Large Animal Medicine for Veterinary Technicians

2022 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Large Animal ◽  
Animal Medicine ◽  
Veterinary Technicians

scholarly journals Modification of empirical antimicrobial regimens in large animal medicine

2020 ◽  
Vol 187 (9) ◽  
pp. e78-e78
Author(s):  
Laurel Redding ◽  
Haley Grunwald ◽  
Stephen Cole ◽  
Shelley Rankin ◽  
Rose Nolen-Walston
Keyword(s):  
Disease Prevention ◽  
Multinomial Logistic Regression ◽  
Care Service ◽  
Empirical Therapy ◽  
Antimicrobial Use ◽  
Large Animal ◽  
Disease Treatment ◽  
Factors Associated ◽  
Lengths Of Stay ◽  
Animal Medicine

BackgroundEmpirical antimicrobial regimens can be modified following new diagnostic information or when empirical treatment fails. Little is known about the frequency or clinical context in which these modifications occur. We characterised these modifications in a large animal hospital to identify when antimicrobial use could be optimised.MethodsChart reviews were performed for all inpatients and outpatients administered antimicrobials at a large animal veterinary referral and teaching hospital in 2017–2018 (n=1163 visits) to determine when and why empirical regimens were modified. Multinomial logistic regression was performed to identify factors associated with reasons for modification.ResultsEmpirical antimicrobial regimens were modified in 17.3 per cent of visits. The main reasons were parenteral-oral conversions in horses and failure of disease prevention or treatment in ruminants. Empirical therapy for disease prevention was more likely to be modified because of complications in ruminants and in animals on the emergency/critical care service. Empirical therapy for disease treatment was more often modified for reasons other than de-escalation in ruminants and in animals with longer lengths of stay.ConclusionsEmpirical antimicrobial regimens were modified infrequently and mostly for purposes of parenteral-oral conversion in horses and lack of response in ruminants. De-escalation of antimicrobials administered for disease treatment, when guided by diagnostics, is a major tenet of judicious antimicrobial use. However, more research is needed to determine when and how antimicrobial regimens administered for disease prevention should be modified.

Role of Lung Surfactant in Respiratory Disease: Current Knowledge in Large Animal Medicine

2009 ◽  
Vol 23 (2) ◽  
pp. 227-242 ◽  
Author(s):  
U. Christmann ◽  
V.A. Buechner-Maxwell ◽  
S.G. Witonsky ◽  
R.D. Hite
Keyword(s):  
Respiratory Disease ◽  
Current Knowledge ◽  
Lung Surfactant ◽  
Large Animal ◽  
Animal Medicine

Use of a Non-traditional University Ambulatory Practice to Teach Large Animal Medicine

2004 ◽  
Vol 31 (4) ◽  
pp. 380-383 ◽  
Author(s):  
Margaret A. Masterson ◽  
Bimbo Welker ◽  
Lowell T. Midla ◽  
Richard W. Meiring ◽  
Kent H. Hoblet
Keyword(s):  
Large Animal ◽  
Animal Medicine ◽  
Ambulatory Practice

Large animal medicine

2017 ◽  
Vol 180 (6) ◽  
pp. 152.1-152
Author(s):  
Mike Evans
Keyword(s):  
Large Animal ◽  
Animal Medicine

Gamification as a tool to engage the next generation of vets with large animal medicine

2021 ◽  
Vol 188 (10) ◽  
pp. 388-390
Author(s):  
Maarten Oosterlinck ◽  
Annelies Decloedt
Keyword(s):  
Large Animal ◽  
Next Generation ◽  
Animal Medicine

scholarly journals Cognitive Dissonance in Laboratory Animal Medicine and Implications for Animal Welfare

2020 ◽  
Vol 59 (2) ◽  
pp. 132-138
Author(s):  
Robyn M Engel ◽  
Carrie C Silver ◽  
Christin L Veeder ◽  
Ron E Banks
Keyword(s):  
Animal Welfare ◽  
Cognitive Dissonance ◽  
Laboratory Animal ◽  
Compensation Mechanism ◽  
Positive Effects ◽  
Compensation Mechanisms ◽  
Animal Medicine ◽  
Animal Use ◽  
Veterinary Technicians ◽  
Emotional Distancing

People experience cognitive dissonance when they entertain 2 conflicting ideas at the same time. Cognitive dissonance may cause a negative emotional state, which can lead to engagement of compensation mechanisms to resolve the conflict. Here we describe a survey that explores cognitive dissonance in laboratory animal veterinarians and veterinary technicians and various ways in which veterinary staff manage dissonance associated with research animal use. Respondents—164 veterinarians and 145 veterinary technicians—were asked to rate their opinions of various statements on a sliding scale of 'strongly disagree' to 'strongly agree' or 'never' to 'always.' Statements assessed negative emotions (discomfort, powerlessness, frustration) and compensation mechanisms (devaluing, emotional distancing, shifting responsibility) as bases for inferring effects on welfare states of animals. Responses were evaluated overall and were compared according to level of training (veterinarian compared with veterinary technician), years of work experience (0 to 5, 6 to 10, greater than 10), and species tended (large, mixed, small species). Respondents strongly agreed that animal wellbeing and animal use in research were important. Respondents reported feelings of discomfort, powerlessness, and frustration associated with work. In addition, respondents reported feeling empowered to initiate changes affecting animal welfare. The most frequent compensation mechanism noted was shifting responsibility onto the IACUC and institutional rules. Devaluing the animals was another reported compensation mechanism. Responses to emotional distancing statements were divided. Survey responses supported the existence of cognitive dissonance associated with laboratory animal medicine. Potential negative and positive effects on animal welfare are discussed.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document