Vet News Vet students and the real dog: Learning on live patients in veterinary school

June 5th, 2008  

Add Comment27 Comments

I think we would all agree, that there are strict moral and ethical guidelines as to what constitutes utilizing a pet under competent supervision for a needed task and what is done "strictly" for the benefit of the student and not in the best interest of the animal.

It is a fair statement that proficiency in any medical field is learned on the job, both human and animal. One learns theory, practices on models or cadavers, works their way up with increasing difficult tasks, and finally flies solo.

When a patient is made to suffer, or suffering is prolonged, pain inflicted and unrelieved, there is no justification at all to cross that line in the name of "education". The public needs to inform themselves to the USDA Animal Welfare Act and their state laws on anti-vivasection and what that may mean to them and their pets. I believe it is morally responsible to inform the client fully and disclose any and all possible conflicts of interest.

My dog Pocket was the ultimate extreme of deception. Obviously, to include ending her life brutally without compassion, illegally, and horrific cruelty of horrific pain, speaks for itself into what is tolerated here in New Hampshire for the sake of utilizing a "teaching tool". The laws protect (via inspections) rodents in laboratories better.

Barbara A. Albright/New Hampshire June 5th, 2008 11:37:00 PM

At my tech school we too practiced on homeless pets. As horrendous as some find the practice- it is a necessary evil. After all- how many clients would knowingly let a brand new grad (with absolutely NO practical skills) use their pet as a guinea pig?

At my school, we used SPCA and Pound animals. One of our proffessors went at the beginning of each semester to choose the best canididates. Then we used them for three months. They were spayed, neutered, vaccinated, microchipped, tattooed, and any illnesses were dealt with. They were put under anaesthesia on average once per week, purely for educational purposes. They were given saline injections occasionally and had blood, and urine pulled whether they needed it or not. During those three months they were also loved, cared for, and trained by the students. At the end of their service they were all found loving homes, which were sought out and ruthlessley screened by their keepers. In the area where the school was located, a rural, ranching community, this was an ideal situation for these animals. They would have likely been euthanized if they had stayed in the shelters.

We had one terminal lab in school where a dog that was destined for destruction (for aggression) from the local pound was anesthetized for us to practice CPR and Emergency procedures. Our patient was treated with repect and kindness from the moment she entered the building. We gave her cookies and made her last concious moments as happy as possible. None of us took for granted her sacrifice. I still remember that day whenever a critical case enters the hospital or a patient crashes. The drills we practiced in that lab come back in living colour when the situation presents.

I learned many valuable skills in school, including lifesaving procedures. I know I would not be the tech that I am without the practical aspect of my education. My patients also benefit from the skills I aquired. I think about the animals that sacrificed for us often. I adopted two of them :)

Meghan RAHT June 6th, 2008 12:19:00 AM

I thought that vet students here in the US had the opportunity to do surgeries on animals destined for euthanasia, like the Australian program you described. Maybe it was 20+ years ago, but I swear I remember hearing my vet talk about it. The animals were never allowed to regain conciousness of course, but once under anesthesia the students performed many surgeries both routine (like spays) and not so routine (limb amputation and the like) and then euthanized the dog or cat. To me this is the perfect compromise between consideration for the animal and education for the vet -- the animal undoubtedly experiences a much gentler ending with lots of attention and affection than it would normally have done at the shelter, and the vets get much needed practice. They don't get to see how a living animal would recover from their efforts but it's a heck of a lot better than nothing.
I'm absolutely APPALLED that US vets don't get that sort of experience!! Thanks to the animal rights nuts, a huge disservice is done to our pets, safeguards notwithstanding. It's curious, because PETA obviously has NO problem with euthanizing vast numbers of pets... I think their beef (haha) is not that the animals are killed, but that there is any benefit from their death.

Barb June 6th, 2008 02:51:00 AM

Without addressing the either/or discussion brought up by this post, I'd like to point out that I know of beauty schools, dental assistant education programs within colleges, chiropractic colleges, and massage schools that offer services to the public at discounted fees.

Before students can work on the public, they've passed their basic classes and have practiced on non-human -- or at least, non-alive -- models (or whatever the appropriate generic term would be), and in some cases on consenting classmates.

Perhaps this idea will help vet schools figure out something similar. Goodness knows there are enough pets who would have better medical care if there were discounted services available, even if the risk was higher than at vet clinics (if you average the experienced vets with the newbies!).

Marcella June 6th, 2008 03:39:00 AM

I can offer an extra viewpoint on this debate. I was due to have my gallbladder out and the surgeon told me that he wanted to make me his first patient for the laproscopic procedure. He was very experienced at what he called the 'slash and grab' big-cut operation but hadn't had a chance at a real-life patient for the new method. I agreed. When I woke up I asked which one I'd had and was told I'd had both cuts! He started the laproscopic one and decided to revert to the big-cut one. I was quite happy about that, because I'd been told in advance that I was his first.

parlance June 6th, 2008 06:56:00 AM

We do a combination at the U of MN. Our spays/neuters are learned on shelter animals, who head back to the shelter afterwards to get adopted. We also have a terminal surgery lab during third year where we learn to do intestinal resection/anastamoses, and after that procedure is done, we can practice other things like cystotomies, blood draws, or putting in a urinary catheter. After the animal is euthanized, we can try more difficult procedures like splenectomies, limb amputations, etc. The animals for the terminal surgery lab are all research beagles at the end of their career (i.e. due to be euthanized). The spay/neuter lab is required, but there is an alternative track to performing the terminal surgery lab.

There will always be a learning curve when you first start practicing, but boy would it be scary to have your first live animal surgical procedure be on an owned cat or dog.

Megan June 6th, 2008 08:16:00 AM

Huh, I always assumed that when I take my dog to the specialty hospital at the veterinary college that procedures would be done by students while being overseen by instructors. (Much like what happens in human teaching hospitals.) I thought that was part of the deal. And I don't mind it. Are you saying that doesn't happen?

Deanna June 6th, 2008 08:32:00 AM

In vet school I seem to recall that we also had access to some lab animal subject that were later euthanized (maybe that was a few years before me). Either way, I remember that practice being somewhat controversial (Philadelphia is a big city with lots of animal rights voices) and I believe it was eventually done away with.

Dr. Patty Khuly June 6th, 2008 08:39:00 AM

I would note that the Animal Welfare Act doesn't actually protect rodents at all, they are excluded from the defintion of "an animal" under the act. thus their treatment falls under the instituion's own ethics committee.

emily June 6th, 2008 09:44:00 AM

I went to vet school about 10 years ago, and my class was the first one to undergo some dramatic changes to the teaching program at Cornell.

First off, our junior surgery labs were NOT on animals at all--junior surgery was more about learning how to handle the technical parts of surgery, so we learned on "boxers" which were plastic boxes with rubber organs inside--I still have the "stomach" I did my first gastrotomy on.

There was an optional surgery course offered for people planning on large animal careers (that was me at the time) where we did "colic surgery" on ponies that were otherwise headed for slaughter. The ponies were euthanized toward the end of the surgery. The surgery itself was an exploratory, and we did not cut into any viscera. The ponies were well loved in the weeks before the surgical procedure--we practiced bandaging legs on them as well, and I know I shed a few tears when my pony was euthanized. In that course we also practiced suturing wounds on equine cadaver legs.

Once we were 4th year students, we did have a special surgical course where we did spays, neuters and declaws on pets from the local humane society. These animals were adopted out. We were also allowed to assist on more complex surgeries, but how much participation you got depended on the intern/resident (those are generally the vets in training that do more complicated surgeries--they are already doctors!) and the case. For example, I remember one enterotomy to retrieve a corncob in a rottie where I got to make the incision into the small intestine, but I don't think I did any suturing. I DID get to put bone screws in once--but the patient was a dairy bull calf. Its unlikely I would have gotten to do that in a canine patient.

People need to understand that there IS NO one set way of training DVMs across the nation--each school does things differently. At the time I was cutting my "boxer" I think we were the only school not doing live surgery for 3rd year students--I would bet that has changed. The fact is that NO ONE comes out of 4 years of vet training being 100% proficient in all things. That is what the rest of the career is for--I am still learning stuff every day, and I would bet most vets would say that (and if they DON'T--run!)

DrSteggy June 6th, 2008 10:01:00 AM

I wish that ALL Vet students could "practice" on free spay-neuter clinic patients. That would be offering a desperately needed community service as well as getting live experience for the students.

slt June 6th, 2008 10:13:00 AM

To be honest.. The thought of you guys practicing on animals that are going to be euthanized sort of infuriates me.. The ought of inflicting pain on an animal that people think is a throw away animal is beyond belief.. I've heard about this before, as I did a mission to an Indian reservation, a couple of summers ago, and there was a group that was there, as students, and they were doing spaying, medical exams, and immunizations on the animals.. It was pretty interesting that they had a mobile operating room, and the teachers.. The students weren't from one school.. but they were donating free services to the underserved..
Why aren't the students able to volunteer at hospitals, so they can get the experience?
I'm heading over to the vets with Socks.. The guy doesn't have a clue that he's getting his yearly checkup.. I'll question the docs.. The three went to Cornell..

barri June 6th, 2008 11:29:00 AM

In response to Barri:
The point though, is that the animals that are practiced on (that are set to be euthanized) are never in pain. They are under anaesthesia for the surgeries, and are euthanized before being brought out. They may be disposable to the shelter, but to the students learning they are among the greatest sources of learning. They are well loved while the students have them, and before they die they can bring knowledge to those that may save your beloved pet one day. Anyway, most of the time, the only surgeries that are practiced are spay/neuters, which are given to dogs and cats that are then adopted out, not euthanized. My brother recently adopted such a puppy (his wife's niece is a vet student). I think that while it can be said, is definitely something that is necessary.

Jessica June 6th, 2008 11:59:00 AM

It's sad that so many unwanted animals are euthanized.
However, as mentioned above, these animals are never woken up from the anesthesia, so there isn't any suffering on their part, and the vets-to-be get a valuable lesson.

What I find touching is the fact that from what I hear/read, these practice animals get more love, care and compassion in the last days of their lives than those who are euthanized at the pounds.
Therefor, I don't see the harm at this point with this practice.

When we will get to the day when there won't be many shelter animals euthanized, then it will be time to go to other ways.

(I am writing this while "redemption" is on it's way across the ocean from Amazon to me. Once I read the book, I might change my mind...)

Xslf June 6th, 2008 12:43:00 PM

I was not under the impression that vet schools stick to spays and neuters here in the US. According to AVAR, terminal surgeries are still going on at many vet schools here. That is: Unncessary surgeries conducted on unowned animals for teaching purposes, after which the animal is killed.

Here go look, this is based on survey data submitted by the schools -- wherever you see the abbreviation "T&D" that means "terminal and detrimental" -- the surgery was not medically necessary for the animal, it was intended to end in the animals death. Definitions are:

"Detrimental Procedures
Detrimental procedures were those procedures that caused short-term or permanent, minor or major harm to an animal without the goal or possibility of improving the individual animal's health or well-being. Examples included, but were not limited to, surgery on healthy animals; invasive medical diagnostics without the medical justification for performance or intent to treat abnormal findings; terminal procedures on healthy animals; general anesthesia without medical justification; dehorning; tail docking; cesarean section of pregnant animals without medical justification; contrast radiography; arthrocentesis; transtracheal wash; protocols that involved the killing of an animal to be used as a cadaver for a procedure(s)."

Terminal Procedures
Terminal procedures were those procedures that resulted in the death of the animal, regardless of the health of the animal or the outcome of the procedure. The death of the animal was not necessarily because of the procedures being conducted; in most cases, it was because the animal was purposefully killed given predetermined protocols for the teaching or testing experience.

Using their data, over 9,000 "terminal and detrimental" procedures were conducted at vet schools for teaching purposes. Granted this is old data (98-99) but I do not believe it is totally gone now -- and no wonder they don't report this any more since it's been thrown up on the net.

I think its immoral, and I think that it all serves to desensitize vets in ways that have LONG TERM effects.

Stefani June 6th, 2008 02:20:00 PM

oops, here is the link

http://www.avar.org/tech_school_animalused4.asp

Stefani June 6th, 2008 02:21:00 PM

I think there are a range of long term effects to each strategy. But I know foreign trained vets already capable of and comfortable with solo surgery have something of a competitive advantage over domestic trained vets who are not.

emily June 6th, 2008 04:05:00 PM

There may be a lot of foreign HUMAN surgeons proficient for the exact same reason. We can recall the unethical procedures done on prisoners too. Society allowed lots of immoral and unethical abuses for the sake of "learning". There is current discussion regarding "paid" or incentive-based human clinical trials going on in inner cities .

The Boston Globe published an article in 2004, because Tufts veterinary students came forth protesting what they viewed as abusive procedures to healthy animals in the name of education.

Dr. Steggy, thank you for your post.
Marcella, you are right on. Dental colleges offer discounted services for the ability to learn (under supervision) and patients are fully informed. We don't deceive humans and inflict harm, for the sake of "teaching tools". Clinical trials and experimental surgery are known up front. My "other" had a procedure done by a Dr.-in-training, he agreed and there were no "gripes".

In essence, we are somehow expecting "more" from the animal medical profession, than the human medical profession---or somehow derived training and expertise? And isn't it only recently, that "pain" is now recognized and treated in animals? Sure wasn't a consideration, decades ago.

emily, when I read up on the AWA and USDA endpoints & relief of suffering, I don't recall any "specific" animals listed & made the assumption it was applicaple to all. I will definitely revisit the site. And yes, I did read that it is completely legal to purchase dogs/cats specifically for "experimental" procedures from class B (? not sure of letter) breeders registered with the USDA.

Hence my whole issue of an educational institution deliberately "circumventing" the AWA, avoiding paperwork, inspections, and the like ---by abusing the "good faith & trust" of client-owned companion animals.

Barbara A. Albright/New Hampshire June 6th, 2008 06:13:00 PM

Here is an interesting essay on the topic by one veterinarian who refused to participate in that stuff and went on to make a difference:

http://www.interniche.org/consh/Lrasmussen.html

Apparently this relatively new vet school, Western University of Health Sciences College of Veterinary Medicine, has used a willed cadaver program to replace the killing of animals for teaching purposes. I saw them present at a conference last year.

http://www.westernu.edu/xp/edu/veterinary/principl...

If there is a will to find alternatives, there is a way.

Stefani June 6th, 2008 06:52:00 PM

So what does everyone think of the very common practice of human surgeons-in-training practicing first on animals? I heard a story of a med school dean who stated that "you aren't a doctor until you've killed a dog." Is it just as unethical to perform terminal procedures in human medicine?

Regarding the idea that if you bring your dog to a teaching hospital, s/he will be treated primarily by students... The way it works at our hospital is that, yes, students generally do the initial exam, come up with some differential diagnoses, choose what diagnostic tests would be helpful, and develop a treatment plan. Everything that we do as students is then reviewed by a resident or clinician, who catch mistakes, make corrections, and do their own exam. So, your pet does get seen by a student, but also gets seen by a doctor (or two or three).

Megan June 6th, 2008 10:35:00 PM

Stefani, I think there are more up-to-date statistics from links on the USDA site (straining my memory).

And I think the protests at Penn revolved around primate experiments of brain injury(s) in the late 80's? Someone must remember the particulars better than me.

Back in '97/98, I consulted via phone with a wonderful Veterinarian at Tufts (probably still have his follow-up letter in my files), that asked me if i would consider donation of my terminally ill TCC Scottie's body (euthanasia free-of-charge) for educational use. My response was that I would have no ethical/moral issue with that---my only problem would be the hour & half drive, when the time came, in a bad emotional state. I inquired if courier pick-up via Idexx was feasible , but apparently not.

In 1985, I donated my first Scottie's body upon request of Dr. Gamberdella, Angell Memorial, another kind man, I'll never forget, who called me with necropsy/pathology results. I am by far not against educational tools, accomplished via non-suffering dead animals.

If a human MD, feels callously towards "killing a dog", I sure wouldn't want that person to be my doc, and leads me to wonder if this is routine practice, why there are so many ethical debates and concerns published in the NEJM. I have found my strongest supporters are within the human medical field. (Maybe just found a lot of pet-owners)

Barbara A. Albright/New Hampshire June 6th, 2008 11:25:00 PM

Very interesting discussion.

Several people have mentioned scenarios where procedures unnecessary to the animal are done to anesthetized animals who are then euthanized before coming out of anesthesia and the comment is made that the animal is never in pain, or did not suffer.

I disagree with that conclusion. The animal may not be in physical pain, but its integrity (the state of being complete or undivided; the state of being sound or undamaged) is suffering insult, if not harm. That is, on some level, the organism knows it is being injured. (And, remember that animals have more sensitive senses that we do in many cases.)

I’m not saying this is reason to disallow these procedures; this is a very sticky ethical issue and I haven’t formed an opinion yet. I do believe, however, that the above should be taken into account.

Marcella June 7th, 2008 03:28:00 AM

i think that the only way for students to become doctors is for them to "practice" on real, live patients. i wouldn't want to be the first for a surgical procedure, and i wouldn't want my pets to be, either. the spay/neuter and RAM programs are great but how do 100-200 vet students in each of the 20+ programs in the country learn how to do the other surgeries of general vet med each year? we also have to remember that vets graduate with 15 monthsish of clinical experience and aren't required a residency like human doctors.

it's terrible but many of these animals have better lives than pets. i managed to spoil the dogs in the heart study i helped with it college, never forgetting the sacrifice they were forced to make to test a new drug to help dogs & humans with heart failure.

Sarah June 8th, 2008 05:01:00 PM

As long as the animal is scheduled for euthansia anyway, I have zero qualms about terminal surgery. Indeed, I've participated in two. One was a snake with terminal cancer that taught me how hard hemostatis is. The other was a bird at a vet conference wet lab on electrosurgery, although in that case they just euthanised it outright and were using fresh tissue for demonstrations.

It's no different from a regular euthansia for the animal: it goes to sleep and never wakes up.

Even when doing shelter spays and neuters, it seems to me the idea is that a botched surgery can be converted to a terminal surgery if necessary. Just take one animal off the euthanasia line to make up the numbers.

The trickier case, which I've also heard of doing, is unnecessary surgeries with patient recovery. That's also very worthwhile, because there are a great many problems that don't show up until later (infections, dehiscence and pain jump to mind), but obviously has its issues.

Herper June 16th, 2008 04:03:00 AM

As Barbara pointed out, donating the bodies of our own pets is a personal step we can each take toward helping ease this situation. Here's a related article by a Celebrant colleague of mine: Saying Goodbye to a Beloved Cat and Finding Meaning in Donating a Pet's Body to Veterinary Medicine, by Pam Vetter. http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/65768

Marcella Fox June 21st, 2008 11:04:00 PM

AVI to DVD Converter

gtrte June 5th, 2009 02:51:47 AM

AVI to MOV MAC

ewrter July 23rd, 2009 03:20:17 AM

Add Commment

Your Name:

CAPTCHA Verification