Restricted licensing for DVM graduates?

[Caninerepro]

Ok so here is a point to ponder. I myself have no interest in dealing with but one species, but to become boarded in my specialty I have to be competent in canine, equine and LA reproduction. So, were I to want to become a "specialist" under the proposed system I would have to be licensed to practice complete medicine in not one, but three different groups of species, as would the equine, or the bovine focused specialist. That is just silly, why would I want to have to pass three different complete boards? Let us just leave it the way it is. Very few people with a sick cow are going to be dumb enough to take it to a clinic called "Pet Friends Animal Hospital", or whatever, nor is a bovine practitioner going to attempt a TPLO on a Lab. I feel comfortable in my belief that as practitioners we know our limits and stick to them. That is just part of the oath we take, to do no wrong.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[alliecat44]

No, we are not talking about hypotheticals--at least, I wasn't. I was speaking of restricted licensure and you were speaking of requiring residencies for everyone. Two very different things.

You mentioned MDs and the USMLE. I will point out that it's impossible for an MD to switch fields without further training/certification, whereas their national boards are general examinations. So, sure, a more general exam would require review since they've been in a particular field...I'd be willing to bet they'd have no problem passing the sections that focused on their areas of specialty. Or that a LA vet would have a problem passing the LA questions on the NAVLE.

And if you can't answer the questions on the NAVLE (or whatever exam there is) fora particular species, should you be practicing on them? Of course this depends on the type of questions asked, etc etc--but would be very curious to find how relatively simple the relevant portion of the NAVLE would be for someone who had been practicing and keeping up to date in their field.

Self-policing is a slippery slope. To think that everyone ever admitted to veterinary school who ends up graduating is of flawless ethics is unrealistic, to say the least. It's imperfect. There are plenty of examples out there, sad to say. "Maintaining the status quo" isn't a compelling argument, IMHO.

 

[StealthDog]

And if you can't answer the questions on the NAVLE (or whatever exam there is) fora particular species, should you be practicing on them?

Alternately, if you can answer the questions on the NAVLE, does that mean you're truely qualified to practice on them? Our school starts tracking during third year, and I'll take all small animal clinical rotations. I plan on cramming for the large animal portions of boards like most small animal track people do and hope that I do well enough on the small animal portions that I can squeek by with my meager large animal knowledge.

I suppose if you split exams into small/large or something, my individual exam scores would give me away as a small-animal-oriented person...

 

[No Imagination]

You mentioned MDs and the USMLE. I will point out that it's impossible for an MD to switch fields without further training/certification,

I beleive you are wrong here.

You do NOT need to do a residency to practice specific fields of human medicine. Malpractice insurance would be so astronomically high (without residency), no one would ever hire them, or go to them, so in a sense they are self regulated as well..

No, we are not talking about hypotheticals--at least, I wasn't. I was speaking of restricted licensure and you were speaking of requiring residencies for everyone. Two very different things.

Not really. When i said "residencies" I was referring to whatever you would call the extra schooling that was proposed to prepare a vet for their area of interest shift. Residency, internship, externship, whatever - Seeing as it doesn't exist, im referring to it as a hypothetical

So, sure, a more general exam would require review since they've been in a particular field...I'd be willing to bet they'd have no problem passing the sections that focused on their areas of specialty.

If this is the level you are talking about (testing level), wouldn't every vet student take every possible section of this propossed exam as soon as they graduated. So they could be "Certified" to practice in every field they passed that section on? Just like most vet students take as many state exams as they can just in CASE they ever want to practice in that state (least they used to do that)

You can't have it both ways:

Either it is too complicated that a competent vet student can't pass all the sections/specialties of the exam right out of vet school without specialized training...

or

A vet of 20+ years can just put a few months review/study time in to pass it.

 

[alliecat44]

Kai, that's a great point. There are a couple of other specialties for which this would be a problem, too.

No Imagination, four years is four years is four years. I'm not referring to "extra" schooling--rather, maximizing the length of time we're already in school. Unless you're referring to vets who have been practicing for years refreshing their knowledge to pass an exam to switch fields? In which case it still wouldn't be a residency-type program. While I imagine it would be more in-depth than the current corresponding section on the NAVLE, how long it takes someone to study for it later on would be very much up to the individual.

Why is it currently okay for no "refresher" training to be required? And "status quo" is not an answer.

Referring to MDs--I don't believe you can go from, say, cardiology to plastic surgery without additional training. What were you referring to when stating MDs can switch fields with no additional training?

You stated, "Most vets I know who have been practicing for 10 - 15 years probably couldn't pass the NAVLE now." I replied by pointing out that such a vet--let's say a SA vet--could easily pass the SA section of the NAVLE, especially if they've kept current on their journals/CE/etc. However, they WOULD have to study for the LA sections. I think this is an important difference--it highlights that, without further study, it really is questionably responsible to allow veterinarians to switch fields without some form of required competency in this area.

Does anyone have an alternative way of managing the vast changes veterinary medicine has already seen in the past 10-20 years? And what's to come? Although the focus of this thread has turned to the wanting-to-switch-practice-type-later-in-career perspective, I think just as large a concern is how well veterinary school really is preparing us for our future careers. How best to re-organize? I think it's really intriguing.

 

[No Imagination]

What were you referring to when stating MDs can switch fields with no additional training?

Not going to have time to really look into it today. I was told by an MD not long ago while asking him about what exactly different specialties did and how they defined themselves (using what I know and understood about vet specialties), and I was (again, told), that technically, and MD is an MD. While 99.9% of doctors do residencies to switch fields, that is not always the case, and still is not a steadfast rule.

He refered specifically to locations (like PA) where there is a doctor shortage, and EM's became OB's, some OB's became GP's. Especially true in the past.

But I acknowledge that has no bearing on this topic anymore.

Why is it currently okay for no "refresher" training to be required? And "status quo" is not an answer.

I agree with you, I hate the "Status quo" as an answer - but thats not the same as "if its not broken, don't fix it". (you obviously think its broken, so no need for us to debate that unless you want to

What I guess it comes down to, and perhaps my 'residency' was taken from someone else's thread, is I don't see how your suggestion changes anything.

I am a 4th year Vet student. I take the NAVLE, and I take and pass the SA, Equine, LA, LAV, and Platypus sections (after studying my ass off). I work for 15 years in a SA hospital - then I decide to be a Platypus vet. Lucky me, I took and passed that section 15 years ago.

I'm Good to Go.

Whats the difference from our current set up?

Unless you don't think that a vet student would be capable of passing the Platypus section of the NAVLE without taking the Platypus concentration?

 

[sumstorm]

Right now we are ruled by ethics. Not to practice in area's that we are not educated or comfortable to practice in. Sure, there is no law that says a SA vet couldn't perform surgery on a horse, but they don't. Much in the same reason Sumstorms dad doesn't try and rebuild someones corvette (though he could try)

Whats wrong with leaving it that way?

I rebuilt the car my hubby drives (carmengia) with lots of advice from my father. When I was home for Christmas, I asked my father to listen to the engine in my car, because something sounded off. He gave me a rather amused look and reminded me that, in his opinion, my car is deadly silent, and the only thing he ever really hears on it is the water pump kicking in...and when he looks under the hood all he sees is a bunch of boxed compartments. Of course, I drive a Prius.

I do know SA vets who will try surgeries they aren't very familiar with if it is that or death for the animal (often due to the cost of specialists.) Generally they will reference more knowledgeable vets (including the specialists themselves.) I probably know more about safely caponizing chickens then the vast majority of SA vets....and a fair amount of LA vets (especially those that focus on ruminants!)

I just tend to think increasing bureaucracy increases inefficiency; hindering the people who would do things appropriatly and providing credentials for those who would skip the actual skill portions of changing fields. Heck, in our state there are a few individuals practicing vet med that have never had any formal post-secondary schooling and the licencing boards can't seem to do much about them, let alone actual vets changing fields.

 

[sumstorm]

Unless you don't think that a vet student would be capable of passing the Platypus section of the NAVLE without taking the Platypus concentration?

This is the part that doesn't make sense to me. Maybe it would work for vets who only see SA companion animals or a food production vet that doesn't deal with 'alternative' livestock.

For lab vets or exotics vets or zoo vets, there isn't a test that is going to cover every single species they encounter, or all of the information on it. Especially when you consider that these vets may also be dealing with both domestics and exotics.

I assumed with these fields the point of veterinary education was to learn how to do the 'basics' with classes of animals and have a reasonable knowledge of pathologies/treatments/etc AND the ability to do the research necessary to treat the animal OR to connect with the vet who is an expert in Goeldi's marmosets or whale sharks or pottos.

I really can't imagine that the NAVLE (or any other exam) could really cover a)all the species of animals found in zoos b) all the issues all these animals could have c)all the current ongoing research about these animals.

Are there individuals who are going into a single species/field and will never move an inch and will become increasingly specialized experts? OF COURSE! (aren't they called doctors? j/k) but for some people generalization is part of the appeal of vet medicine...hence 'real doctors treat more than one species' and is a necessity for the field they are going in.

So, if we can't agree on the testing, what are you wanting to change about the education? I am not as convinced as you are that there is 10 times as much to learn in vet med than 50 years ago. I think there may be some increase, but that other skills are lost or forgotten or have been shipped out to other extra-field specialists (do they train vets in hand dipping rads anymore?) I would also argue that a lot of the fundamentals of the additional stuff are covered in undergrad..and that different vets from different fields and WITHIN different fields would disagree about what is essential to learn and what could be left in the books.

How does the saying go? If you have a hammer, you see a world of nails?

 

[No Imagination]

From my personal experience, and I can only imagine if this is true for veterinary, but the one thing graduate work has taught me is – What I don’t know and how to go about learning it.

I cannot tell you the details of TCA, Glycolysis, Gluconeogenesis, ect. any more then I could 2 weeks after I first took biochemistry. What I can do, is (re) learn anything even remotely biochem/molecular in nature in a fraction of the time it would take someone else.

Sure, I have a plethora of useless knowledge in my head, but it will probably never be called upon in a moment’s notice to solve any problem, do any task, or illuminate any issue. If someone asks me the correct primary Ab concentration to use in an ELISA, I am going to look it up. Same for everything else I know unless it is what I am doing right now.

Why is being a vet any different?

If I am a good SA vet, when a platypus walks into my clinic, I am not going to shoot him up with dex (even though that will fix the problem, whatever that problem is), instead I am going to look up what I forgot about platypuses, ergh, Platypii, uh, Ornithorhynchidae’s

 

[Fairyblastt]

If I am a good SA vet, when a platypus walks into my clinic, I am not going to shoot him up with dex (even though that will fix the problem, whatever that problem is), instead I am going to look up what I forgot about platypuses, ergh, Platypii, uh, Ornithorhynchidae’s

If I were a good SA vet, I would take awesome pictures of the platypus, and then refer the client to an exotics vet because that's where they need to take their critter. More than likely I would also wonder where in the world they acquired a platypus and why they thought it'd be a great pet.... But I understand what you're saying. Esp. since most exotic vets (except for maybe the one world-reknown expect on the platypus and all its wonderful maladies) would probably have to follow the same steps you listed above in order to treat the critter I just sent them.

 

[sumstorm]

If I were a good SA vet, I would take awesome pictures of the platypus, and then refer the client to an exotics vet because that's where they need to take their critter. More than likely I would also wonder where in the world they acquired a platypus and why they thought it'd be a great pet.... But I understand what you're saying. Esp. since most exotic vets (except for maybe the one world-reknown expect on the platypus and all its wonderful maladies) would probably have to follow the same steps you listed above in order to treat the critter I just sent them.

I actually met a vet at Healesville who was considered an expert in platypus medicine. He was a very interesting character....and I learned to be VERY careful picking up males with those horrid spurs. They are, in general, much smaller than I ever imagined. I even toured the 'Billiton platypusary' in it's infant stages.

 

[Fairyblastt]

That's really neat Sumstorm. Almost as neat as...

platypusary

This word definitely For. The. Win.

 

[alliecat44]

Argh, two exams this week so don't have much time to post. But I did want to make a couple of comments:
1. No Imagination, I think the difference would be planning on going into some field (whether it be LA, or mixed, or exotics, or SA, or SA + exotics, or whatever) and then switching down the line--you wouldn't have passed the platypus exam 15 years ago, because you hadn't taken it. I see what you're saying, though, but I think the initial goal would be focusing education more on what species one is actually dealing with.

2. Regarding zoo/exotic animal medicine--no, a single exam does not exist that covers all the millions of species on this planet--not even the lab animal board certification exams! But IMHO, there would/could/should be more specific training for those who either a) know off the bat they want to make that a large part of their practice; or b) want to add it as a significant portion of their practice later on. Too many people don't know what the hell they're doing with exotics. Perhaps the practice act would allow for emergency treatment/stabilization of species not covered by your license? I don't really know the logistics--for the millionth time!

3. Regarding the whole "increasing beurocracy" argument--again, I think this is relatively naive and uninformed. This is the same thing as assuming a) the status quo doesn't need to be changed because it IS the status quo (a logical fallacy) and b) assuming everyone who graduates from vet school is of impeccable ethics, judgement, etc (which we all know is not the case).

4. Until you actually experience the veterinary curriculum, please do not assume you know what is taught. Yes, we are taught about hand-dipping rads. We are taught about technique adjustments, artifacts, radiation physics, how to store film and how to maintain the equipment--even even though a well-trained technician should be able to do this for us, and even with the increasing popularity of DR/CR, we have to know the traditional ways, too. Trust me when I say there is a VAST amount of information. Scientific knowledge does not follow the laws of thermodynamics--well, perhaps it does, because the knowledge is there and it is its DISCOVERY that changes. However, do not assume that the ratio of new stuff gained = old stuff "lost"/given up. You will soon find out that that is not the case...again, when you're in vet school (especially when you begin with more applied coursework in the second year), just think about how much of what you are learning--and how much detail about it--was known fifty years ago. Just consider, oh, diabetic ketoacidosis. Or a displaced abomasum. We might have known ABOUT it fifty years ago--but all of the nuances of electrolyte changes and acid/base balance/blood gas disturbance/etc etc certainly weren't elucidated. We didn't even have equipment to detect this stuff, let alone analyze/interpret/implement a treatment plan with modalities that were completely unavailable and unheard of 50 years ago.

What am I wanting to change about veterinary education? Let's make it more focused and more relevant. Let's facilitate the best possible care for our patients, giving our students more exposure to relevant coursework for their future patients (both lecture and clinical). Let's try to have some consistency in training for veterinarians switching/adding areas of treatment down the road to better maintain quality of care. This doesn't have to mean more expense, for either the client or the veterinarian--quality of care does not equate to "buying expensive toys." It means being aware of what is now treatable (that wasn't treatable ten years ago) and giving the clients the option. Of what drugs are out of favor for certain conditions (such as steroids for shock--which many thousands of vets are still using, even though they've been out of favor for about ten years). Think beyond the details of the logistical implementation and think outside the box--that's all I'm saying.

Not going to try to defend/predict the details of logistics any more...but I can tell you my opinion on veterinary education has certainly changed since I have become a student.

(And just because I KNOW it's going to come up: I have ten years of experience in specialty medicine as a technician, have worked with dozens of specialists and have helped train over 40 interns/new graduates. I have worked in our school's ICU, teaching fourth year students, for the past year and a half. I have extensive experience with veterinary students, new graduates, general practitioners, and specialists. My perspective on veterinary education has STILL changed since I myself became a student. )

 

[sumstorm]

What am I wanting to change about veterinary education? Let's make it more focused and more relevant. Let's facilitate the best possible care for our patients, giving our students more exposure to relevant coursework for their future patients (both lecture and clinical). Let's try to have some consistency in training for veterinarians switching/adding areas of treatment down the road to better maintain quality of care. This doesn't have to mean more expense, for either the client or the veterinarian--quality of care does not equate to "buying expensive toys." It means being aware of what is now treatable (that wasn't treatable ten years ago) and giving the clients the option. Of what drugs are out of favor for certain conditions (such as steroids for shock--which many thousands of vets are still using, even though they've been out of favor for about ten years). Think beyond the details of the logistical implementation and think outside the box--that's all I'm saying.

First, I actually ASKED if vets learn how to hand dip rads, I didn't assume (they don't at every school...or at least our 2 associate vets never learned it.) I already acknowledged my opinion may change (but notice several vet students on here have similar opinions to mine...so apparently vet school =/= belief in limited licensing.) I also didn't say that I think everything has replaced on a 1:1 basis, but that I am not certain that lack of diagnostics (that now have to be learned) made vet med easier to learn. I could always be terribly wrong....it hasn't been that long that vets have been licensed at all.

Second, I still don't see how the education would be reduced for those in zoo med or lab med. What would you cut out of the curriculem?

So, since you say it is about being aware of current treatments (including drug availability and usability) would you also support retesting in the field for vets who have been out of school for X years to continue practicing? Penalties for those who don't update thier techniques?

BTW-those aren't asked as challenges...just out of general curiosity.

Oh, and I stand by my bureaucracy statement....increasing bureaucracy nearly always increases costs and inefficiency. The more stuff has to be handled (reviewed, applied, administered) the more work hours it takes, the more hands are involved, and generally the longer it takes. Someone somewhere has to pay for those work hours.

Again, all said in a light, random curiosity air. Hard to convey that in text, so figured I would just say it!

It means being aware of what is now treatable (that wasn't treatable ten years ago) and giving the clients the option. Of what drugs are out of favor for certain conditions (such as steroids for shock--which many thousands of vets are still using, even though they've been out of favor for about ten years). Think beyond the details of the logistical implementation and think outside the box--that's all I'm saying.

 

[ratbandit]

I am not as convinced as you are that there is 10 times as much to learn in vet med than 50 years ago. I think there may be some increase, but that other skills are lost or forgotten or have been shipped out to other extra-field specialists (do they train vets in hand dipping rads anymore?)

I think your opinion on this will change! I had a conversation with an admin at our school about how hard it is getting to squeeze in all this info into just 4 years with all the advances in medicine and the expectation that we keep up.

I think I'm in the Alliecat boat on this debate. I "get" the arguments against restricted liscencing, I just think that its going to be necessary with the amount of knowledge we're expected to have. I am also the type of person who thinks that liberal arts is the biggest waste of time/money ever so I guess my viewpoint is a little extreme anyways.

 

[sumstorm]

I am also the type of person who thinks that liberal arts is the biggest waste of time/money ever so I guess my viewpoint is a little extreme anyways.

As I said many times, part of my opinion is likely due to my Renaissance Woman nature....I am a generalist and a firm believer in the value of a liberal arts education I attended a lib arts school

 

[alliecat44]

As I said many times, part of my opinion is likely due to my Renaissance Woman nature....I am a generalist and a firm believer in the value of a liberal arts education I attended a lib arts school

I highly value the liberal arts as well (and completed a double-major in philosophy and a four-year long professional acting program). So it's possible for a Renaissance woman to believe in limited licensure.

Edit: Thanks, ratbandit! Absolutely no offense meant--just wanted to point out that different personalities can still lead to the same conclusion.

 

[alliecat44]

First, I actually ASKED if vets learn how to hand dip rads, I didn't assume (they don't at every school...or at least our 2 associate vets never learned it.) I already acknowledged my opinion may change (but notice several vet students on here have similar opinions to mine...so apparently vet school =/= belief in limited licensing.) I also didn't say that I think everything has replaced on a 1:1 basis, but that I am not certain that lack of diagnostics (that now have to be learned) made vet med easier to learn. I could always be terribly wrong....it hasn't been that long that vets have been licensed at all.

Second, I still don't see how the education would be reduced for those in zoo med or lab med. What would you cut out of the curriculem?

So, since you say it is about being aware of current treatments (including drug availability and usability) would you also support retesting in the field for vets who have been out of school for X years to continue practicing? Penalties for those who don't update thier techniques?

BTW-those aren't asked as challenges...just out of general curiosity.

Oh, and I stand by my bureaucracy statement....increasing bureaucracy nearly always increases costs and inefficiency. The more stuff has to be handled (reviewed, applied, administered) the more work hours it takes, the more hands are involved, and generally the longer it takes. Someone somewhere has to pay for those work hours.

Again, all said in a light, random curiosity air. Hard to convey that in text, so figured I would just say it!

I am inclined to think that the associate vets at your practice DID learn about hand-dipping films--they just forgot it. And then forgot that they had learned it. This is typical of vet school. After all, you get 5-10 minutes on something, tested over it, and it's forgotten.

Not going to get into logistics any more, as I said. A group of people much more expert than I would design the exotics/zoo/lab animal curriculum.

In an ideal world, yes, some sort of periodic assessment would be great. However, this is extremely unlikely to happen. Right now, the CE system/requirements are meant to keep folks up to date--but that system is pretty flawed, IMHO (see some of my comments above). It needs to be better-regulated (despite the fears of beaurocracy).

 

[Caninerepro]

Just a question. If you want a specialist, should you not go to a specialist? What is wrong with having available a GP who knows a little about a lot of different things? Is that not what a GP is for? If you do not want to pay/choose to not employ the expertise of the absolute best in a given field you get what you pay for. There is nothing wrong with that from either side. Why does everyone here expect every vet encountered to be at the top of the field in each and every minuscule minutia of practice that is theoretically possible?

 

[alliecat44]

Just a question. If you want a specialist, should you not go to a specialist? What is wrong with having available a GP who knows a little about a lot of different things? Is that not what a GP is for? If you do not want to pay/choose to not employ the expertise of the absolute best in a given field you get what you pay for. There is nothing wrong with that from either side. Why does everyone here expect every vet encountered to be at the top of the field in each and every minuscule minutia of practice that is theoretically possible?

Define "specialist." Is a cat/dog GP a "specialist"? Is a large animal veterinarian a "specialist"? Is an equine veterinarian a "specialist"? Why are you assuming that improving depth of knowledge constitutes specialization? This seems to be a common misunderstanding in this conversation. Perhaps you're assuming that veterinary school teaches you "all you need to know" to be a good GP? Will be interesting to see if your views change once you're in school.

 

[ratbandit]

I highly value the liberal arts as well (and completed a double-major in philosophy and a four-year long professional acting program). So it's possible for a Renaissance woman to believe in limited licensure.

Edit: Thanks, ratbandit! Absolutely no offense meant--just wanted to point out that different personalities can still lead to the same conclusion.

Haha, none taken, I think my opinion is the minority anyways when it comes to liberal arts.

 

[No Imagination]

Im bit tired of the...

Will be interesting to see if your views change once you're in school.

argument. This is the pre-vet forum, so of course a lot of pre-vets are going to comment. While your position as a current student certainly offers you a different perspective, just like you said yourself, you would not be qualified to lay out the details, you are still able to give your opinion.

I will go so far as to say, that I am a specialist... in Biochemistry. Yet I don't expect my voice to carry any more weight then anyone else here, unless its an argument about biochemistry.

Define "specialist."

An improved depth (and proof in the form of certification) of knowledge in an area is pretty much the definition of a specialist

Is a cat/dog GP a "specialist"?

No

Is a large animal veterinarian a "specialist"?

No

Is an equine veterinarian a "specialist"?

Yes

Why are you assuming that improving depth of knowledge constitutes specialization?

Because that is pretty much the definition

 

[Caninerepro]

Define "specialist." Is a cat/dog GP a "specialist"? Is a large animal veterinarian a "specialist"? Is an equine veterinarian a "specialist"? Why are you assuming that improving depth of knowledge constitutes specialization? This seems to be a common misunderstanding in this conversation. Perhaps you're assuming that veterinary school teaches you "all you need to know" to be a good GP? Will be interesting to see if your views change once you're in school.

As a grad student already, and with my former experience in "the real world" I stand by my assertions. Yes, if you chose to go to the public health clinic you get what you pay for. If you are only willing to spend $200.00 what more can you expect? How are these practitioners wrong for attempting to provide relief for the masses?

 

[alliecat44]

This is the pre-vet forum, so of course a lot of pre-vets are going to comment. While your position as a current student certainly offers you a different perspective, just like you said yourself, you would not be qualified to lay out the details, you are still able to give your opinion.

Absolutely agree--I was merely making an observation and also trying to point out the reasons for why my own perspective changed between pre-vet and vet school. It's not an "argument" per se.

If you define a specialist as treating one species--because you said that an equine vet would be a specialist--then that is a different definition of the word than in the veterinary community. (You are not allowed to market yourself as a specialist unless you are board-certified in a specialty.) Which is why I asked for a definition of terms.

 

[No Imagination]

If you define a specialist as treating one species--because you said that an equine vet would be a specialist--then that is a different definition of the word than in the veterinary community.

No, I said Equine was a specialist because it is a specialist (I thought?!). Isn't there a board certification in Equine Medicine? That is the only reason I said "yes". Why equine and not Dogs, is a question for the AVMA and KY lobbiest's I imagine.

God, i hope I right about their being an equine board cert now

 

[alliecat44]

No, I said Equine was a specialist because it is a specialist (I thought?!). Isn't there a board certification in Equine Medicine? That is the only reason I said "yes". Why equine and not Dogs, is a question for the AVMA and KY lobbiest's I imagine.

God, i hope I right about their being an equine board cert now

Unless they go through the ABVP, there is not. Most equine pracitioners are not certified by the ABVP (this is a special residency program). Here is a link to specialty websites:
http://www.avma.org/education/abvs/specialty_orgs/default.asp

You can become an equine vet at any point in your career--just as you can become a large animal vet, a small animal vet, a swine vet, a public health vet, etc at any point.

 

[No Imagination]

Good call. Thanks for the heads up I have no idea why, but I was always under the impression that Equine was a board cert (and I always thought it was odd - I mean why Equine and not cows)

BTW, I still need a damn avatar. Wish I had a pet ATM

 

[alliecat44]

Mine's my "nephew" (aka my brother's dog). I love love my cat, but am also looking forward to when I can have my own dog, too! Hope you get a critter of your own soon.

 

[No Imagination]

Gonna get the closest thing to a full bred German Shep (mix) I can rescue soon as I am comfortable in vet school (if that happens). Told myself i would get one and a new apt. soon as I got accepted. Now I am thinking it should wait until at least Christmas when I have a better understanding of my time constraints.

 

[laurafinn]

I'm going to agree with alliecat on this one. I would be in favor of two general, comparative years, then years 3-4 in a companion animal, mixed animal, large animal, equine or other track (lab, zoo, wildlife, poultry, swine, self-directed, etc). The vet schools would still be graduating GP's, albeit those whose practices may be limited by species or type.

I feel like there is a huge difference between companion animal, production animal and equine medicine at this point. Not so much in the physiology, although that's there and really, I have 12 lectures on herd health in farmed red deer this year, and don't think I don't resent every one of them. But... where was I? But the mindsets and goals of clients in companion vs. production vs. equine are completely different. A charming but rusty former LA vet who switches to SA might just think "Well, it's just a pet dog, not worth much" and not make the transition into thinking that an individual animal is really worth quite a lot of bother.

I'm also in favor of mandatory CE and refresher exams -- nothing as intense as the NAVLE, but definitely something including anesthesia, analgesia, antibiotic (ab)use, emerging diseases and approaches to common conditions -- at least every 10 years.

I think the intern year is increasingly being regarded as a necessary, fifth year of vet school, and I think this is really unfortunate. Vet school costs too much already in the face of relatively low vet salaries.

 

[sumstorm]

I'm going to agree with alliecat on this one. I would be in favor of two general, comparative years, then years 3-4 in a companion animal, mixed animal, large animal, equine or other track (lab, zoo, wildlife, poultry, swine, self-directed, etc). The vet schools would still be graduating GP's, albeit those whose practices may be limited by species or type.

I think the intern year is increasingly being regarded as a necessary, fifth year of vet school, and I think this is really unfortunate. Vet school costs too much already in the face of relatively low vet salaries.

I am confused...aren't you advocating for 5-6 years of vet school in the top paragraph, then saying the internship (as a replacement for the 5th year) isn't good due to extra costs?

I think all fields tend to have some animals that are more valuable than others. An ewe with incredible wool quality and great production along with regularly production of twins was treated with greater care than one with good wool quality, good production, and produces singletons. Some people value the pet dog more than anything....others thing of a pet dog as an accessory. In zoo meds, the expensive and/or endangered animals are a higher priority than the guinea hens or peafowl.

I just feel the higher quality vets will review what they need whether or not there is a gated system....while the poorer quality vets will still slip by using the same tools that it sounds like some vet students are using: memorize and forget.

I did ask our associates, and they insist that they never learned to dip rads. Our dr owner did learn in school but wasn't sure if her school still taught it or not. One is only a year out, but I suppose she could have forgotten...thought it would suprise me (she can still tell you what questions she missed on tests her first year....perfectionist.)

 

[alliecat44]

Don't mean to speak for laura on this one, but my understanding was that "years 3-4" refers to third and fourth year of veterinary school, respectively.

By the way, whether or not they "remember" learning about hand-dipping rads--it's not like we had to DO it in lab. We just talked about what steps were involved in hand-dipping and what steps were involved in different stages of the processor. Three powerpoint slides. And how they generated various artifacts. Plus, each school is different.

FYI, pretty much everyone remembers the questions they got WRONG--we are all perfectionists to some degree. Doesn't mean they didn't mention it.

I just feel the higher quality vets will review what they need whether or not there is a gated system....while the poorer quality vets will still slip by using the same tools that it sounds like some vet students are using: memorize and forget.

Excuse me, what exactly are you trying to say? I do believe that was an insult.

 

[aretoo]

But IMHO, there would/could/should be more specific training for those who either a) know off the bat they want to make that a large part of their practice; or b) want to add it as a significant portion of their practice later on.

alliecat44 - a couple questions - just because I'm interested:
- So you see this specific training as an elective course(s) that could be taken while in vet school, OR after, if one's areas of interest change?

- Would you like to see specialization be declared before admission, or after?

 

[alliecat44]

alliecat44 - a couple questions - just because I'm interested:
- So you see this specific training as an elective course(s) that could be taken while in vet school, OR after, if one's areas of interest change?

- Would you like to see specialization be declared before admission, or after?

I don't see it as a single elective course--rather, a more intense version of tracking.

What would it look like? That's a good question...whether everyone has the first year together, or the first two, or you don't narrow it down until your fourth year...I think those would all be possibilities. I don't think declaring it before admission would be necessary, but I do think that the whole fourth year should be focused on your area of practice (whether that's one species or 50!). If that makes sense.

Again, no idea about the actual logistics. Hope that clarifies my thoughts.

Edit: Also, if your interest should change after graduation/you switch areas of practice--you'd have a separate exam to take/materials to review beforehand so that everyone was on the same page.

 

[sumstorm]

Excuse me, what exactly are you trying to say? I do believe that was an insult.

Maybe I didn't say it clearly. It was in reference to vets changing fields.

I sincerly believe that good vets review whenever they move into areas that are unfamiliar to them. Whether that is a surgery that they do not perform routinely, or a diagnostic that is beyond atypical, or a species they don't always interact with.

I believe that poor vets (the ones who would not update thier knowledge when changing fields) can memorize the information they would need to pass a test and ditch it post test. If vet students can do that with material they don't plan on using in the future, why couldn't a vet use the same skill to pass a test in a given area? Wouldn't they have developed the skill (memorize in the short term) in vet school? You said that in an earlier post:

As a vet student, there's so much binging and purging--and half of this is information that you are never going to use.

It wasn't meant as an insult.... but an observation that if the skill of short term memorization is developed in vet school, it could still be utilized by a vet later on.... they just might memorize the info for the field they are moving to, pass the test, then not have it entrenched either (or even care if it IS entrenched.

Thanks for the clarification on the other post...I did read it as 5 years and was confused. Don't some vet schools do that? If that is what a vet student wants, can't they just limit thier applications to schools that do so?

 

[alliecat44]

Thank you for clarifying that you were not, in fact, trying to imply that vet students who memorize and forget will be bad veterinarians.

I understand what you're saying about the same skill being used later on, etc. But at least then, there would be some accountability. Binging and purging--okay--but then you actually DO use what you memorized. And right away, not three years down the road. I do think there's a difference.

Plenty of vets who take the NAVLE are poor veterinarians. Does that mean we should get rid of the NAVLE and have no testing whatsoever? That argument doesn't work for me.

Regarding five year veterinary schools: these are international schools whose native students are admitted after high school. The five year program includes a year of what we would consider pre-reqs (but a bit more focused towards a veterinary education). The fifth year is NOT a year of additional focus in your future area of practice.

Even students at the few schools with tracking still have to learn everything for the NAVLE. With restricted licensing, you could go more in-depth in your area of focus and not have to waste time/brainpower on information you will never use. The system would still allow for flexibility if you want to change your mind down the road--but hold you to the same standard as a new graduate in that field.

 

[laurafinn]

I am confused...aren't you advocating for 5-6 years of vet school in the top paragraph, then saying the internship (as a replacement for the 5th year) isn't good due to extra costs?

Sorry, I meant years #3 and #4 as more focused years. Four years total.

I think all fields tend to have some animals that are more valuable than others.

Yes, but the intra-species difference in values is usually not as pronounced as the average pet dog vs. the average sheep.

I just feel the higher quality vets will review what they need whether or not there is a gated system....while the poorer quality vets will still slip by using the same tools that it sounds like some vet students are using: memorize and forget.

I don't think so, for the most part. Studying for the exams, at least, will confront out-of-date vets with the fact that newer anesthesia protocols are out there, and that pain relief in surgery is the current standard of care. It's not so much the memorization that I'm interested in.

 

[shelterURIgirl]

I know with the increase in technology and information there is increased pressure for members of our field to specialize, but I am against restricted licensing. I think in order to "pass" vet school, a student should be exposed to ALL areas of medicine, regardless of any special interests. Electives and tracks already give us so much freedom. I think our field will evolve in a way analogous to the medical field. Practicing veterinarians can be kind of like GPs, they see basic/everyday cases and refer complicated cases that require in depth diagnostics to a specialist.

What is the point behind restrictive licenses? If a small animal vet suddenly decides to start seeing livestock, and accidently kills a few due to ignorance, well that vet made bad decisions and should be subject to having their license suspended/revoked. As veterinarians, we should be responsible for our own actions. I think the best veterinarians are the ones who accept their own limitations. A restrictive license, IMO, will only prevent us from doing what we should already NOT be doing on our own.