Terminal surgeries?

[ratbandit]

Vet students keep comming back with the argument that they are doing animals a service in the long run by practicing on live animals in school prior to doing a procedure on a client owned animal. Honestly, is the surgery lab you had 2 years prior to graduation where you got to assist really going to make the quality of your work all that much different the 2nd time you do it? I'm going to have to look up some literature on the practicing on live vs. models because I just don't buy that me doing something once in a surgery lab is really going to make me a better doctor.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[littlelisa]

I used to have a difficult time wrapping my mind around terminal surgeries and how I would react to doing one myself. What I've learned is that I would hope the animal would be unadoptable for either severe medical or behavioral issues, rather than purposely bred for this reason. After realizing how necessary the skills are that I will learn by doing a terminal surgery, I've realized how much I am going to embrace the experience and take advantage of the sacrifice the animal gave for my knowledge.

 

[sumstorm]

Why is it bad to treat animals as educational resources in terminal surgery if it is ok in research, food consumption, product manufacturing, pharm development/testing, varieties of other testing, psychological studies, etc?

I guess I don't understand.... I could probably save more lives by working a job in business and donating all of my income other than true necessities (food, modest shelter, modest clothing, modest tranportation) to an organization that does excellent rescue work. Volume wise, I believe I would make a more significant dent. But after being in places where 10's of thousands of dogs are euthanized a year, I don't really believe any dent I make doing that will be truely useful long term.

I looked at the website you suggested, but didn't find data, just testimonials. Did I miss something?

I will be fortunate; I will probably leave vet school with my only debt being my home mortgage. I won't have to face down forebearance, huge debt loads, and accumulating interest. I may be wrong, but I think that might make residencies and internships difficult.

I am fine with people making the decision, and even with entire programs, to not conduct terminal surgeries..... but I don't think there should be condemnation for learning from an animal resource which will meet the same fate either way.

In all honesty, I am all for processing the meat off of dogs and selling it to cultures that do consume them. I would rather it be useful than the wasted slaughter that currently occurs. I may have felt differently 10 years ago before working with shelters that are inundated with hundreds of dogs a day.

I just don't understand why it is ok and acceptable to use animals as resources EXCEPT for the education of vets. Seriously, not trying to be smart or anything....just genuinly don't understand the contradiction.

 

[No Imagination]

in all honesty, i am all for processing the meat off of dogs and selling it to cultures that do consume them. I would rather it be useful than the wasted slaughter that currently occurs. I may have felt differently 10 years ago before working with shelters that are inundated with hundreds of dogs a day.

^ qft

 

[Shanomong]

^ qft

lol, I actually had to google "internet lingo qft"... I feel so old.

Anyway it came back as "Quoted for truth" as the more common use, and "quit f'ing talking" as another... I'm assuming you were going for the former?

 

[No Imagination]

lol, I actually had to google "internet lingo qft"... I feel so old.

Anyway it came back as "Quoted for truth" as the more common use, and "quit f'ing talking" as another... I'm assuming you were going for the former?

LoL, Didn't know about the other definition... yes, meant the former

 

[WhtsThFrequency]

I just don't buy that me doing something once in a surgery lab is really going to make me a better doctor.

Doing something once (or multiple times) in a surgery lab is a more realistic experience than doing something once (or multiple times) on a model.

It will not make you a "better doctor" in the long, long run......but it will help you be more prepared for when you do your first "real" surgery, aka client animal. Therefore you will be a more competent fourth year and more competent resident, and can focus your attention on other areas of improvement.

It also depends on how involved the surgery lab is. Of course, if you sit and assist once, you don't learn anything. But that is a problem of the lab, not the fact that it uses a live animal or if it is terminal or not. I'm pretty lucky in that regard, I will have participated in four spays and one neuter, having been the primary surgeon on two of the spays, by the end of third year. Also almost a dozen anesthesia inductions. Plus large animal C sections, castrations, omentopexies. I have learned this stuff MUCH better than on any model. I know it is going to make me a better surgeon when I do it the "second" time (or third or fourth or whatever).

Yeah and I just learned what qft meant now, too. Man....I'm so dweeby


I am fine with people making the decision, and even with entire programs, to not conduct terminal surgeries..... but I don't think there should be condemnation for learning from an animal resource which will meet the same fate either way.

Yes! If only the general public could be convinced of that. Blargh.

 

[Ninnerfish]

Sumstorm, I doubt that those who are fundamentally opposed to terminal surgeries are often pro-vivisection in the areas of research and safety-testing. But then again, I've known many people who held seemingly incompatible beliefs in different areas and were able to rationalize them, so I could be wrong.

I personally go back and forth on the issue of terminal surgeries. I can see how they would be a valuable learning tool, but I also see flaws in the system (i.e. how to see a patient through recovery from an invasive surgery is just as important as being able to do the surgery itself). Also, the use of purpose-bred animals seems so depressing to me. I'm no vegetarian, so I guess I've been responsible for a fair number of "purpose bred" cows and chickens being slaughtered, but it's just different when it's a dog or cat because no matter how hard I try, I'm always going to see one of my own pets when I look at the animal.

What I'm trying to say (in my rambling, ineloquent way) is that I can see it both ways and I appreciate the fact that a lot of schools are moving away from required terminal surgeries to elective ones so that each student has the opportunity to decide for herself/himself. After all, we have to be able to live with the decisions that we make to get where we want to be. If that means you can justify the use of animals for terminal surgeries, more power to you. But if your belief system is such that you can't , I don't think it necessarily dooms you to being a subpar doctor.

Phew, that was a novel. Call me Ishmael...

 

[sumstorm]

If that means you can justify the use of animals for terminal surgeries, more power to you. But if your belief system is such that you can't , I don't think it necessarily dooms you to being a subpar doctor.

Phew, that was a novel. Call me Ishmael...

I never said that it made anyone subpar to do so, or to not do so. What I have said is that it is using an animal as a resource, and that I do not see how that is different than benefiting from the use of animals as resources. IE, I do not see consuming an animal as a better use of a creature than a terminal surgery is, or that it is more humane.

I grew up hand rearing livestock, then auctioning them off. It was hard. That steer that makes your beef patty could have been someone's pet...a child's pet in a small farm region. Having said that, at the same time, I would rather consume an animal that was tended with kindness and care than an animal whose entire life was spent in a confinement pen.

People utilize resources all the time, including other humans. We benefit from procedures that are not necessarily in the best interest for those they are tested on. In vivo tests of pharms are done on animals before human exposure, and then on sets of humans before general distribution. Unless we refuse to partake in medical care, education, many manufacturing processes, etc, we are using animals as resources.

I just don't get for those who can't be ok or accepting of it (note I did not say participate) how they can be ok and accepting (or even embracing) of all the other stuff. It reminds me of the commercial of the buddhist monk that won't swat the mosquito bugging him but then sneezes into an antimicrobial tissue, then realizes that he destroyed life.

I get that a lot of things about veterinary medicine will be difficult. I refused a few weeks ago to participate in a euthanasia that I didn't believe was appropriate. Our head tech threw an absolute fit, but our vet refuses some euths and in this case, the dog was being euthanized because she was blind and ran into trees and bushes when she was out in the yard, which was scaring her, making her not want to go outside in the yard to relieve herself unless she was accompanied by a human. So I understand making decisions not to....just not the idea that it is conceptually wrong or inappropriate, or the general condemnation of it.

Death is, unfortunatly, a part of life...and for stray animal populations, a frequent and sad part. I would rather see something useful come out of a stray animals destruction than nothing at all. There is something tragic about it not having an affect on anyone, good or bad. Then again, I am the person known throughout college for saying 'if I die, chop me up and feed me to the big cats, at least then I will be useful, rather than rotting in a box or burning in a fire' so my sense of life and death may be a bit macabre.

 

[nyanko]

Sumstorm, I doubt that those who are fundamentally opposed to terminal surgeries are often pro-vivisection in the areas of research and safety-testing. But then again, I've known many people who held seemingly incompatible beliefs in different areas and were able to rationalize them, so I could be wrong.

I hate the word "vivisection." It is so inflammatory and is way overused by animal rights groups to reference any sort of animal related research.

 

[Ninnerfish]

"Vivisection" may have certain connotations, but I'm not sure how else to succinctly put what it refers to.

 

[dyachei]

I personally go back and forth on the issue of terminal surgeries. I can see how they would be a valuable learning tool, but I also see flaws in the system (i.e. how to see a patient through recovery from an invasive surgery is just as important as being able to do the surgery itself). Also, the use of purpose-bred animals seems so depressing to me. I'm no vegetarian, so I guess I've been responsible for a fair number of "purpose bred" cows and chickens being slaughtered, but it's just different when it's a dog or cat because no matter how hard I try, I'm always going to see one of my own pets when I look at the animal.

Its been said more than once, so I felt the need to chime in. just because a school does terminal surgeries does not mean that they don't do other surgeries such as s/n on shelter animals. If I decide to take the elective at my school, I still have had the experience of a s/n on a shelter animal which includes recovery. The two aren't mutually exclusive.

And I don't know about other schools (and this has nothing to do with what ninnerfish has said) but we practice s/n multiple times throughout the 4 years. Our first experience is in our 2nd year, but then there are times, especially fourth year, where we have designated days to s/n during different rotations. Sometimes rotations that are having slow weeks will set it up for extra practice. And as for the 4th year clinical rotations in surgery, there isn't much you are actually allowed to do other than scrub in and hold suture (from what I've seen).

I am for terminal surgeries. And the idea that its disrespectful is just misguided. Most people are very respectful of their animals, even if they have to be put down after a procedure because of quality of life issues. I don't think that terminal surgeries should be for cases where the surgery will help the animal be adopted or to learn more common procedures like s/n, but I don't see a problem with it as an educational tool. Live animals are much more unpredictable than models and cadavers just aren't the same.

 

[sumstorm]

Live animals are much more unpredictable than models and cadavers just aren't the same.

Very true. I am probably more skilled than the vast majority of vets at completing necropsies on dolphins (seriously, how many practicing vets ever cut open a dolphin) but that certainly doesn't prepare me to conduct a surgery on the same animal when it is alive.

 

[mooturkey]

If someone higher up were judging me based on the amount of animals I've killed, then I suppose I am doomed to hell. Working in research you just have to face that fact... these animals are purpose-bred... to test drugs in a live system to benefit other humans/animals. You cannot, and will not, get the same results working in a petri dish... you will always need to test your product in a live system before it goes on market. It moves on from animals to humans(clinical trials)...should we not test on humans either?

I've worked in necrospy for several years also, and I know for sure that I don't have the slightest clue how to set up for surgery, anesthesia, or how to suture properly (i will be learning all this shortly), because all these animals are "cadavers" and you don't need to practice how to stop bleeding or how to adjust anesthesia levels, etc. A living, breathing animal will move differently. And yes, even doing this just once can help alot in the future. If you go into it not knowing ANYTHING, then this new experience will be beneficial.. how to handle the instruments, the feel of the scalpel, etc.

With that said, I don't necessarily agree with using "purpose-bred" animals for these terminal surgeries...I can see using them in research since you need everything controlled. But for these terminal surgeries, I can definitely seeing using an animal that has met its end and is destined for eutanasia anyway. Again, I am a scientist first and foremost and see everything as a learning experience. Maybe once a student has gotten used to the procedure, then I can see them moving on to live spay/neuters, etc.

To each his/her own!

 

[nyanko]

With that said, I don't necessarily agree with using "purpose-bred" animals for these terminal surgeries...I can see using them in research since you need everything controlled. But for these terminal surgeries, I can definitely seeing using an animal that has met its end and is destined for eutanasia anyway.

Unfortunately, as mentioned before in this thread, animal rights activists are making this impossible in many states by legislating away the schools' rights to get animals from external sources like this.

 

[Marsala]

I didn't see this posted anywhere in this discussion, but I thought this link would be helpful:

http://www.avar.org/pdf/vtech/chart_av_school.pdf

 

[3dogsand2cats]

For those of you who think terminal surgery's are wrong let me ask you this:

Is it ethical to perform an unnecessary surgical procedure (ie the animal does not have any issues), then put the animal through a painful recovery?

 

[alliecat44]

And for those who would rather use purpose-bred animals for terminal surgeries rather than shelter animals already slated for euthanasia (keeping in mind shelters euthanize literally MILLIONS of animals PER YEAR in this country):

Why is it better to end up killing more animals overall by using purpose-bred for terminal surgeries versus shelter animals slated for euthanasia?

You're adding to the death toll instead of minimizing the number of dead. How is this better?

I'm genuinely curious as to the logic. It actually bothered me to consider our anatomy cadavers might have been purpose-bred.

 

[3dogsand2cats]

Why is it better to end up killing more animals overall by using purpose-bred for terminal surgeries versus shelter animals slated for euthanasia?

I see your point about using shelter animals for terminal surgeries. I totally agree. I assume it must also be cheaper for a school to use shelters animals then to buy purpose-bred animals. So honestly I am unsure why they don't use shelter animals for terminal surgeries.

However I do understand school's using purpose-bred animals for research.

 

[No Imagination]

I'm genuinely curious as to the logic. It actually bothered me to consider our anatomy cadavers might have been purpose-bred.

The same arguement can be made as to why are we breeding cows and pigs when we could be putting dogs and cats in our hotdogs... Logic there is the same. Its an emotional issue for most people

Yes, at the moment such a move could not be made do to zoonotic disease concerns and health issues, but if we really wanted to, fluffy and fido could reduce the amount of cows and pigs we kill and eat every year (or at minimum offset our national deficit)

 

[alliecat44]

The same arguement can be made as to why are we breeding cows and pigs when we could be putting dogs and cats in our hotdogs... Logic there is the same. Its an emotional issue for most people

I understand what you're saying here, but I'm specifically talking to the vet students/future vet students who are not the average member of the public. Of course it's an emotional issue, but I'm asking the scientist in all of us--not the emotional animal-rights activists.

It sounds like there are people here who are okay with terminal surgeries AS LONG AS they are using purpose-bred animals. How are using purpose-bred animals more ethical than using shelter animals, when you're actually taking more lives? How does that make terminal surgery more palatable?

I guess that's a better way of phrasing my question.

 

[alliecat44]

I see your point about using shelter animals for terminal surgeries. I totally agree. I assume it must also be cheaper for a school to use shelters animals then to buy purpose-bred animals. So honestly I am unsure why they don't use shelter animals for terminal surgeries.

However I do understand school's using purpose-bred animals for research.

As several have pointed out, the big reason they don't use shelter animals is because of pressure from animal-rights activists.

Also, I should have mentioned that yes, I am for using purpose-bred animals in research. Absolutely. Wasn't trying to refer to that.

 

[tpad40]

It sounds like there are people here who are okay with terminal surgeries AS LONG AS they are using purpose-bred animals. How are using purpose-bred animals more ethical than using shelter animals, when you're actually taking more lives? How does that make terminal surgery more palatable?

Maybe I've misread, but most of the posts have said the exact opposite...I think the point was brought up that due to public misconception often purpose-bred animals are the only option. I don't recall anyone saying they'd refuse to do a terminal surgery on a euthansia-destined shelter animal but be willing to do one on a purpose-bred animal. If they did, then I would agree with you, that seems a little backwards in logic!

 

[lunazzurra]

A vet I used to work with who went to Tuskegee in the '80s told me that each member of her class was "assigned" a live dog for a surgical rotation. They practiced one surgery after the other on their assigned dog (a total of 6 different ones I believe), recovering them for a week each time in between. At the end of the rotation they euthanized them.

Now THAT is something I would not be able to do.

 

[sumstorm]

Maybe I've misread, but most of the posts have said the exact opposite...I think the point was brought up that due to public misconception often purpose-bred animals are the only option. I don't recall anyone saying they'd refuse to do a terminal surgery on a euthansia-destined shelter animal but be willing to do one on a purpose-bred animal. If they did, then I would agree with you, that seems a little backwards in logic!

A purpose bred animal that has been utilized for research and is slated for euth and shelter animals that are not adoptable/out of time both seem to be reasonable options to me. Animals who are bred for the very intent of being put to death for the use of education (not research, etc) does not make a lot of sense to me. Research is an entirely different field regarding purpose bred.

I sit at the local gas chamber once a week. It would salve my soul just a little bit to have those animals at least have some purpose (like our feral cats are used for anatomy) and a more peacable death. Oh, and before anyone asks, I attend the gas chamber because it is the ONLY way we seem to be able to force animal control staff to follow proper procedures for operating the gas chambers. If a dog is going to die a terrible death, I would rather them not do it while other dogs are attacking them...or when dead bodies are already in the chamber.

By the way, on a sadder note, all our AC staff are able to do injection euthanasia but feel that it is 'crueler' to the animal, and too much 'bother' and increases the 'stress of both animals and staff.'

 

[alliecat44]

Maybe I've misread, but most of the posts have said the exact opposite...I think the point was brought up that due to public misconception often purpose-bred animals are the only option. I don't recall anyone saying they'd refuse to do a terminal surgery on a euthansia-destined shelter animal but be willing to do one on a purpose-bred animal. If they did, then I would agree with you, that seems a little backwards in logic!

Serves me right for speed-reading in class--I looked back through and you're right; I was misunderstanding the position of some people.

Sumstorm, I completely agree with you (as always) and admire your ability to sit through the gas chamber and make lives as good as possible for those shelter animals. You rock. Wow.

 

[pitbull lover]

Does anyone know what kind of terminal surgeries Colorado does? In what year?
Also, does anyone know if their dog/cat cadavers are purposely bred or shelter animals.

 

[hopefulvet21]

If you check the link Marsala (I think that is who posted it) offered, it lists each school and what they do as far as invasive procedures for teaching vet students, as well as where the animals come from.

 

[pitbull lover]

Thanks hopefulvet21, I have a copy of that list. What I want to know is what specific terminal surgery is performed in what year, and if any CSU students have opted out. Or any other information from a CSU student.

 

[Barnaby]

I didn't see this posted anywhere in this discussion, but I thought this link would be helpful:

http://www.avar.org/pdf/vtech/chart_av_school.pdf

Very informative link, Marsala! Thank you!

I asked about these things at my interviews and a number of people I spoke with could not answer my questions. This is exactly the info. I wanted.

 

[WhtsThFrequency]

They practiced one surgery after the other on their assigned dog (a total of 6 different ones I believe), recovering them for a week each time in between.

That would never, ever happen today with all of the required IACUC protocols required, and AALAC guidelines....

 

[ratbandit]

So far I can't seem to find anything other than some third party sources who evaluated some papers from JAVMA in the 90's and summarized them saying that the students who chose alternative teaching methods and those that participated in terminal surgeries were equivalent in confidence and skills. I'll have to actually find the articles in the library though and see how their performance was evaulated etc. because I have been wondering this for some time. I agree that live animals are more realistic (by definition!) than models but if it makes no difference in the long run I can't really argue in favor of their use for that reason (that they will improve my competency in the area of surgery in any appreciable or significant way). Like I said, I'm going to have to look at the articles and see how exactly they came to these conclusions and what their criteria was for making it. By the way I am totally for the use of dogs who would otherwise be euthanized being used in surgery labs, it's just the more I think about it the more am seeing that we don't really need these labs to be properly educated.

 

[alliecat44]

There are so many threads on VIN about practice owners hiring new/recent grad associates and complaining that they lack confidence, especially in their surgery skills. Many question whether the associate is a good fit for their practice based on things like wanting Dr. Owner in the building while they do their first splenectomy/gastrotomy/etc what have you. Their perspective seems to be that new grads should have more experience, especially in surgery, than what they do. This comes out in such ways as resentment over specialist training at universities ("how is a student supposed to learn surgery if they're three-deep at the surgery table?") to a questioning of the individual graduate's fortitude.

All this is to say that there is another perspective out there besides our own as students/future new grads.

Would doing a surgery "only once" in school make a huge difference? I think it would, if it were my dog on the table for your first enterotomy. Especially if Dr. Owner was out of town, or it was the middle of the night, or...

Good discussion!

 

[Caninerepro]

Thanks hopefulvet21, I have a copy of that list. What I want to know is what specific terminal surgery is performed in what year, and if any CSU students have opted out. Or any other information from a CSU student.

I can only speak for the animals I have seen after junior surgery in the anatomy cooler, which is on the main campus. The seniors are at the VTH, which is on another campus @ 2 miles away. Most of the small animals are various mixed breed mutts and stray cats. I have seen some spays, abdominal exploratories, and a lot of suturing prectice -- I also know you start on bananas! Also know, from your avatar I assume you are a pit bull fan, which I am as well. However, pits have been banned within the city of Denver only 60 miles away, so...

CSU is pretty liberal on their positions as to surgeries. I know they nolonger have the infamous "junior surgery dogs", and I think you can opt out of live animal surgeries, working instead on cadaver pigs. But do not quote me on that.

 

[sumstorm]

There are so many threads on VIN about practice owners hiring new/recent grad associates and complaining that they lack confidence, especially in their surgery skills. Many question whether the associate is a good fit for their practice based on things like wanting Dr. Owner in the building while they do their first splenectomy/gastrotomy/etc what have you. Their perspective seems to be that new grads should have more experience, especially in surgery, than what they do. This comes out in such ways as resentment over specialist training at universities ("how is a student supposed to learn surgery if they're three-deep at the surgery table?") to a questioning of the individual graduate's fortitude.

All this is to say that there is another perspective out there besides our own as students/future new grads.

Would doing a surgery "only once" in school make a huge difference? I think it would, if it were my dog on the table for your first enterotomy. Especially if Dr. Owner was out of town, or it was the middle of the night, or...

Good discussion!

I am observing this at our clinic now...one very experienced Dr. Owner and an associate who isn't 'fresh' out of school, but relatively so (4 years) who would like the dr owner around for consults and just -in- case on unfamiliar surgeries (though she is excellent and super-fast at S/N, even cryptorchids) which frustrates the dr owner who feels like she is not getting her money's worth if she has to supervise/train/etc....which in turn has resulted in several surgeries being done for the first time ever by this vet without any supervision by an experienced vet.

I know it is a lot of stress on both vets.

 

[3dogsand2cats]

Also, I should have mentioned that yes, I am for using purpose-bred animals in research. Absolutely. Wasn't trying to refer to that.

As I stated in my previous post I understand completely why purpose-bred animals are used (in research) and I support it.

I understand that activist are one of the many reasons that schools don't use shelter dogs. However I feel that this is something that should change.

 

[pitbull lover]

There are so many threads on VIN about practice owners hiring new/recent grad associates and complaining that they lack confidence, especially in their surgery skills. Many question whether the associate is a good fit for their practice based on things like wanting Dr. Owner in the building while they do their first splenectomy/gastrotomy/etc what have you. Their perspective seems to be that new grads should have more experience, especially in surgery, than what they do. This comes out in such ways as resentment over specialist training at universities ("how is a student supposed to learn surgery if they're three-deep at the surgery table?") to a questioning of the individual graduate's fortitude.

Private practice doctors have been complaining about this since the 1980's I read in some veterinary magazine. Even if you do ONE terminal surgery during vet school doesn't mean you will be prepared to do that certain surgery in private practice on your own. That Dr. owner is still going to have to mentor that new associate either way. I think the owner would complain no matter what because vet school can't teach you everything, just the basics. Private practice or internships are where a lot of graduates learn many of the procedures, tricks, etc that they still use today.

My opinion: If you're ok with terminal surgeries--great, if you're not ok with terminal surgeries--great.

 

[pitbull lover]

Also know, from your avatar I assume you are a pit bull fan, which I am as well. However, pits have been banned within the city of Denver only 60 miles away, so...

Yes, I love pitbulls. I think they are a great breed in the right hands. That dog in my avatar is the best pitbull I could possibly have. I love him so much.

I am aware of pitbulls being banned in Denver. I hope that's the only city, right? I heard of rescue groups transferring pits to boulder to re-home them.

 

[No Imagination]

My opinion: If you're ok with terminal surgeries--great, if you're not ok with terminal surgeries--great.

I agree with your closing, but

Even if you do ONE terminal surgery during vet school doesn't mean you will be prepared to do that certain surgery in private practice on your own. That Dr. owner is still going to have to mentor that new associate either way.

I guess it's worth repeating.

Your beloved pitbull had an undiagnosed splenic mass that just ruptured and needs emergency surgery. There is me, a newly graduated vet who has done a splenectomy as a terminal surgery, and the guy across the street who has never done one (new grad, same level of experience).

As far as you can tell, we are equal in every other way, and we are alone.

Who do you bring it to?

Its a simple question IMO. A vet school's job is to do the best they can to prepare us to be practicing vets. We will not know everything, nor could we. But the question at hand seems to be (despite the thread title) "Do terminal surgeries better prepared a vet for that one (and possibly other associated) surgeries?"

Well, does it? Do you bring your pit to me or the other guy?

 

[sumstorm]

Well, does it? Do you bring your pit to me or the other guy?

While the 'logical' answer seems obvious, I am willing to bet that you bring it to the person you *feel* better about. I have met some vets who are not updating thier procedures, including surgical, and don't utilize pain meds very often, etc, who have excellent clientelle because they are great with thier clients (even if they are NOT great with thier patients.)

So, when it really comes down to it, the answer will be whichever vet gives the owner the most 'good' feelings, which will vary between owners.

 

[StealthDog]

Your beloved pitbull had an undiagnosed splenic mass that just ruptured and needs emergency surgery. There is me, a newly graduated vet who has done a splenectomy as a terminal surgery, and the guy across the street who has never done one (new grad, same level of experience).

As far as you can tell, we are equal in every other way, and we are alone.

Who do you bring it to?

You may have removed a spleen, but you removed a normal spleen from a healthy dog- not a bloody ruptured spleen with a hemangiosarc tumor taking it over. Your terminal surgery dog didn't have an abdomen full of blood. You terminal surgery dog didn't have the possibility of metastases in the heart or lungs or liver. Anesthesia will be totally different in a shocky dog. You'll be dealing with a sobbing owner facing the loss of a beloved pet.

One person may have done a splenectomy as a terminal procedure, but I'd say the first time they have to do a splenectomy in an emergency situation, both types of practitioners will be flying by the seat of their pants.

 

[InfiniVet]

If you went to vet school in Mexico in the 1970's you had to catch your own strays off the street to practice all of your surgeries on.

Count your blessings.

 

[hopefulvet21]

Or maybe there's a new grad who did a terminal surgery splenectomy and a new grad who did a splenectomy in a recovery situtation supervised by an experienced vet...

 

[3dogsand2cats]

If you went to vet school in Mexico in the 1970's you had to catch your own strays off the street to practice all of your surgeries on.

Count your blessings.

WOW.... learn something new everyday

 

[Shanomong]

There are so many threads on VIN about practice owners hiring new/recent grad associates and complaining that they lack confidence, especially in their surgery skills. Many question whether the associate is a good fit for their practice based on things like wanting Dr. Owner in the building while they do their first splenectomy/gastrotomy/etc what have you. Their perspective seems to be that new grads should have more experience, especially in surgery, than what they do. This comes out in such ways as resentment over specialist training at universities ("how is a student supposed to learn surgery if they're three-deep at the surgery table?") to a questioning of the individual graduate's fortitude.

All this is to say that there is another perspective out there besides our own as students/future new grads.

Would doing a surgery "only once" in school make a huge difference? I think it would, if it were my dog on the table for your first enterotomy. Especially if Dr. Owner was out of town, or it was the middle of the night, or...

Good discussion!

I think it's a shame that doctors would feel annoyed at helping to teach the recent graduate they hired. They aren't paying them what they would pay an experienced doctor, that's why they hire them and this is what they should expect. Our practice hires both-- and there is a huge support network for all new hires. Even if someone is experienced, it's always good to get opinions and advice from your colleagues. While I plan on doing an internship and probably a residency in some specialty, I can see scenarios that would leave me a couple of years between internship and residency and needing to work in a primary or emergency practice... I just hope it's as good as the place I work now

If you went to vet school in Mexico in the 1970's you had to catch your own strays off the street to practice all of your surgeries on.

Count your blessings.

LOLOLOLOL............. Blessings counted!

 

[thedogisgreen]

My head is exploding from reading all of this. The Mizzou supplemental question this year is a bit less loaded than the question of terminal surgeries - it simply asks whether you support the use of animals in teaching and research. I wrote a blurb about the need for alternative methods, but enforcement of AWA regulations when animals are used.. but I feel like I should discuss terminal surgeries as well. It doesn't directly ask about it but it is such a related issue. Mizzou does seem to do terminal surgeries (correct me if they have since changed their policies), so will it be asking for rejection to say that I don't believe in that, use x alternatives instead? Any ideas on how to approach this?

 

[OnceBitten]

My head is exploding from reading all of this. The Mizzou supplemental question this year is a bit less loaded than the question of terminal surgeries - it simply asks whether you support the use of animals in teaching and research. I wrote a blurb about the need for alternative methods, but enforcement of AWA regulations when animals are used.. but I feel like I should discuss terminal surgeries as well. It doesn't directly ask about it but it is such a related issue. Mizzou does seem to do terminal surgeries (correct me if they have since changed their policies), so will it be asking for rejection to say that I don't believe in that, use x alternatives instead? Any ideas on how to approach this?

I'm always surprised at how not open Mizzou seems to be about this and have a few classmates who didn't realize that we perform terminal surgeries when we first started. That being said, you do have the option to opt out of performing the terminal surgery and have it replaced with something else, although I'm not sure what the replacement entails. Because we do offer an alternative to the terminal surgery, I don't think that being unwilling to do it yourself could bring an automatic rejection to you. I do, however, think that being insultingly closed-minded about it would bring negative marks. I would find a way to make it clear (if you feel this way) that, while you yourself will not perform such a surgery, you understand its use as a teaching method for those who do choose to take that route, but are grateful that the school sees the value in offering an alternative to that route. Do keep in mind that they may bring this up in an interview later (as they did in mine), so be prepared to articulately and passionately (but not fanatically) explain your beliefs in this area.

 

[gilch]

I struggled with that essay last year too. I ended up saying something along the lines of, "of course I see the need to use animals in teaching and research...something or another on why it was important...I do not wish to participate in terminal surgeries...something or another about why." No one asked about this during my interview and I was offered admission.

 

[BlacKAT33]

why do i not remember this from last yr? lol i guess that means i talked about the use of animals in research but i didnt bring up terminal surgeries. If it doesnt ask about terminal surgeries i wouldnt write anything about it. I think it would just draw up a ton of questions they have for you and it may be good or bad who knows.

 

[BlacKAT33]

Ok i found what i wrote last year. I basically answered the question lol and it seems to be the same question as last year "Do you support the use of animals in teaching and research?" so i'm not sure why you say it is "less loaded" I did not get into terminal surgeries though. Anyway, if you choose to bring on the huge topic of terminal surgery it is your choice. Just remember to answer the question because I have heard that schools mark you down for forgetting to answer specifically what the question asks. So don't forget to talk about animals both in teaching and research .