'Breeders' doing ultrasounds??

Re: 'Breeders' doing ultrasounds??

argyro koukouseli — Fri, 10 Feb 2012 22:05:42 GMT

i didnt mean to sound offensive.when talking to owners am on the vs side,or make no comment at all.not comdemning ,just commenting ,as among colleagues.

Re: 'Breeders' doing ultrasounds??

Gillian Mostyn — Fri, 10 Feb 2012 19:03:41 GMT

I believe you! I was trying to be nice! Although I stand by my initial point, that is a proper history had been obtained then the details of the original scan would have been discovered, I also think that we cannot condemn a a VS or a clinical decision unless we are in possession of all the facts!

Re: 'Breeders' doing ultrasounds??

Cat Henstridge — Fri, 10 Feb 2012 13:42:29 GMT

[quote user="Gillian Mostyn"]I think you are missing the point of what the majority of posters are saying. There is every chance that this VS was wrong or negligent. However, without hearing both sides of the story no one is happy to condemn a colleague. You show them the same courtesy you would want them to show you[/quote]

Really, she wasn't. Obviously I should have included more detail in my original post but in the subsequent ones I have made it quite clear that there was a pre-operative scan, no pups were seen but an abnormality was and the owner was fully informed before the surgery went ahead. My point was about breeders scanning, which is not something I have come across before, don't feel particularly comfortable with and was posting to gain views on this from my colleagues.

Re: 'Breeders' doing ultrasounds??

Gillian Mostyn — Fri, 10 Feb 2012 10:30:54 GMT

[quote user="argyro koukouseli"]even if no u/s available,no x-ray available,no relaxin test available,no experience in palpating abdomen.one can use his eyes,and take a look at the breasts or use his ears and a stethoscope to hear any heart beat comming from the abdomen as we are talking about bitches close to giving birth. [/quote]

I think you are missing the point of what the majority of posters are saying. There is every chance that this VS was wrong or negligent. However, without hearing both sides of the story no one is happy to condemn a colleague. You show them the same courtesy you would want them to show you.

Re: 'Breeders' doing ultrasounds??

Simon Neuhoff — Fri, 10 Feb 2012 10:29:11 GMT

I agree in general Gerry but as you say "everyone has done something a bit daft" and it is very easy to be critical after the fact, when you weren't there and over an internet forum! So a measured approach is best I feel. Especially if people are asking for advice - because if the advice-askers keep getting jumped on they will stop coming here for advice.

Re: 'Breeders' doing ultrasounds??

Gerry Henry — Fri, 10 Feb 2012 10:24:51 GMT

[quote user="Neil Wheadon"]

With respect a lot on this forum is something akin to this. Vets post things and others suggest they will be sued, mis-diagnosed etc etc. The effect it will have is that nothing of interest will be posted, it will be bland bland bland!!

Maybe the vet should have checked and in fact did, but in a 5 line post (does anyone ever read the long rambling posts) the full story never comes across.

I had a case OOH a while ago where the member practice vet sent an empty dog across for a caesar. I checked/X-Rayed and didn't do it, but wouldn't blame him/her - these things happen

Neil

[/quote]

Hell of a difference between a member practice and a breeder. I'd trust the findings of a lay sheep scanner over my own every time but a dog breeder, never. I take your point about postings here sometimes being a bit censorious but if someone had done something a bit daft (and who hasn't) and his/her more experienced peers don't take him/her aside, metaphorically, for a quiet word then his/her more experienced peers have failed said VS.

Re: 'Breeders' doing ultrasounds??

argyro koukouseli — Thu, 09 Feb 2012 17:28:11 GMT

even if no u/s available,no x-ray available,no relaxin test available,no experience in palpating abdomen.one can use his eyes,and take a look at the breasts or use his ears and a stethoscope to hear any heart beat comming from the abdomen as we are talking about bitches close to giving birth.

Re: 'Breeders' doing ultrasounds??

Wren — Thu, 09 Feb 2012 17:03:14 GMT

It's not really relevant to this case but with regads to lay scanners we're in mixed practice in a rural area and quite often see farm dogs who have been scanned by the sheep/pig scanner-man. They can count the number of puppies (which obviously we NEVER do) with unerring accuracy.

Re: 'Breeders' doing ultrasounds??

Clive Ansell — Thu, 09 Feb 2012 16:56:18 GMT

Not sure if it is nationwide/charity wide policy, or just a decision at branch level?? 2 petaid practices where I work also compulsorily spey,but I'm not sure if this is PDSA or just practice policy?

Re: 'Breeders' doing ultrasounds??

Cat Henstridge — Thu, 09 Feb 2012 15:52:20 GMT

[quote user="Clive Ansell"]It is frustrating I know, but I feel it is something the profession needs to be more proactive with; "If we do a c-section, you dog will be speyed". It is somewhat of a nonsense that as a profession we can bleat on about animal welfare, yet be seen to condone and almost be complicit in the breeding of hideously deformed dogs.[/quote]

I agree completely!

[quote user="Clive Ansell"]I thought the larger charities did? last time I worked at an RSPCA and a PDSA clinic they were both only agreeing to c-section if speyed at the same time. [/quote]

I wasn't aware of this but it is a while since I have worked for any of them. If so, good for them! It is about time!

Re: 'Breeders' doing ultrasounds??

Clive Ansell — Thu, 09 Feb 2012 15:47:34 GMT

[quote user="Cat Henstridge"]

[quote user="Clive Ansell"]Shame the thing wasn't speyed [/quote]

I quite agree! But without the owner's permission, what can you do? I wish at least the charities would make a stand and insist on a spay with every caesar!

[/quote]

It is frustrating I know, but I feel it is something the profession needs to be more proactive with; "If we do a c-section, you dog will be speyed". It is somewhat of a nonsense that as a profession we can bleat on about animal welfare, yet be seen to condone and almost be complicit in the breeding of hideously deformed dogs.

I thought the larger charities did? last time I worked at an RSPCA and a PDSA clinic they were both only agreeing to c-section if speyed at the same time.

Re: 'Breeders' doing ultrasounds??

Hannah Wynne Richards — Thu, 09 Feb 2012 15:44:29 GMT

Unless this was an OOH clinic and no way of contacting the registered surgeon, this is a case where a lot of embarrassement could have been saved by strict application of the Gto PC and insisting on contacting previous surgeon-when alarm bells should have rung due to absence of scan on notes

Wynne

Re: 'Breeders' doing ultrasounds??

Cat Henstridge — Thu, 09 Feb 2012 15:36:42 GMT

[quote user="Clive Ansell"]Shame the thing wasn't speyed [/quote]

I quite agree! But without the owner's permission, what can you do? I wish at least the charities would make a stand and insist on a spay with every caesar!

Re: 'Breeders' doing ultrasounds??

Clive Ansell — Thu, 09 Feb 2012 15:28:18 GMT

[quote user="Neil Wheadon"]

I had a case OOH a while ago where the member practice vet sent an empty dog across for a caesar. I checked/X-Rayed and didn't do it, but wouldn't blame him/her - these things happen

[/quote]

True enough, but in the hypothetical scenario of being sued (some breeders' are the type that would sue their own mothers) for negligence and/or the cost for trying to C-section a non pregnant bitch, I don't think "these things happen" would be adequate defence?

As the VS, buck stops with you every time, it is your arse on the line, keep it covered!

Re: 'Breeders' doing ultrasounds??

Clive Ansell — Thu, 09 Feb 2012 15:19:38 GMT

I have heard of Breeders' scanning bitches, but I have never personally encountered a case where this has happened. If I did I would totally disregard their "findings" and advise another scan if indicated.

Shame the thing wasn't speyed

Re: 'Breeders' doing ultrasounds??

Cat Henstridge — Thu, 09 Feb 2012 15:14:47 GMT

Thankyou Neil.

My colleague did discuss all the options with the owner and informed them she couldn't see a pregnancy but was worried, because of the abnormality she did see, that she was concerned about a possible abortion or other issues. Nothing was found on ex lap and she freely admits she isn't the best scanner in the world, butt he owner was very keen to go ahead (from what I understand, I wasn't there that day, he was still convinced that there were pups), was happy in the end that we did and the bitch is recovering well but, sadly, still has her uterus ready for next time!

The issue I was raising was not with the surgery, which was done professionally and with all parties fully informed, but with the fact a breeder had scanned the dog and made such an incorrect assumption. I have never heard of a breeder scanning their own, or anyone else's, bitches before and I was wondering if this was a common practice and what other peoples opinions, on this point, were

Re: 'Breeders' doing ultrasounds??

Neil Wheadon — Thu, 09 Feb 2012 14:59:05 GMT

Maybe the vet should have checked and in fact did, but in a 5 line post (does anyone ever read the long rambling posts) the full story never comes across.

I had a case OOH a while ago where the member practice vet sent an empty dog across for a caesar. I checked/X-Rayed and didn't do it, but wouldn't blame him/her - these things happen

Neil

Re: 'Breeders' doing ultrasounds??

Mark Hedberg — Thu, 09 Feb 2012 14:45:47 GMT

I put a dog to sleep with a raging pyometra; mucosa was the ugliest, toxic color I'd ever seen, dog had a fever of 43, collapsed, panting. Dog was mated 2 months before; O had insisted on breeding the dog despite well documented warnings by multiple vets at my old practice that this dog was a very high risk to breed, due to multiple missed heats and false pregnancies. She claimed her breeder friend had ultrasound scanned the dog a week before and "everything was fine".

I tell the owner we'll ultrasound again, got out our ultrasound, and the nurse started shaving the abdomen so I could have a peek. Owner looks confused, asks what nurse is doing.

"Shaving the hair so we can do an ultrasound," was the answer.

"Oh, [breeder friend] never needed to shave her!" (Makes you wonder what the breeder did at all!)

(shortcut to end - pts due to bad prognosis and no finance, but mainly because the dog didn't have a chance.)

One of the few cases that really made me mad...I mean, we tried our honest best to get her to listen and she refused. Depressing.

Re: 'Breeders' doing ultrasounds??

Clive Ansell — Thu, 09 Feb 2012 14:35:01 GMT

[quote user="Gerry Henry"]

Sorry, VS 100% to blame here. Operating on the say so of a lay diagnosis is not only v foolish, in this crazy, counter-intuitive and litigious world, probably actionable.

[/quote]

Agree entirely. The responsibility begins and ends with the VS, the professional in charge. Firstly, I don't think we should be doing elective C-sections on Bulldogs; secondly, if we do them we should at least confirm pregnancy by palpation. ballotment or US scan; thirdly, get the client to sign a disclaimer in the event of non or too early pregnancy and/or non viable foetuses; and finally compulsory speying at the time of surgery.

PS: I hope the Bulldog in the OP was speyed at surgery?

Re: 'Breeders' doing ultrasounds??

Gerry Henry — Thu, 09 Feb 2012 14:23:03 GMT

Sorry, VS 100% to blame here. Operating on the say so of a lay diagnosis is not only v foolish, in this crazy, counter-intuitive and litigious world, probably actionable.

Re: 'Breeders' doing ultrasounds??

Cat Henstridge — Thu, 09 Feb 2012 12:56:54 GMT

[quote user="Gillian Mostyn"]I have to say that in this case I don't fell it was the breeder or owner that was at fault! If the veterinary history of the dog had been asked for and received, the facts would have been known from the start.[/quote]

To be fair, she did discuss the fact the bitch didn't look pregnant and did do a scan before the surgery. She didn't see any pups but did see a fluid filled mass that concerned her which is why she operated (sorry I didn't include this before, I didn't want to confuse things). So, it wasn't much of a surprise there were no pups but the fact the uterus was so inactive really pointed towards the fact that the previous scan was highly unlikely to be right.

I posted more to see if this was something other people had come across and what the general feelings were, I don't approve but I rarely approve of anything 'breeders' do or advise !

Re: 'Breeders' doing ultrasounds??

bob lehner — Thu, 09 Feb 2012 12:53:43 GMT

Might have been wise to apply a u/s probe for 5 seconds prior to doing a caesar ? ( or even x-ray if no u/s available)

Re: 'Breeders' doing ultrasounds??

Gillian Mostyn — Thu, 09 Feb 2012 12:50:13 GMT

I have to say that in this case I don't fell it was the breeder or owner that was at fault! If the veterinary history of the dog had been asked for and received, the facts would have been known from the start.

I don't see any harm in anyone wielding an ultrasound probe - they are unlikely to do any harm. Many mothers have their own doppler to check for foetal heart beats. However, that doesn't mean to say I will attach any significance to their findings.