash MRCVS (the BSAVA Past Pres). Andrew #1 said: "Currently, pet owners have only two options when they need advice about their pets' health and welfare. They either take time out of busy schedules to visit the vet or, when a visit to the vet is not possible they search the Internet for non professional and frequently unreliable information."
Francesco Cardoletti said: "It’s important to understand that PawSquad is a supplementary service – it’s not replacing traditional veterinary services.There are limits to the services you can digitally provide. If an animal is seriously ill, it needs to get to a bricks and mortar veterinary clinic and be examined by a vet."
Eleanor Ferguson, Head of Professional Conduct at the RCVS said: "We have had a discussion with Pawsquad and understand that the aim of its service is to increase accessibility to veterinary advice, which can only be a good thing as a large percentage of animal owners are not registered with a veterinary surgeon.
“We understand that the veterinary surgeons involved will not be giving detailed clinical advice but will be limited to offering general advice on areas such as puppy care, nutrition, allergies and pet passports.
“We also recommended to Pawsquad that their veterinary surgeons should take care to point out the limitations of their advice, given no physical examination has taken place, and suggest that owners takes their pets to a veterinary practice where that is appropriate.
“The issue of telemedicine has come up often during the joint RCVS/BVA Vet Futures project and is a topic that the Standards Committee, which looks after the Code of Professional Conduct and its supporting guidance, is currently considering in more depth, with an evidence-gathering process due next year.”
I tried out the new service with a question about my dog's slightly worrying habit of growling at one of my children. It was a question which we had not thus far raised with our normal vet because it hadn't been enough of a concern at the last consultation. But it seems to be getting slightly worse, and my wife and I had recently talked about getting advice. It seemed like just the sort of situation where an informal chat with a vet could be helpful.
Completing the preconsultation details was a breeze, slowed only by the need to shove the dog on a set of scales (I didn't know what she weighs, and it's needed for the consultation). Thereafter, only one hiccup when it transpired that Safari, the browser I was using, is incompatible. I switched to Chrome, which is.
The consultation itself was excellent. Within a few seconds, the very charming Angie Henderson MRCVS appeared on my screen. It transpired I was her very first consultation since the service was launched yesterday! We discussed the problem. She reassured me that one of the things I was doing (getting the child to feed the dog under supervision) was a good idea, and we discussed a number of other positive reinforcement strategies to try and improve our dog's behaviour. She explained that she wasn't one for certain types of negative reinforcement, but that using a spray bottle of water when the dog behaved inappropriately could help. She explained that we would need to do these things several times a day for them to have an effect, and even then it may take some considerable time, and may need the services of a behaviourist. She also reassured me that the dog would be unlikely to do anything worse than nip, whilst stressing that even a nip is very upsetting for a child, so it does need to be dealt with.
All in all, I came away reassured, with some very useful suggestions and a clear idea of what we need to do. £15 very well spent. I gather that I should also have received a written post-consultation report by email, which didn't arrive because of some technical glitch. But that's slightly by-the-by; the icing on the cake.
I can also see the service would be very useful as a sort of out-of-hours triage, in other words offering me the ability to have a "my-dog-has-just-eaten-three-kilos-of-Green-and-Blacks-what-next-consultation?" at 11:00pm at night.
If the service proves popular amongst pet owners, the question remains whether it will reduce the number of people seeking and paying for traditional consultations. I suspect not. Perhaps the reverse will happen as pet owners use the system to corroborate their feeling that the dog might need a physical exam. As part of the service and with your permission, PawSquad forwards a copy of the consultation report to your normal vet.
Again if the service proves popular, it seems to offer the potential for a nice additional income stream for veterinary surgeons, especially locums, which can be earned in the hours you specify, from the comfort of your home. PawSquad says it pays vets between £12-£32 per hour; equivalent to £60K per annum. Whilst the company doesn't directly employ vets, it will provide liability insurance provided by the VDS.
PawSquad says it also plans to recruit veterinary nurses later in the year, to offer advice to new pet owners on nutrition, behaviour and the environment.
The RCVS Disciplinary Committee has suspended two veterinary surgeons from the Register after finding them guilty of lying to clients and the College about the circumstances of a castration procedure which led to the death of a dog.
The Committee suspended Mr Mpho Donald Lesolle and Mr Georgi Cheshmedzhiev from the Register for four and two months respectively, following surgery undertaken on Benson, a two-year-old male Labradoodle belonging to Mr and Mrs Grayson.
During the proceedings, the Committee heard that, on 6 August 2013, Mr and Mrs Grayson brought Benson to the Swinfen Veterinary Centre in Stafford, where Mr Lesolle is the practice principal and Mr Cheshmedzhiev was his assistant, for the operation which was undertaken by Mr Cheshmedzhiev. Mr Lesolle did not directly supervise the procedure telling the Committee that he was confident that his colleague could carry out the castration, having permitted him to do so on previous occasions.
The Committee heard that, after the operation, a nursing assistant, Ms Bell, had noticed that there was blood on the bedding and that Benson had a swollen scrotum. Mr Lesolle then performed a scrotal ablation on Benson, who was discharged later that day.
However, on the morning of 8 August 2013, Mrs Grayson discovered that Benson had died during the night. An independent post-mortem concluded that he had probably died of intra-abdominal bleeding which caused circulatory collapse. Mr and Mrs Grayson raised a concern with the RCVS in September 2013.
The charge against Mr Lesolle relates to his actions following the operations and during the investigation. The four parts of the charge were that he failed to be sufficiently open with Mr and Mrs Grayson on the circumstances of Benson’s surgery; that, in September 2013, he wrote to the College indicating that he had in fact performed the castration and failing to state that there had been two operations; that, on 23 January 2014, he informed Pam Mosedale, a Veterinary Investigator employed by the College, that he had carried out both procedures; and that, on the same day, he also encouraged his veterinary nursing assistant Ms Bell to be dishonest with the College’s investigators.
Mr Lesolle, who was present at the hearing, admitted all parts of the charge against him. He told the Committee that he decided to take responsibility for Mr Cheshmedzhiev’s operation out of a desire to protect his colleague whom he regarded as vulnerable and lacking in self-confidence. He also accepted that he had encouraged Ms Bell to lie during her interview. He told the Committee that he had persisted with the deceit until 15 January 2015, when he gave a full account of what had occurred.
The three parts of the charge against Mr Cheshmedzhiev, who was not in attendance or represented at the hearing, were that in a letter to the College sent in September 2013, he indicated that he had not undertaken the castration procedure on Benson; that on 23 January 2014 he had denied carrying out the operation while being interviewed by Pam Mosedale; and that, on 19 June 2014, while being interviewed by a solicitor instructed by the College, he said that Mr Lesolle had carried out both procedures.
The Committee found the charge against Mr Lesolle amounted to serious professional misconduct, falling far short of what is expected of a professional. The Committee highlighted the protracted nature of his deceit and the fact that he encouraged another member of staff to participate in it. However, it did accept that his motivation was to protect Mr Cheshmedzhiev.
In deciding on the sanction for Mr Lesolle, the Committee considered the aggravating and mitigating factors. Ian Green, chairing the Committee and speaking on its behalf, said: “Having taken the calculated decision to deceive the College as to what had occurred, he abused his position of responsibility to obtain support for his deceit by involving a junior employee, without any proper consideration of the effect of that decision upon her. Instead he continued with the deceit until he was presented with incontrovertible evidence that he had not carried out both procedures on the dog. In the Committee’s view he showed a wilful disregard for the College’s investigatory process.”
However, in mitigation, it also accepted that he was protecting a colleague and that there was no financial gain. It also considered his personal circumstances, the fact that he is sole principal of a small mixed practice which provides his sole source of income and that the rented accommodation also provides a home for his wife and two children. Taking all factors into account, the Committee imposed a sanction upon Mr Lesolle of four months’ suspension from the Register.
In regards to Mr Cheshmedzhiev, the Committee did not find the part of his charge relating to the letter sent in September 2013 to be proven but, in respect of the other two parts of his charge, found that his conduct fell far short of what is expected of a professional. It highlighted his willing participation in the deceit over a protracted period and his failure to take responsibility for his own involvement in the operation on Benson.
In deciding the sanction, the Committee said that the fact that Mr Cheshmedzhiev had lied to the College’s investigators on two occasions and did not admit that he had carried out the castration and apologise for his actions until February 2015, after he had returned to his native Bulgaria, was an aggravating factor.
Ian Green added: “The Committee accepts that he allowed himself to be persuaded by Mr Lesolle to provide a dishonest account of what had taken place to the College’s investigator Mrs Mosedale, and solicitor, Mr Hudson. It also accepts that he has been described by Mr Lesolle as a vulnerable person, lacking in self-confidence in his ability to practise as a veterinary surgeon in the United Kingdom.
“Nevertheless, Mr Cheshmedzhiev accepted the obligations contained in the Code of Professional Conduct when he registered as an MRCVS, which included an obligation to cooperate honestly with the College’s investigatory process. It has also noted that he has expressed a present intention not to work in or visit the United Kingdom again.”
Taking into account all factors, the Committee decided the appropriate sanction was to suspend him from the Register for two months.
The RCVS Disclipinary Committee has severely reprimanded and warned as to her future conduct a Brighton-based veterinary surgeon who failed to maintain a proper boundary between her professional and personal relationships with a client.
The eight charges considered at the seven-day hearing involved Marie-Louise Schlemm's treatment of Ratszy, a 16-year old Jack Russell with chronic renal failure, and her relationship with the dog's owner, Ms B, who suffers from mental illness, during May 2010. At that time, Ms Schlemm was employed by Coastway Veterinary Group in Brighton to work for its out-of-hours veterinary services, Vetcall, to which Ratszy had been referred by the PDSA.
The College alleged that Ms Schlemm deliberately misled Ms B as to the condition and prognosis of Ratszy, removed the dog without Ms B's consent, and behaved unprofessionally and inappropriately in her dealings with Ms B. Other allegations were that that she had suggested Ms B tell the PDSA a fabricated story in order that she might see the dog again; made an offer that Ms B and Ratszy could come and stay with her at her home; required Ms B to attend a supermarket car park at 12.30am to collect Ratszy; and took money from Ms B other than for the purposes of legitimate veterinary treatment.
The Committee found both Ms Schlemm and Ms B to be truthful and honest witnesses, and that Ms B's recollection was given to the best of her ability. However, where recollections differed, it relied on contemporaneously prepared clinical records to find that Ms Schlemm did not mislead Ms B to the effect that the dog was not dying. Although recognising that Ms Schlemm's actions were misguided the Committee found that the dog was not taken without consent.
Furthermore, the Committee said in making the offer that Ms B and Ratszy might come and stay with her, Ms Schlemm was wholly misguided and had blurred the distinction between personal and professional activities. By this time, she was aware Ms B suffered from mental illness and so should have allowed the mental health services to take control of the situation. Similarly, she should not have required Ms B to meet in a car park to collect Ratszy, behaviour the Committee described as bizarre and which had compromised Ratszy's welfare. Although the Committee gave Ms Schlemm the benefit of the doubt as to whether money taken was, in fact, to pay for alternative therapy for Ms B, she did not deal with the matter openly and it was a clear breach of trust to both Ms B and Vetcall.
In mitigation, the Committee was satisfied that Ms Schlemm now had a genuine insight into her lack of judgement in her relationship with Ms B, had reflected on the decision of the Committee and fully accepted the "utter stupidity" of her actions. She had also attended courses on teamwork and managing client relationships, and had established good working relationships in a new practice.
Professor Peter Lees, chairing and speaking on behalf of the Committee said: "While the Committee has accepted that Ms Schlemm was motivated by good intentions towards Ms B and Ratszy, she breached the trust of both of Ms B and Vetcall in the way in which she behaved [and] acted in a misguided way in dealing with a vulnerable client, who was suffering from mental illness. In light of the serious nature of its findings, the Committee does not consider it appropriate to take no further action. The Committee has concluded that Ms Schlemm should be severely reprimanded for her conduct and given a warning as to her future conduct [and] reminds the profession of the importance of maintaining a proper boundary between the professional and personal relationships of client and veterinary surgeon."
The RCVS has announced the results of the 2013 Council and Veterinary Nurses Council elections.
4,661 veterinary surgeons voted, the highest turnout seen in ten years. 1,329 veterinary nurses voted, the highest ever number.
Veterinary surgeons voted incumbents Christopher Gray, Peter Jinman, Bradley Viner, Christopher Tufnell, and Jeremy Davies back onto the RCVS Council. However, the highest number of votes was given to Thomas Witte, who will be new to Council when he takes his seat in July. Veterinary nurses voted similarly by returning Andrea Jeffery to VN Council, whilst giving to Amy Robinson, another newcomer, the largest number of votes.
According to the College, turnout in both elections has increased markedly on last year in both absolute and proportional terms. Votes were cast by 4,661 veterinary surgeons (18.8%) and 1,329 veterinary nurses (12.5%), compared to 3,625 (15.1%) and 743 (7.5%), respectively, in 2012.
Gordon Hockey, RCVS Registrar said: "We're delighted with the increase in turnout. It's difficult to pinpoint the reasons for the increase, but hopefully, it's because increasing numbers of vets and nurses are feeling more engaged with the College. We have also undertaken extra communications activities this year, such as the 'hustings', which we hope have helped."
The Council election 'hustings' was a new venture this year, with RCVS Council candidates able to select three questions, submitted by voters, to answer in a live webinar run by The Webinar Vet.
Veterinary surgeons and VNs could cast their votes by post, online, or by text. The majority of vets voting chose to cast postal votes (3,247), as did the majority of VNs (1,055). Whilst voting online was used by 1,330 veterinary surgeons, only 227 VNs chose it as a means of voting. Voting by text was used by only 84 veterinary surgeons and 47 VNs.
The successful candidates will take up or resume their seats at RCVS Day on 5 July.
The full results of the two elections are as follows:
RCVS Council electionWITTE, Thomas Hermann - 2,251 (Elected)GRAY, Christopher John - 1,974 (Elected)JINMAN, Peter Charles - 1,949 (Elected)VINER, Bradley Phillip - 1,927 (Elected)TUFNELL, Christopher Wynne - 1,883 (Elected)DAVIES, Jeremy Vincent - 1,830 (Elected)STURGESS, Christopher Paul - 1,809 CONNELL, Niall Thomas - 1,596 ROBINSON, Peter Bayley - 1,366 ELLIS, Robert Nigel Ward - 1,302 GRANT, Lewis George - 832 TORGERSON, Paul Robert - 824 LONSDALE, Thomas - 337 Twenty-two votes in the RCVS Council election were found to be invalid.VN Council election
ROBINSON, Amy - 725 (Elected)JEFFERY, Andrea Karen - 607 (Elected)BADGER, Susan Frances - 459TOTTEY, Helen Wendy 332 One vote in the VN Council election was found to be invalid.The 2013 RCVS and VN Council elections were run on behalf of the RCVS by Electoral Reform Services.
The RCVS has opened a consultation on the future of veterinary specialisation, which includes a proposal that the use of postnominals and titles by veterinary surgeons should be rationalised in order to avoid confusion amongst the public.
The proposals are submitted for comment by the RCVS Specialisation Working Party, which is chaired by former Chief Medical Officer Professor Sir Kenneth Calman.
The Working Party's review was precipitated by a finding that the structure of veterinary specialisation is "confusing and opaque" to both animal owners and the profession (Unlocking Potential - a Report on Veterinary Expertise in Food Animal Production, by Professor Philip Lowe, 2009).
The Working Party has explored the routes to RCVS Recognised Specialist status. It has also looked at the use of 'specialist' more broadly, given the fact that it is not a protected term in the veterinary field, and has considered animal owners' expectations of a 'specialist'.
The Working Party also makes proposals for encouraging more veterinary surgeons to become specialists, given that there are currently only 319 on the RCVS List of Recognised Specialists, out of a UK practising arm of the profession of some 17,400 veterinary surgeons.
The proposals from the Working Party could have far-reaching impact. One suggestion is that all those meeting the criteria for specialist status would also become Fellows of the RCVS (FRCVS) - a status currently only held by those who complete a thesis or exam, or who qualify on the basis of 'meritorious contributions to learning'. There are also proposals that the term 'RCVS Recognised Specialist' be dropped and replaced with the much simpler term 'specialist' or 'veterinary specialist'.
Further proposals include the introduction of a 'middle tier' of veterinary surgeons - potentially to be called 'advanced practitioners' - who would be below full specialist status and subject to periodic revalidation.
There are also recommendations that veterinary surgeons should be obliged to explain referral options to their clients, including the level of expertise of those to whom they are referring cases.
The future of the RCVS subject boards, which currently manage the various Certificate and Diploma examinations, is also considered in the proposals.
The emphasis throughout is on simplification and improvement, according to Professor Sir Kenneth Calman, who said: "New legislation to introduce statutory registration for veterinary specialists would no doubt make things clearer, as it is for doctors and dentists, but, in the meantime, we believe there are a number of actions which the RCVS could take to improve matters."
The consultation paper can be downloaded from www.rcvs.org.uk/consultations, and comments are welcomed from members of the public, veterinary surgeons and veterinary nurses. The closing deadline for comments, which should be sent to RCVS Head of Education, Freda Andrews, on f.andrews@rcvs.org.uk, is Friday 9 December.
Comments received will be considered by the RCVS committees and Council in early 2012.
Nutricat, a supermarket cat food launched this year, has released the results of a survey which, it says, shows that modern day lifestyles are resulting in British cat owners anthropomorphising their cats.
The survey found that 54% of cat owners believe their cat shares similar emotions to them, 40% sign greetings cards from their cat, and 1/3 say their cat is a better listener than their partner.
Anthropomorphism is nothing new, and since the press release came from a supermarket brand, it would ordinarily have been destined for the 'Deleted Items' folder.
However, one thing caught my eye. In the press release, Nutricat was described as: a new brand of veterinarian approved advanced feline nutrition'.
But it's not just how Nutricat is described in the press release. The title of the Nutricat website is: 'Veterinarian approved cat food', and the words 'veterinarian approved' appear no less than 3 times on the home page. It doesn't stop there. Tesco seems to have got the message too.
So how many veterinary surgeons are required to endorse something in order to claim, reasonably, that it is 'veterinarian approved'. A couple of RCVS Specialists in Feline Medicine? 10 general practitioners? 20? 50? 100?
VetSurgeon.org rang the PR agency for Nutricat and asked the question.
The answer is one.
What do you think? Take part in our poll, here: http://www.vetsurgeon.org/forums/t/9928.aspx
The figures highlight the burden placed on veterinary surgeons every day when they're asked to euthanise perfectly healthy animals.
Problem behaviours include persistent barking and howling, destructive chewing and inappropriate toileting. Aggressive behaviour, towards both people and other pets, is also a problem, with the PDSA Animal Wellbeing (PAW) report revealing that a third of pet owners have been attacked or bitten by a dog. Such behaviours can cause a breakdown of the human-animal bond, leading to pets being excluded from family life to the detriment of their welfare, relinquished to rehoming centres or euthanised.
The BVA says these figures overwhelmingly show the importance of adequate socialisation of animals at an early age – young animals should safely encounter a variety of people, animals and everyday household sights and sounds in their first few weeks and months of age, beginning at the place where they are born.
Other reasons that owners give their veterinary surgeon for wanting to euthanise a healthy pet included: poor health of the owner (48%), owners moving to accommodation that is unsuitable for their pet (39%), and legal enforcement reasons (32%).
British Veterinary Association President Sean Wensley said: "These figures are stark and are likely to come as a shock to members of the public. But this is the sad reality of a failure to socialise animals from the earliest possible age – a specific time in a puppy’s development which has a significant impact on their future temperament and behaviour. With dogs, this process starts from before a puppy is even seen by a potential owner. In recent months there has been a litany of news stories about the illegal importation, breeding and trading of puppies through puppy farms. This is no way for a family pet to start life and we urge potential owners to thoroughly research where a puppy has been born and reared, using the AWF/RSPCA Puppy contract to help. Then, in the first year of ownership, and especially in the first few weeks, work with your local veterinary practice to ensure your puppy is introduced to everyday sights and sounds, including other people and animals, in a safe and structured way."
Mr Wensley also commented on the impact on vets: "Nobody enters the veterinary profession wanting to euthanise healthy pets, but this is the stressful situation that many vets are facing because of undesirable behaviours in pet animals. Vets will do all they can in these situations to avoid euthanasia, including offering evidence-based behavioural advice, referring to accredited pet behaviourists or assisting with rehoming through reputable rehoming organisations, but sometimes these options are not appropriate, particularly where the behavioural issues make it extremely difficult to rehome the animal. Vets are not required to euthanise healthy animals at an owner’s request, but sometimes, having carefully considered all options and given the circumstances the pet finds themselves in, it may be in an animal’s best interests to do so. Euthanising an animal who could have been a loving pet is the hidden, tragic cost of poor socialisation."
In his first year of what would normally have been be a four-year term, Colin served on the College’s Education Committee, PIC/DC Liaison Committee, and on the Advancement of the Professions Committee as Council Deputy Lead for the ViVet innovation programme.
VetSurgeon.org caught up with Colin, who explained: "I've never had any problem with the idea of respecting Council decisions, even those I disagree with.
"However, I questioned the interpretation of collective responsibility when I first joined Council, and was told that in the event of disagreement, it was OK for councillors to say publicly that there was a 'split vote', or 'opinions varied'.
"This new statement would mean that if I disagree with a Council decision, I would now either have to lie in public and say I supported it, or run away and hide.
There were two other aspects of the new statement which Colin was not prepared to sign up to.
The first was a new requirement that councillors "support the College’s vision".
Colin said: "People who actively disagree with the College's vision should be free to stand to join Council, and if the profession disagrees with the College's vision, they'll get elected!"
The second was a requirement for councillors to "Live the College’s values"
Colin said: "Although perhaps inline with a corporate ethos, I think it represents quite a conflict.
"The values someone lives by are a deeply personal matter, and shouldn't be imposed by the majority vote of a committee they happen to sit on - however much they may or may not be likely to align."
Colin's resignation prompted VetSurgeon.org to carry out a quick analysis of the percentage of RCVS Council meeting agenda items marked as 'Confidential' from November 2015 to June 2022, to see whether the requirement to tow the party line reflected a broader lack of transparency at the College.
In the four Council meetings from November 2015-2016, 12% of the agenda items in the Council minutes were marked 'Confidential'.
By 2022, that figure had more than doubled to 36% (see graph right).
The new RCVS 'How we work' statement can be read in full in Annex One of the June 2022 Council Papers.
The main change to the guidance was from:
A veterinary surgeon who has an animal under their care should have a 24/7 facility to physically examine the animal or visit the premises in the case of production animals, farmed aquatic animals and game.
to
A veterinary surgeon who has an animal under their care must be able, on a 24/7 basis, to physically examine the animal or visit the premises in the case of production animals, equines, farmed aquatic animals and game.
Where a veterinary surgeon is not able to provide this service, they must make arrangements for another veterinary service provider to do so on their behalf, details of which must be provided to the client in writing in advance of providing veterinary services.
The new guidance elaborates on the details which must be given to clients:
Veterinary surgeons should provide clients with full details of this arrangement, including relevant telephone numbers, location details, when the service is available and the nature of service provided.
The amended guidelines maintain that the prescription of antimicrobials and controlled drugs requires a physical examination in all but exceptional circumstances, but clarify that for antimicrobials, this applies to all except production animals, farmed aquatic animals and game.
The guidance for limited service providers, such as vaccination and neutering clinics, has been amended with the requirement that if they engage the services of another provider to provide 24-hour emergency cover, this arrangement must be confirmed in writing with the client before veterinary services are offered.
Council voted unanimously for a review of the guidance to be conducted 12 months from the implementation date, with the caveat that the Standards Committee would continue to monitor any impacts on an ongoing basis.
The full details of the amendments can be found in the papers for the March 2023 RCVS Council meeting at: www.rcvs.org.uk/who-we-are/rcvs-council/council-meetings/
Linda Belton MRCVS, Chair of the RCVS Standards Committee, said: “I would like to thank all the organisations and individuals within the professions who helped provide the crucial content and context for the case study scenarios, as well as feedback to make sure they were realistic and applicable in practice.
"Thank you also to all those who have fed into the further improvements that have been made to the guidance and I would like to reassure those with concerns that the guidance is robust, we have considered how it will be enforced and we will continue to review the guidance.”
Eleanor Ferguson, RCVS Registrar, added: “Ahead of it coming into force, we will also be publishing resources about the guidance, including the case studies that we are currently finalising, and some FAQs.
"We hope these will help to further explain the context behind the guidance changes, and help to counter any misunderstanding about the impact of the guidance and what it will actually mean for practising professionals on a day-to-day basis.”
For further information about the guidance and the consultation process that led to its development visit: www.rcvs.org.uk/undercare
For the survey, veterinary surgeons and nurses were asked: "Thinking about the last time you (or your OOH provider on your behalf) were called by a pet owner out-of-hours within the last fortnight, was the call ...
a) Something which was clearly NOT an emergency (eg vaccination, nail clip, dematt, pet passport etc.)
b) A condition which should have been seen in normal working hours (either because it has been present for some time already with no deterioration or because - in your opinion - it could have waited till the morning).
c) A genuine emergency, which needed prompt attention to prevent the animal suffering.
475 members took part, 69% of which were vets and the remainder vet nurses.
Of the out-of-hours (OOH) calls they had taken:
28.2% were genuine emergencies, which needed prompt attention to prevent the animal suffering.
64.8% were about a condition which should have been seen in normal working hours (either because it has been present for some time already with no deterioration or because it could have waited till the morning).
6.9% were about something which was clearly NOT an emergency (eg vaccination, nail clip, dematt, pet passport etc.)
So in total, 71.7% of the calls to veterinary surgeons OOH are unnecessary.
This raises a number of important questions, chiefly whether a profession struggling with a staffing crisis can afford to maintain the blanket requirement for all practices to make provision for OOH, particularly now that society places so much greater demands on the profession than it did when the rules were invented, demanding wormers in the middle of the night and then blackening the name of the vet on social media if they refuse. It happens.
Is it time to go the same way as some other countries and let the market meet the demand?
Or can anything else be done to relieve the pressure that OOH places on the profession? Ideas floating around include making all veterinary OOH telephone lines premium rate, charging at least enough to focus the caller's mind on whether it is actually necessary to renew their pet passport at 3:00am. Or perhaps a concerted effort by all parties to communicate the message that OOH is A&E. You shouldn't ring unless you really need to. But that message may not carry much weight when at the end of the day, it's the insurance company footing the bill.
Reducing the number of spurious calls doesn't, of course, help the staffing crisis. But it is surely pertinent to ask whether an obligation for 100% of general practices to make arrangements to service something which is 70% unnecessary is the most efficient way to operate.
Maybe the time has come for the profession to consider OOH and general practice as two very distinct things. Discuss.
The RCVS didn't want to comment.
A survey published today by the veterinary recruitment agency recruit4vets has found 45.8% of salaried veterinary surgeons earning less than £35K per annum.
251 veterinary surgeons in full-time permanent employment took part in the survey, the largest number (37%) working in the south east and London.
The survey found that the typical starting salary was £31K per annum, rising to 41K for a more experienced vet in small animal practice, and £44K for more experienced large animal practitioners. The survey also found that senior vets with over 20 years experience earn up to £69K.
The survey also looked at locum charge-out rates, which varied from £220-£230 per day (17%) to over £250 (15%), with the greatest number (29%) charging between £240-£250.
62% of locums said their hourly pay rate had not changed in the last 12 months, compared to 45% of permanent staff who said their salary was unchanged over the period. This despite 65% of vets saying that the demands on them within the practice had increased in the last 12 months.
Recruit4vets has produced a couple of video presentations about the results, locum pay covered here and permanent pay covered here.
Visit VetSurgeon.org Jobs for the largest selection of classified jobs for veterinary surgeons.
BVA’s Voice of the Veterinary Profession survey panel, which polls over 1,000 UK vets, highlighted that many vets support the higher welfare standards of British farming, with 9 out of 10 vets saying they would be more likely to buy food if it was labelled as British or locally sourced. Over three quarters of vets said that they would be more likely to buy free-range (77%) or food that carried a Farm Assurance Scheme label (over 50% for Red Tractor and RSPCA Assured; formerly known as Freedom Food).
BVA President Sean Wensley encouraged consumers to check labels as the warmer weather sees BBQs and picnics take centre stage in gatherings of families and friends. He said: "Animal welfare should be a paramount consideration whether we’re thinking about purchasing pets or the food we eat. For vets it’s a top priority that the animals we rear for food have a good life and a humane death.
"Vets are not alone in caring about where their food comes from. To support high standards of animal welfare, all of us can vote for good animal health and welfare through our thoughtful meat, fish, and dairy purchases and send a strong message to food producers and retailers this summer."
BVA’s Voice of the Veterinary Profession survey panel also revealed that 9 out of 10 vets would be less likely to buy meat or fish if it was labelled as not stunned prior to slaughter.
BVA is leading a campaign to end slaughter without pre-stunning for animal welfare reasons and calling for better labelling of food to help consumers make pro-animal welfare choices.
To find out more about BVA’s campaign to end non-stun slaughter, visit: http://www.bva.co.uk/News-campaigns-and-policy/Campaigns/An-end-to-non-stun-slaughter
Image: CC BY-SA 2.0 cyclonebill
The RVC has published the results of a study which showed that dogs treated with pimobendan at the preclinical stage of mitral valve disease (MVD) remained asymptomatic for an average 15 months longer and lived for significantly longer than the placebo group.
The EPIC study (Evaluation of Pimobendan In Cardiomegaly), published open access in the Journal of Veterinary Internal Medicine1, is the largest prospective veterinary cardiology study carried out to date. The authors say that the quality of the data it produced rivals that of human clinical trials.
The study was double-blinded, placebo-controlled and randomised. It took seven years to complete and involved 360 dogs across 11 countries in four continents.
To qualify for enrolment in the study, dogs had to be 6 years of age or older, have a body weight ≥4.1 and ≤15 kg, have a characteristic systolic heart murmur of moderate to high intensity (≥ grade 3/6) with maximal intensity over the mitral area, have echocardiographic evidence of advanced MMVD defined as characteristic valvular lesions of the mitral valve apparatus, mitral regurgitation on the colour Doppler echocardiogram, and have echocardiographic evidence of left atrial and left ventricular dilatation, defined as a left atrial-to-aortic root ratio ≥ 1.6 and body weight normalized left ventricular internal diameter in diastole ≥ 1.7, in addition to radiographic evidence of cardiomegaly (vertebral heart sum > 10.5)
In fact, the study was terminated early following an interim analysis as the evidence was considered conclusive and it was deemed unethical to continue to withhold treatment from the placebo group.
Adrian Boswood, Professor of Veterinary Cardiology at the RVC (pictured above right), led the research. He said: "Thanks to the EPIC study results, vets no longer have to adopt a 'watch and wait' approach to suspected preclinical cases of MVD. When a typical mitral valve murmur is detected, vets should now investigate further to look for cardiac enlargement. If demonstrated, this suggests the patient will probably benefit from treatment with pimobendan before the onset of clinical signs.
"It's great that as a trusted treatment, pimobendan has a wealth of safety data behind it in addition to that gleaned from the EPIC study, which can help support vets when prescribing it in this new way."
Adrian added: "As far as evidence-based medicine goes, this is about as good as it gets. The size and design of the study places it in the top-tier. The study was designed and run by an independent team of investigators and sponsored by Boehringer Ingelheim. We, as lead investigators, had the right to publish the results regardless of the outcome. This makes EPIC very special indeed."
In light of the findings, Adrian says vets should now consider testing early for signs of preclinical MVD, and in dogs with cardiomegaly secondary to preclinical MVD, consider the use of pimobendan to delay the onset of congestive heart failure and extend the asymptomatic period.
To read more about the EPIC study and results, visit www.rvc.ac.uk
Reference