Hearing held: June 15, 16, 17, July 7, 13, 2020 

Brief Summary of Allegations

The member treated four dogs for dental procedures. While the medical outcome for each animal varied, it is alleged the member provided inadequate treatment, both pre- and post-operatively; that all four dogs suffered unnecessary pain and distress and required emergency treatment within 3 to 48 hours of discharge. Two of the dogs died within 24 hours of the dental procedure. 

Jegolo & Pepper 

The first case involves two dogs who attended the member’s clinic for dental procedures required as a result of moderate to severe periodontal disease. The first dog, Jegolo was not fully recovered at discharge, was lethargic and not walking in the early evening and overnight his condition worsened. The dog was returned to the clinic the following morning but died during the day. The second dog, Pepper also was not fully recovered at discharge but did improve overnight. However, Pepper developed severe periorbital swelling of the left eye within 24-48 hours of discharge - most probably related to the dental extraction. The owner took Pepper to another veterinary clinic where Pepper was treated and recovered. In both cases, no intra-oral dental radiographs were taken, no monitoring of blood pressure was done, neither dog was monitored post- surgery and both were discharged in an unsuitable condition. 

Bandit 

Bandit was treated for dental procedures required because of moderate periodontal disease. Again, blood pressure was not monitored during surgery. The dog developed severe bradycardia during the procedure, which was not treated. Bandit was not monitored properly post-surgery. He was discharged in an unsuitable condition and was non-responsive and extremely hypothermic by the time the owner arrived home with the dog. The owner brought Bandit to an emergency clinic that evening where Bandit was found to be extremely hypothermic with no detectable blood pressure reading, and in kidney failure. After several days of intensive veterinary care, Bandit recovered. 

Loki 

Loki was treated for dental procedures required because of facial swelling. Blood pressure was not monitored during anesthesia and no intra-oral radiographs were taken, despite a severe swelling on Loki’s face and serious differential diagnoses considered as a cause. During surgery, the dog developed severe bradypnea, which was not treated. The dog was not monitored properly post-surgery and was discharged in an unsuitable condition. The owner contacted the clinic the following morning and was directed by a technician not to bring the dog in unless it started panting. The owner took the dog to an emergency clinic where Loki later died that day. A postmortem was performed at the Animal Health Laboratory, University of Guelph.

Allegations of Professional Misconduct

• failed to maintain the standard of practice of the profession 
• failed to continue to provide professional services to an animal until the services are no longer required or until the client has had a reasonable opportunity to arrange for the services of another member 
• failed to make or retain the records required 
• an act or omission relevant to the practice of veterinary medicine that would be regarded as disgraceful, dishonourable or unprofessional 
• failed to provide within a reasonable time and without cause any certificate or report requested by a client or their agent in respect to an examination or treatment performed by the member 
• conduct unbecoming a veterinarian

Decision

The member pleaded guilty with respect to some of the allegations and denied others. 

Penalty

• Reprimand 
• The member’s licence to practise veterinary medicine is suspended for four months 
• Before the end of the suspension, the member shall complete the following remediation: 
• A half-day assessment to evaluate the member’s baseline knowledge of the issues that were raised in the cases. 
• A one-day mentorship on the issues raised in the cases. The mentor shall report to the Registrar. 
• A follow-up half-day assessment to review what the member learned in the mentorship and whether the member will change his practice as a result of the mentorship. 
• Completion of the College’s online learning module on foundations for medical record keeping. 
• The member must participate in a peer review of medical records at least every four months until the quality of his records improves. The results of the reviews may be reported to the Executive Committee for possible further action. 
• The member will pay costs to the College of $80,000.

Panel's Reasoning

The panel found that generally, the anesthesia of the dogs including the delivery of premedications, local and general anesthetic procedures, was not properly managed, and the dogs’ vitals were not properly monitored during and/or after the procedures. The panel also found that in two cases, informed client consent regarding declining intra-oral radiographs was not obtained; in all cases the standard of practice was not met by not performing intra-oral radiographs. 

The panel also found that generally, the dogs were not discharged in an acceptable condition, and that the dogs’ conditions worsened after discharge to the point of requiring emergency veterinary care and in two cases, death. The condition of the dogs at discharge was not properly assessed and recorded, and the owners’ concerns were not properly addressed. The panel also found that the medical records in all cases, did not meet the standards. 

For these reasons, the panel finds the member guilty of failing to maintain the standard of practice of the profession.