Opinions and practices of veterinarians and dairy farmers towards herd health management in the UK

The objective was to compare farm veterinary surgeons' and dairy farmers' opinions on herd health plans and herd health and production management with the aim of discovering and better understanding the differences. Two comparable questionnaires, one for farm veterinarians and one for dairy farmers, were distributed throughout the UK. While listing the 'major roles' of the veterinarian on the farm, veterinarians considered 'optimising milk production', 'decreasing overall cost' and 'being an independent adviser' as important roles, but these were not seem to be perceived as such by the farmers. In addition, when presenting themselves to clients, veterinarians seemed to favour the 'friend of the farmer' approach; a much smaller proportion of farmers seemed to prefer this approach. The majority of farm respondents (98 of 121; 81 per cent) valued the discussions with their veterinarian, and it was apparent from the relatively small proportion of veterinarians instigating a discussion on farm (33 of 125; 26 per cent) that there is the opportunity for a more proactive approach from veterinarians. The study underlines that 'demonstrating cost-effectiveness' is still a main concern for veterinarians and farmers and identifies areas that can be improved by more training and effective communication.     

Challenging the myth of the irrational dairy farmer; understanding decision-making related to herd health

Veterinarians working with dairy cows are suggested to refocus their efforts from being task-oriented providers of single-cow therapy and develop themselves into advice-oriented herd health management advisors. The practising cattle veterinarian's ability to translate knowledge into on-farm application requires a profound understanding of the dairy farm as an integrated system. Consequently, educating and motivating farmers are key issues. To achieve such insight the veterinarian needs to work with several scientific disciplines, especially epidemiology and (behavioural) economics. This trans-disciplinary approach offers new methodological possibilities and challenges to students of dairy herd health management. Advisors working with dairy herd health management may sometimes experience that farmers do not follow their advice. Potentially, this could lead to the interpretation that such farmers are behaving irrationally. However, farmers who are confronted with advice suggesting a change of behaviour are placed in a state of cognitive dissonance. To solve such dissonance they may either comply with the advice or reduce the dissonance by convincing themselves that the suggested change in management is impossible to implement. Consequently, herd health management advisors must understand the fundamental and instrumental relationships between individual farmers' values, behaviour and perception of risk, to stimulate and qualify the farmer's decision-making in a way that will increase the farmer's satisfaction and subjective well-being. Traditionally, studies on herd health economics have focussed on financial methods to measure the value of technical outcomes from suggested changes in management, following the basic assumption that farmers strive to maximise profit. Farmers, however, may be motivated by very different activities, e.g. animal health and welfare or other farmers' recognition, making it impossible to provide 'one-size-fts-all' consultancy because the best decision depends heavily on the internal logic and context-bound reality on each dairy farm. Relevant information may be available, but to be implemented at farm level it has to be communicated effectively. This requires a trustworthy communicator. Consequently, veterinarians are recommended to receive training in communication; keywords in this process are dialogue and reflection. An educational framework based on science and the authors' experience is presented. The aim is to guide practising cattle veterinarians into a personal learning process considered necessary for them to be recognised by farmers as trustworthy dairy herd health advisors.     

Carriage of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus by veterinarians in Australia

Objective To estimate the prevalence of carriage of methicillin‐resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) among Australian veterinarians. Methods Individuals attending veterinary conferences in Australia in 2009 were recruited to provide nasal swabs and complete a questionnaire about their professional activities. Swabs were processed by standard methods for detecting MRSA and questionnaire responses were used to group veterinarians according to their areas of major work emphasis (species and practice type). Prevalence was estimated for each of these grouping and contingency tables and regression tree analysis used to explain the variation in MRSA carriage. Results Among the 771 respondents ‘industry and government veterinarians’ (controls) had the lowest prevalence of MRSA carriage at 0.9%. Veterinarians with horses as a major area of work emphasis had a prevalence of 11.8% (13‐fold that of controls) and those whose only major emphasis was horses had a prevalence of 21.4% (23‐fold that of controls). Veterinarians with dogs and cats as a major activity had a 4.9% prevalence (5‐fold that of controls). Prevalence rates for other major activities (pigs, dairy and beef cattle, avian and wildlife) were also increased, but were estimated from smaller numbers of respondents. Regression tree analysis clearly isolated equine veterinarians and dog and cat practitioners as groups at increased risk of carriage of MRSA. Conclusion Carriage of MRSA is a notable occupational health issue for veterinarians in clinical practice in Australia, particularly those who work with horses.     

The marketing of herd health and production management services on Dutch dairy farms: perceptions of dairy farmers and their veterinary surgeons

A questionnaire-based survey on veterinary herd health and production management services was conducted on 194 specialist dairy veterinarians and 466 dairy farmers. The farmers were randomly selected from greater than 6,000 farmer clients of the surveyed veterinarians. This paper reports these survey findings and the findings of an earlier survey conducted among the veterinarians. The survey included questions on the attributes of the service itself, the practitioners delivering the service, reasons for participation and the expected future of herd health and production management services. Reasons farmers participated in herd health and production management programmes included; access to routine screening of their herd; increasing profits; and receiving regular veterinary advice or solutions to remedy existing problems. Advantages of participation named included: good management support; higher profits; structural solutions to problems; and being better informed. Differences between farming styles were observed, pointing to the different needs and goals of farming styles. Farmers cited high costs and the time investment required as major disadvantages. The proportion of farmers citing these reasons was lower than expected by the veterinarians. In the future, preventive healthcare will be the main reason of farmers to participate. Farmers who are not using the service can potentially be encouraged to engage the services after gaining increased insight into the herd health and management service structure, the planning of activities, the cost-benefit of the service, veterinary surgeons being more co-operative with other farm advisors and veterinarians being more willing to pay attention to quality issues on the dairy farm.     

Clinical use of dichlorvos (Nuvan) and trichlorfon (Neguvon) in the treatment of salmon louse, Lepeophtheirus salmonis. Compliance with the recommended treatment procedures

Veterinarians representing one third of the Norwegian fish farms were asked about the clinical use of dichlorvos and trichlorfon by use of a questionnaire. A total of 45 veterinarians had experience in treatment of salmon lice with these organophosphates. Fourty-nine percent of the veterinarians reported that the fish farmers in their region solely used the recommended treatment equipment when delousing the fish, of these 1/4 always oxygenated the treatment solution. Repeated treatment were always prescribed by 24% of the veterinarians, while 44% did this occasionally. Of the 45 veterinarians 7% were often present and 44% were occasionally present at the fish farms in connection with the treatment. The answers showed that compliance with the recommended treatment procedures was unsatisfactory.     

Veterinary assistance to dairy farms in the Netherlands: an assessment of the situation by dairy farmers

A questionnaire-based study was conducted among 466 dairy farmers in the Netherlands. The study investigated the experiences and opinions of dairy farmers about veterinary herd health and production management programmes. The dairy farmers were selected at random, and thus some took part in such programmes whereas others did not. The questionnaire comprised general questions about the farm operation and specific questions about the herd health programme and the practice conducting it, as well as perceived advantages and disadvantages of the veterinary programme. Farmers who did not participate in such programmes were questioned about their reasons for not participating. Both groups were questioned about future perspectives and opportunities. The costs of the programme appeared to be a drawback for participation but not as much as perceived by the practices. According to farmers, programmes focus too much on curative aspects and too little on analysis or prevention, where the needs are. Farm areas not included in the programme are so far not yet covered by other institutions, contrary to the expectations of the veterinarians. In the future, the farmers would be willing to take part in similar or expanded programmes, provided that certain conditions, such as product definition, structure, planning, costs, are properly met.     

Castration of calves: a survey among Swiss suckler beef farmers

In fall 2004, a survey of a representative sample of 1185 Swiss suckler beef farmers was carried out by questionnaire (return rate 51.9%). 32.7% of the respondents castrated their calves without the help of a veterinarian, 37.8% mandated a veterinarian to carry out the castrations and 29.4% did not castrate their bull calves at all. On average, 8 calves were castrated per farm and year at an average age of 7 days when the castration was carried out by a farmer or 34 days when the castration was carried out by a veterinarian. Almost all farmers castrated their calves with the rubber ring, and a majority considered no other method as feasible. 73.9% of the veterinarians used the Burdizzo technique, 14.9% applied rubber rings, and 11.2% performed a surgical procedure. 22.6% of the farmers and 85.4% of the veterinarians used sedation; local anaesthesia was performed in 32.1% of the castrations carried out by farmers and in 84.5% of the castrations carried out by veterinarians. 65.7% of the farmers were concerned by the change of the Swiss Animal Protection Ordinance (2001), when pain relief became mandatory. 47.6% of these farmers changed their castration routine: 53.1% now mandated a veterinarian, 33.0% used sedation or local anaesthesia and 8.9% abandoned castration of their calves. 59.8% of the farmers intended to participate in a future course for laymen, to study and train the technique of local anaesthesia for castration. Castration of their calves is for many suckler beef farmers an inevitable husbandry procedure. The political goal, that all calves shall be castrated with local anaesthesia can only be reached when livestock owners are informed about the distress caused by the castration and convinced of the benefit of the local anaesthesia.Veterinarians are important information carriers in this process. The implementation also produces work, be it the more complex castration procedure or the education of the farmers who want to carry out the local anaesthesia themselves.     

Pharmacological treatments and risks for the food chain

Veterinarians play a pivotal role in public health control, in particular in the management of risks deriving from pharmacological treatments of food-producing animals. Veterinary medicinal products can represent a risk for animal health and welfare (side effects, decreased efficacy), for farmers and practitioners administering the drug, for consumers of food of animal origin (presence of residues, occurrence of antibiotic resistance) and for the environment. According to pending European guidelines, risk management starts from marketing authorisation that must be based on risk evaluation and can be denied when the risk/benefit ratio is not favourable considering the advantages for animal health and welfare and for safety of consumers. Veterinarians can prevent and control risks by using correct pharmacological criteria to choose and administer medicinal products and undertaking risk-based inspection of residues of drugs in food of animal origin. Moreover, a major tool for veterinarians to prevent and control drug-borne risk is “pharmacovigilance”. Risks for the environment are usually assessed during the pre-marketing approval process, however veterinarians, as risk managers, should educate farmers about correct drug handling and disposal, and periodically verify that suggested measures are applied.     

Vaccine-associated adverse events.

Although vaccination plays a vital role in maintaining animal health, there are risks associated with this medical procedure. Veterinarians are beginning to reexamine dogmatic vaccine protocols and consider both risks and benefits of vaccination, with special emphasis on adverse event information generated by practitioner experience. The current status of postmarketing surveillance for commercially available veterinary vaccines is presented, along with a discussion of the strengths and limitations of surveillance programs. An overview of adverse events commonly reported by veterinarians is included, along with practical information on how veterinarians can share their observations and learn about adverse events reported by their colleagues.     

Pharmacological treatments and risks for the food chain

Veterinarians play a pivotal role in public health control, in particular in the management of risks deriving from pharmacological treatments of food-producing animals. Veterinary medicinal products can represent a risk for animal health and welfare (side effects, decreased efficacy), for farmers and practitioners administering the drug, for consumers of food of animal origin (presence of residues, occurrence of antibiotic resistance) and for the environment. According to pending European guidelines, risk management starts from marketing authorisation that must be based on risk evaluation and can be denied when the risk/benefit ratio is not favourable considering the advantages for animal health and welfare and for safety of consumers. Veterinarians can prevent and control risks by using correct pharmacological criteria to choose and administer medicinal products and undertaking risk-based inspection of residues of drugs in food of animal origin. Moreover, a major tool for veterinarians to prevent and control drug-borne risk is "pharmacovigilance". Risks for the environment are usually assessed during the pre-marketing approval process, however veterinarians, as risk managers, should educate farmers about correct drug handling and disposal, and periodically verify that suggested measures are applied.     

Veterinary dairy herd health management in Europe: constraints and perspectives

The nature of veterinary work in dairy health management in Europe has changed over the past years and will change even more dramatically in the near future. The consumers and the media show increasing concern about animal welfare, safety of products of animal origin and traceability of animal products. Farmers in Europe have to produce under strict, often expensive and laborious regulations, while still commercially competing with farmers outside the EU and not subject to the same rules. Veterinarians should adapt their knowledge and skills to the new challenges and developments of the dairy sector. Dairy farmers nowadays ask for support in areas that go beyond clinical activities: environmental protection, welfare, nutrition, grassland management, economics and business management. Bovine practitioners should be able to advise in many different areas and subjects--that is the challenge to our profession. Veterinary education with regards to cattle health management should start with individual animal clinical work, which constitutes the basis of herd health advisory programmes. The bovine practitioner should then look beyond that and regard the herd as the unit. Each diseased cow or group of cows should be detected early enough to avoid financial losses or such losses should be prevented altogether by detecting and managing risk factors contributing to disease occurrence. Herd health and production management programmes represent the first level to optimise dairy farm performance. Expansions to that should further be considered, comprising both animal health and welfare issues, as well as food safety and public health issues. The latter could be addressed by quality risk management programmes following the HACCP-principles. Cattle veterinarians should follow recent developments and invest in new skills and knowledge in order to maintain their usefulness to the modern dairy farmer. Finally we are convinced that the cattle practitioner should evolve into this direction, otherwise the veterinarian as we know him will miss the train in the next years.     

Eradication of porcine sarcoptic mange within a health declared production model

The success of a large-scale eradication programme against sarcoptic mange was evaluated in piglet producing herds belonging to the health class LSO 2000. These farms are monitored to be free from sarcoptic mange, swine enzootic pneumoniae, swine dysentery and progressive atrophic rhinitis. The local veterinarians were instructed to eradicate sarcoptic mange from the herds by 2 ivermectin injections 14 days apart or 3 treatments with phoxim pour-on 6 days apart before the farms were able to join the health class. The study consisted of a questionnaire administered to the farmers, farm visits and follow-ups associated with the regular control of the health class. A questionnaire was sent to all of the 379 accepted farrowing farms. Altogether 323 farmers had initiated an eradication programme at least 7 months before the questionnaire was distributed and 96% of them believed that the mange eradication programme had been successful. In most of the successful herds (90%), the local veterinarian had treated the animals by the recommended methods, and the majority of the farmers (88%) had cleaned and sprayed the pens with insecticides on the days of treatment. Three out of the 7 unsuccessful farms had employed methods other than those recommended. Twenty-five herds were randomly selected for an intensified control. The rubbing index was < or = 0.1 in all herds visited, indicating freedom from mange. Sows or gilts, 15-20 animals per farm, were skin scraped and no Sarcoptes scabiei was found. The same animals were blood sampled and serum antibodies to S. scabiei were measured by an indirect ELISA. All except 1 farm had low optical density (OD) values in most of the samples. The owner of that farm had become uncertain about the mange status of the herd and had recently retreated all animals with acaricides. The number of complaints about mange in the finishing units buying health class feeder pigs was low. The study demonstrates that it is possible to run an eradication programme against sarcoptic mange, in which a large number of farmers together with their veterinarians participate. It is possible to eradicate mange not only at the herd but also at the population level. The ELISA test employed proved to be a possible tool to monitor the efficacy of mange-eradication programmes.     

A focus group study of veterinarians' and pet owners' perceptions of the monetary aspects of veterinary care

OBJECTIVE: To compare veterinarians' and pet owners' perceptions of client expectations with respect to the monetary aspects of veterinary care and identify challenges encountered by veterinarians in dealing with pet owners' expectations. DESIGN: Qualitative study based on focus group interviews. PARTICIPANTS: 6 pet owner focus groups (32 owners) and 4 veterinarian focus groups (24 companion animal veterinarians). PROCEDURES: Independent focus group sessions were conducted with standardized open-ended questions and follow-up probes. Content analysis was performed on the focus group discussions. RESULTS: Pet owners expected the care of their animal to take precedence over monetary aspects. They also expected veterinarians to initiate discussions of costs upfront but indicated that such discussions were uncommon. Veterinarians and pet owners differed in the way they related to discussions of veterinary costs. Veterinarians focused on tangibles, such as time and services. Pet owners focused on outcome as it related to their pet's health and well-being. Veterinarians reported that they sometimes felt undervalued for their efforts. A suspicion regarding the motivation behind veterinarians' recommendations surfaced among some participating pet owners. CONCLUSIONS: Results suggested that the monetary aspects of veterinary care pose barriers and challenges for veterinarians and pet owners. By exploring clients' expectations, improving communication, educating clients, and making discussions of cost more common, veterinarians may be able to alleviate some of the monetary challenges involved in veterinarian-client-patient interactions.     

Management practices associated with Mycobacterium avium subspecies paratuberculosis infection and the effects of the infection on dairy herds

During 2004, a survey of Mycobacterium avium subspecies paratuberculosis (map) was conducted in 101 randomly selected dairy herds to investigate associations between the infection status of the herds, different management practices, and possible disease indicators, such as indices of mastitis and reproductive performance. Data were collected by means of a questionnaire through personal interviews with the farmers and veterinarians in charge of each farm. At the same time, blood samples were taken from cattle over one year old and analysed with a commercial elisa to detect antibodies to map. Statistical analyses indicated that the following management practices constituted major risk factors: utilisation of colostrum from cows with a previous positive map diagnosis, and housing replacement calves with adult cattle before they were six months old. Seropositivity to map was related to the herds' bulk tank somatic cell counts and incidence of clinical mastitis, but not to their reproductive performance.     

A mixed methods inquiry: How dairy farmers perceive the value(s) of their involvement in an intensive dairy herd health management program

Background

Research has been scarce when it comes to the motivational and behavioral sides of farmers'' expectations related to dairy herd health management programs. The objectives of this study were to explore farmers'' expectations related to participation in a health management program by: 1) identifying important ambitions, goals and subjective well-being among farmers, 2) submitting those data to a quantitative analysis thereby characterizing perspective(s) of value added by health management programs among farmers; and 3) to characterize perceptions of farmers'' goals among veterinarians.

Methods

The subject was initially explored by means of literature, interviews and discussions with farmers, herd health management consultants and researchers to provide an understanding (a concourse) of the research entity. The concourse was then broken down into 46 statements. Sixteen Danish dairy farmers and 18 veterinarians associated with one large nationwide veterinary practice were asked to rank the 46 statements that defined the concourse. Next, a principal component analysis was applied to identify correlated statements and thus families of perspectives between respondents. Q-methodology was utilized to represent each of the statements by one row and each respondent by one column in the matrix. A subset of the farmers participated in a series of semi-structured interviews to face validate the concourse and to discuss subjects like animal welfare, veterinarians'' competences as experienced by the farmers and time constraints in the farmers'' everyday life.

Results

Farmers'' views could be described by four families of perspectives: Teamwork, Animal welfare, Knowledge dissemination, and Production. Veterinarians believed that farmers'' primary focus was on production and profit, however, farmers'' valued teamwork and animal welfare more.

Conclusion

The veterinarians in this study appear to focus too much on financial performance and increased production when compared to most of the participating farmers'' expectations. On the other hand veterinarians did not focus enough on the major products, which farmers really wanted to buy, i.e. teamwork and animal welfare. Consequently, disciplines like sociology, economics and marketing may offer new methodological approaches to veterinarians as these disciplines have understood that accounting for individual differences is central to motivate change, i.e. ''know thy customer''.     

Nonspecific clinical signs in pigs and use of exclusion diagnosis for classical swine fever: a survey among pig farmers and veterinary practitioners

Outbreaks of Classical Swine Fever (CSF) occurred in spring 2006 in Germany close to the Dutch border. On 6th April Dutch pig farmers were given the possibility to submit blood samples directly via their veterinary practitioner to the National Reference Laboratory for CSF if their pigs had non-specific clinical symptoms or if pigs were being treated with antibiotics. The pig farm was not quarantined and was not visited by the veterinary authorities. Over a period of 9 weeks 156 pig farmers submitted whole blood samples via 50 different veterinary practices. All samples tested negative in the PCR test. These pig farmers and veterinary practitioners were asked to respond to a postal questionnaire with questions regarding their experience with this new diagnostic possibility, the distribution of the costs involved, a comparison with other instruments, such as official notification or use of a leukocyte count test, and their knowledge of clinical signs of CSF. 65 pig farmers (42%) and 33 veterinary practices (66%) returned the questionnaire. The main results indicated that pig farmers (72%) would use this type of exclusion diagnostics sooner than that they would approach the veterinary authorities (practitioners: 86%). Moreover the respondents considered the fact that the farm was not quarantined immediately to be an advantage (pig farmers, 79%; practitioners, 88%). 32 percent of the pig farmers were not aware that they were required to submit blood samples if pigs were being treated with antibiotics (practitioners: 11%). The majority of pig farmers and practitioners were not satisfied with the current distribution of the costs involved: in their opinion the costs of the PCR test, the costs of the veterinary practitioner and the costs for shipping the samples to the reference laboratory should be paid out of the Animal Health Fund (50% government and 50% industry) or by the government. If the current distribution of the costs is not changed, a large proportion of the pig farmers indicated that they would not use this form of exclusion diagnostics for CSF in the future. Pig farmers appeared to have a rather limited knowledge of the clinical signs of CSF: 33% of the pig farmers could mention maximally three clinical signs of CSF, and 7% could not mention a single clinical sign of CSF and said they were entirely dependent on the practitioners' ability to judge a CSF-suspect situation.     

Perceptions of state public health officers and state veterinarians regarding risks of bioterrorism in the United States

OBJECTIVE:To assess perceptions of state public health officers and state veterinarians in the United States regarding the risks of bioterrorism and determine the degree of support provided for activities related to bioterrorism. DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey. SAMPLE POPULATION: State public health officers and state veterinarians. PROCEDURE: A questionnaire was sent between April and June 2001 to the state public health officer and state veterinarian in each of the 50 states and the District of Columbia. RESULTS: Perceptions of the risk of bioterrorism attacks were similar for state public health officers and state veterinarians. Veterinarians perceived the risks associated with foot-and-mouth disease and Newcastle disease to be higher than did physicians. State veterinarians perceived the risks associated with an anthrax hoax, brucellosis, and ricin toxicosis to be lower than did state public health officers. Risk posed by agents that affected animals exclusively was perceived to be higher than risk posed by agents that affected humans exclusively and zoonotic agents. Number of full-time-equivalent positions devoted to bioterrorism surveillance and percentage of the budget devoted to bioterrorism activities were significantly lower for offices run by state veterinarians than for offices run by state public health officers. State veterinarians were significantly less likely to have knowledge of bioterrorism incidents within their state or district than were state public health officers. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Provision of additional resources to state veterinarians and explicit integration of their expertise and surveillance capabilities may be important to effectively mitigate the risk of bioterrorism.     

Perceptions of veterinarians and clients to expressions of clinical uncertainty

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to explore the attitudes of veterinarians and clients towards expressions of clinical uncertainty. METHODS: Questionnaires that assessed the respondent's attitudes towards expressions of clinical uncertainty were completed by clients at six small animal practices. In addition, questionnaires that evaluated what veterinarians thought their client's attitudes would be towards expressions of clinical uncertainty were completed by veterinarians. The responses from clients and veterinarians were statistically compared. RESULTS: Veterinarians significantly underestimated the desire of clients to be told about uncertainties in treatment and significantly overestimated how the expression of uncertainty would generally reduce client confidence. Veterinarians significantly overestimated the loss of client confidence resulting from saying "I am not sure about this" and from asking a nurse for advice. Both clients and veterinarians considered that verbal expressions of uncertainty would lead to a greater reduction in client confidence than behavioural expressions of uncertainty. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: This study suggests that most clients want to be told about their veterinarian's clinical uncertainties, and how this uncertainty is expressed can markedly influence client confidence.     

Longitudinal study of veterinary students and veterinarians: effects of growing up on a farm with animals

OBJECTIVE: To compare the career paths of veterinarians who had grown up on farms with animals with those of veterinarians from other backgrounds, during the first 15 years after they graduated. PROCEDURE: Questionnaires were completed by veterinary students in their first and fifth year, and after 1, 5, 10 and 15 years after they graduated. The most recent questionnaires were returned by 134 of 137 graduates, 20% of whom had grown up, or lived for at least two years, on farms where animals were a primary source of income. This paper includes findings from that questionnaire but also contains comparisons with previous ones. RESULTS: Fifteen years after they graduated, veterinarians who had grown up on farms with animals were more likely than those of other backgrounds to be living in centres with < 10,000 people (58% farm, 20% other), irrespective of the type of work they were doing. Although they were more likely to be doing no veterinary work (42% farm, 21% other), they were also more likely to be working in mixed practice (15% farm, 9% other) and with cattle and sheep generally (11% full time equivalent farm, 5% full time equivalent other). However, > 80% of those who had started their careers in mixed practice were no longer in mixed practice after 15 years. Veterinarians of farm origin who were in private practice were more likely to be sole or part owners (93% farm, 46% other) and less likely to be employees (7% farm, 54% other). CONCLUSIONS: In this study, veterinarians who had grown up on farms with animals seemed slightly more likely than those from other backgrounds to continue working in mixed practice and to work with cattle or sheep, although the numbers were small and the differences not significant. Whatever their background, the majority who started their careers in mixed practice left over the next few years, and by 15 years only 15% remained.     

Policies for the vaccination of cats and dogs in New Zealand veterinary practices

AIMS: To determine current practices and attitudes towards vaccination of dogs and cats of veterinarians in New Zealand; the methods used for informing clients on which vaccines to use, and the preferred site for vaccination of cats.

METHODS: A postal questionnaire was sent to all 483 listed veterinary practices in New Zealand during February 2012. Some questions were specific to pet dogs, cats, or working farm dogs. Responses were categorised according to practice type and geographical region of the respondent. Factors associated with respondent recommendation of annual vaccination with modified live viral (MLV) vaccines were examined using logistic regression analysis. Vaccines that were considered to be essential for every animal were defined as core; those that may be recommended for animals whose location or lifestyle placed them at risk, were defined as non-core.

RESULTS: There were 204 useable returns, equivalent to a response rate of 42.2%, distributed across the country. Annual vaccination with MLV vaccines of dogs was recommended by 54/198 (27.3%) respondents, and of cats by 107/181 (59.1%) respondents. Factors associated with the recommendation of annual administration of MLV vaccines to dogs included being a companion animal practice, a desire for policies on vaccination to be left to individual clinics, and having one veterinarian in the practice. Administration of the final vaccination for puppies was recommended at ≥14 weeks old by 55/185 (29.7%) respondents, and for kittens at ≥13 weeks old by 42/183 (23%) respondents. Of respondents that administered MLV vaccines annually, 62/103 (60.2%) believed reducing the frequency of vaccination would reduce income, and 52/103 (50.5%) considered it would have a negative effect on animal health. Advice to enable clients to decide which non-core vaccines were administered was given by 181/199 (91%) respondents. Factors considered when recommending a vaccine included consideration of risk to individual patients (190/203; 93.6%), requirements of boarding kennels/catteries (165/203; 81.3%) and clinic vaccination policy (142/203; 70%). The preferred site for administering MLV vaccines to cats was the dorsal neck or inter-scapular region (137/198; 69.2%). Amongst respondents, 18 wanted disease surveillance information to allow for truly informed decisions to be made about vaccination.

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Veterinarians can now compare their own vaccination practices and attitudes with those of veterinarians nationally, and internationally. There is a need for national surveillance information and for continued education of the public and commercial kennel and cattery owners for optimal vaccination strategies to be developed.