A few thoughts on workplace safety.

In an industry known for its workplace hazards, such as the management and manipulation of animals that could bite, kick or cause considerable damage simply because of their size, combined with long working hours, lifting of heavy loads and the general mental stress, it is perhaps surprising that the veterinary industry is not also known for its safety culture and structures. One would expect that where such hazards and risks have been identified, there would be many and varied levels of education on risk and hazard management, a comprehensive set of tools with which to mitigate these risks as well as discussion and debriefing of significant adverse events to ensure they do not occur again. One would also assume that there would be a strong sense of safety culture in the workplace and that personnel would expect each other to ensure that the health and safety of themselves and their colleagues was a number one priority. Yet, is this the case in the veterinary industry? A request was made by the Association of Veterinary Anaesthetists (AVA) to provide 'safety guidelines' for use in general practice, particularly pertaining to pregnancy. The AVA set up a task force to address these concerns and to determine if guidelines could be created. This article is offered as a starting point for considering safety in the veterinary industry in a broad sense, with the hope that in the future there may be development of such guidelines. It is hoped that this article also provides the stimulus for further research in this area.

An incredible journey: my struggles with education led to a new approach to CPD.

Having dyslexia and no formal qualifications proved to be no barrier to Toby Trimble, who not only succeeded at vet school but now runs his own company making engaging and relevant content for vets.

A Survey-Based Study Into the Use of Peripheral Nerve Blocks for Pelvic Limb Surgery Among Veterinary Professionals With an Interest in Anesthesia.

Peripheral nerve blocks are commonly recommended as perioperative analgesia for orthopedic procedures. We aimed to determine the prevalence of use of techniques and drugs among veterinary professionals with an interest in anesthesia. Veterinary professionals were contacted via an email (ACVA-list) and newsletter (Association of Veterinary Anesthetists) containing a link to an online survey. Surveys completed in full were used for analysis. Analysis found that peripheral nerve blocks (PNBs) and epidural analgesia techniques were the preferred techniques of 46% and 38% of individuals, respectively. Of those using PNBs, nerve stimulator techniques were most common, used by 72% of individuals. Bupivacaine was used by 71% of individuals. Adjuvants were used by 37% of respondents; most commonly an alpha-2 agonist. Severe adverse effects were reported by 11 respondents, while 49% of individuals had not witnessed any adverse effects. More experienced veterinary anesthetists (>100 blocks performed) were more likely to have seen adverse effects. In conclusion, PNBs are utilized by anesthetists for pelvic limb orthopedic surgery, with nerve stimulation being the most commonly used PNB technique. Bupivacaine was the most commonly used local anesthetic however, diversity in both the techniques and drugs used was evident among respondents.

Comparison of sedation in dogs: methadone or butorphanol in combination with dexmedetomidine intravenously.

OBJECTIVE: Opioids can be combined with alpha-2-adrenoreceptor agonists to sedate dogs for radiography. The study investigated the sedative effects of methadone or butorphanol in combination with dexmedetomidine in dogs undergoing stifle radiography. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective, blinded, randomized, clinical trial. ANIMALS: A total of 52 healthy dogs requiring sedation for stifle radiography were enrolled. METHODS: Dogs were assessed for body condition [body condition score (BCS)], temperament and pain using the short-form composite measure pain scale (CMPS-SF). Dogs were randomized to be administered methadone 0.2 mg kg-1 (group M) or butorphanol 0.2 mg kg-1 (group B) in combination with dexmedetomidine 2 µg kg-1 intravenously (IV). Sedation was assessed using a numerical descriptive score, from 0 (no sedation) to 11 (greatest sedation), before administration and at 5, 10, 15 and 20 minutes by one blinded assessor. Onset signs of sedation, pulse rate and respiratory rates were recorded. Positioning for radiography was attempted at 5 minutes. If positioning was not possible at 10 minutes, dexmedetomidine 2 µg kg-1 was administered IV, with the dog recorded as failed sedation and withdrawn from further analysis. Following normality testing, data were assessed using Student t test, Mann-Whitney test, two-way analysis of variance and Fisher's exact test for failed sedations. Results are reported as mean ± standard deviation. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05. RESULTS: Groups were similar for sex, age, weight, BCS, temperament and CMPS-SF. The onset of sedation was faster in group B than in group M (p = 0.048). Sedation scores were higher in group B at 10 minutes compared to group M (p = 0.003). Failed sedation occurred in 12 dogs in group M and two in group B (p = 0.002). Pulse rates were lower in group B at 5 and 10 minutes (p = 0.002). CONCLUSION AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: IV butorphanol provides more effective sedation at 10 minutes than methadone, in combination with dexmedetomidine.

Comparison of intramuscular butorphanol and buprenorphine combined with dexmedetomidine for sedation in cats.

Objectives The objective of this study was to compare the sedative effect of butorphanol-dexmedetomidine with buprenorphine-dexmedetomidine following intramuscular (IM) administration in cats. Methods Using a prospective, randomised, blinded design, 40 client-owned adult cats were assigned to receive IM dexmedetomidine (10 µg/kg) combined with either butorphanol (0.4 mg/kg) ('BUT' group) or buprenorphine (20 µg/kg) ('BUP' group). Sedation was scored using a previously published multidimensional composite scale before administration (T0) and 5, 10, 15 and 20 mins afterwards (T5, T10, T15 and T20, respectively). Alfaxalone (1.5 mg/kg) was administered IM at T20 if the cat was not deemed adequately sedated to place an intravenous catheter. Adverse events were recorded. Friedman two-way ANOVA analysed sedation scores within groups. Mann-Whitney Rank Sum test compared sedation scores between groups; Fisher's exact test analysed the frequency of alfaxalone administration and adverse events. P <0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results Sedation scores between groups were similar at baseline, but at T5, T10, T15 and T20 scores were higher in the BUT group ( P <0.01). Within both groups, sedation scores changed over time and the highest sedation scores were reached at T10. Requirement for additional sedation was similar between groups: two cats in the BUT group and five cats in the BUP group. One cat and 11 cats vomited ( P = 0.002) in the BUT and BUP groups, respectively. No other adverse events were recorded. Conclusions and relevance At these doses, IM buprenorphine-dexmedetomidine provides inferior sedation and a higher incidence of vomiting than butorphanol-dexmedetomidine in cats. Butorphanol-dexmedetomidine may be preferred for feline sedation, especially where vomiting is contraindicated.