Editorial Type:
Scientific Reports

Most veterinarians treating exotic animals use formularies to select drug dosages without consistently checking their sources

Nicola Di GirolamoDepartment of Veterinary Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, OK

Search for other papers by Nicola Di Girolamo in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMedClose
 DMV, MSc, PhD, DECZM(Herp), DACZM
,
Marianne CaronDepartment of Veterinary Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, OK

Search for other papers by Marianne Caron in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMedClose
 DVM
,
João BrandãoDepartment of Veterinary Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, OK

Search for other papers by João Brandão in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMedClose
 LMV, MS, DECZM(Avian)
, and
Reint Meursinge ReyndersDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Amsterdam University Medical Center (Amsterdam UMC) Location AMC, Meibergdreef 9, Amsterdam, Netherlands

Search for other papers by Reint Meursinge Reynders in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMedClose
 DDS, MSc, PhD
View More View Less
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.2460/javma.21.03.0116
Volume/Issue:
Volume 260: Issue 8
Online Publication Date:
24 Feb 2022
Restricted access
Sign In Reprints and Permissions Purchase Article

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To assess what information sources veterinarians use to select drug dosages for treating exotic animals and how they implement this information.

SAMPLE

936 veterinarians from Europe, Asia, Australia, Africa, and the Americas.

PROCEDURES

An anonymous, online survey was used to collect data on information sources used for dosage decisions by veterinarians treating exotic species. Logistic regression models were built to identify associations between individual characteristics and primary outcomes.

RESULTS

Respondents reported their single most common source for establishing drug dosages as formularies (682/936 [72.9%]), followed by scientific journals (96 [10.3%]), other textbooks (68 [7.3%]), colleagues (47 [5.0%]), or continuing education notes (38 [4.1%]). Over two-thirds of the respondents (645, 68.9%) consulted a specific exotic animal formulary for establishing drug dosages in most situations. Of the 936 respondents, 407 (43.5%) reported that they sometimes (318 [34.0%]) or never (89 [9.5%]) checked the source of a dosage in a textbook or a formulary, 503 (55.3%) reported that they sometimes (399 [42.6%]) or never (104 [11.1%]) searched the original publication on a dosage, and 486 (51.9%) reported that they would base their dosage decision on the abstract of an article if they had no access to the full-text. Several respondents’ reported characteristics were significant predictors of primary outcomes.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Considering our findings, we recommend authors of formularies and textbooks should focus on evidence-based information and state clearly when information is anecdotal. Tailored strategies to educate veterinarians treating exotic animals on the importance of primary sources are also recommended.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To assess what information sources veterinarians use to select drug dosages for treating exotic animals and how they implement this information.

SAMPLE

936 veterinarians from Europe, Asia, Australia, Africa, and the Americas.

PROCEDURES

An anonymous, online survey was used to collect data on information sources used for dosage decisions by veterinarians treating exotic species. Logistic regression models were built to identify associations between individual characteristics and primary outcomes.

RESULTS

Respondents reported their single most common source for establishing drug dosages as formularies (682/936 [72.9%]), followed by scientific journals (96 [10.3%]), other textbooks (68 [7.3%]), colleagues (47 [5.0%]), or continuing education notes (38 [4.1%]). Over two-thirds of the respondents (645, 68.9%) consulted a specific exotic animal formulary for establishing drug dosages in most situations. Of the 936 respondents, 407 (43.5%) reported that they sometimes (318 [34.0%]) or never (89 [9.5%]) checked the source of a dosage in a textbook or a formulary, 503 (55.3%) reported that they sometimes (399 [42.6%]) or never (104 [11.1%]) searched the original publication on a dosage, and 486 (51.9%) reported that they would base their dosage decision on the abstract of an article if they had no access to the full-text. Several respondents’ reported characteristics were significant predictors of primary outcomes.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Considering our findings, we recommend authors of formularies and textbooks should focus on evidence-based information and state clearly when information is anecdotal. Tailored strategies to educate veterinarians treating exotic animals on the importance of primary sources are also recommended.

Supplementary Materials

    • Supplementary Appendix S1 (PDF 539 KB)
    • Supplementary Appendix S2 (PDF 68 KB)

Contributor Notes

Corresponding author: Dr. Di Girolamo (nicoladiggi@gmail.com)
Cover Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association
Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association
ISSN:
0003-1488
Publication Date:
24 Feb 2022
  • 1.

    Bhatti SF, De Risio L, Muñana K, et al. International Veterinary Epilepsy Task Force consensus proposal: medical treatment of canine epilepsy in Europe. BMC Vet Res. 2015;11:176.doi: 10.1186/s12917-015-0464-z

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 2.

    Shaughnessy AF. STEPS drug updates. Am Fam Physician. 2003;68:2342–2348.

  • 3.

    de Vries TP, Henning RH, Hogerzeil HV, Fresle DA. Guide to good prescribing. A practical manual. World Health Organization Action Programme on Essential Drugs. Accessed January 12, 2021. whqlibdoc.who.int/hq/1994/WHO_DAP_94.11.pdf

    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 4.

    Visser M, Oster SC. The educated guess: determining drug doses in exotic animals using evidence-based medicine. Vet Clin North Am Exot Anim Pract. 2018;21(2):183–194. doi:10.1016/j.cvex.2018.01.002

    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 5.

    Everitt S, Pilnick A, Waring J, Cobb M. The structure of the small animal consultation. J Small Anim Pract. 2013;54(9):453–458.doi: 10.1111/jsap.12115

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 6.

    Corah L, Lambert A, Cobb K, Mossop L. Appointment scheduling and cost in first opinion small animal practice. Heliyon. 2019;5:e02567.doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2019.e02567

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 7.

    Belshaw Z, Robinson NJ, Dean RS, Brennan ML. “I always feel like I have to rush…” Pet owner and small animal veterinary surgeons’ reflections on time during preventative healthcare consultations in the United Kingdom. Vet Sci. 2018;5:20.doi: 10.3390/vetsci5010020

    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 8.

    Pan SD, Zhu LL, Chen M, Xia P, Zhou Q. Weight-based dosing in medication use: what should we know? Patient Prefer Adherence. 2016;10:549–560. doi:10.2147/PPA.S103156

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 9.

    Carpenter JW. Exotic Animal Formulary. 5th ed. Elsevier Saunders; 2018.

  • 10.

    Greenwell K, Hanna D, Womble W, Di Girolamo N. A twenty-year trend in references used for avian drug dosages in an exotic animal formulary. Presented at: Exoticscon 2019; St Louis; 340.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 11.

    Caron M, Smead C, Brandão J, Di Girolamo N. A twenty-year trend in type of references used for reptile drug dosages in an exotic animal formulary. Presented at: Exoticscon 2019; St Louis; 564.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 12.

    Kline S, Tarpalechee L, Brandão J, Di Girolamo N. Twenty-year trend in type of references used for small mammal drug dosages in an exotic animal formulary. Presented at: Exoticscon 2019; St Louis; 412.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 13.

    PubMed. National Library of Medicine. Accessed May 25, 2021. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

  • 14.

    CAB direct. Centre for Agriculture and Bioscience International. Accessed May 25, 2021. https://www.cabdirect.org

  • 15.

    Google forms. Google. Accessed January 18, 2022. https://www.google.com/forms/

  • 16.

    Eysenbach G. Improving the quality of web surveys: the Checklist for Reporting Results of Internet E-Surveys (CHERRIES). J Med Internet Res. 2004;6(3):e34.doi: 10.2196/jmir.6.3.e34

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 17.

    Perreault WD. Controlling order-effect bias. Public Opin Q. 1975;39(4):544–551.

  • 18.

    Carpenter JW. Exotic Animal Formulary. 3rd ed. Elsevier Saunders; 2008.

  • 19.

    Carpenter JW. Exotic Animal Formulary. 4th ed. Elsevier Saunders; 2013.

  • 20.

    Scopus. Elsevier. Accessed August 8, 2019. https://www.scopus.com/search/form.uri?display=basic#basic

  • 21.

    Exotic DVM. Veterinary Forum for Companion Exotic Animal Medicine. HBD International, Inc. Accessed September 27, 2019. https://groups.io/g/ExoticDVM

  • 22.

    Italian Society of Veterinarians for Exotic Animals [SIVAE] forum. Società Italiana Veterinaria per Animali Esotici. Accessed September 24, 2019. http://groups.google.com/a/anmvi.vet/group/sivae-forum?hl=it

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 23.

    Peduzzi P, Concato J, Kemper E, et al. A simulation study of the number of events per variable in logistic regression analysis. J Clin Epidemiol. 1996;49:1373–1379.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 24.

    Meredith A. BSAVA Small Animal Formulary: Part B: Exotic Pets. John Wiley & Sons; 2015.

  • 25.

    Divers SJ, Stahl SJ, eds. Mader’s Reptile and Amphibian Medicine and Surgery. Elsevier Health Sciences; 2018.

  • 26.

    Miller ER, Fowler ME, eds. Fowler’s Zoo and Wild Animal Medicine, Volume 8. Elsevier Health Sciences; 2014.

  • 27.

    Quesenberry K, Mans C, Orcutt C. Ferrets, Rabbits and Rodents: Clinical Medicine and Surgery. Elsevier Health Sciences; 2020.

  • 28.

    Speer B. Current Therapy in Avian Medicine and Surgery. Elsevier Health Sciences; 2015.

  • 29.

    Mitchell M, Tully TN. Manual of Exotic Pet Practice-E-Book. Elsevier Health Sciences; 2008.

  • 30.

    Pelzer NL, Leysen JM. Use of information resources by veterinary practitioners. Bull Med Libr Assoc. 1991;79:10–16.

  • 31.

    Wales T. Practice makes perfect? Vets’ information seeking behaviour and information use explored. Aslib Proc. 2000;52:235–246.

  • 32.

    Nielsen TD, Dean RS, Massey A, Brennan ML. Survey of the UK veterinary profession 2: sources of information used by veterinarians. Vet Rec. 2015;177(7):172.doi: 10.1136/vr.103068

    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 33.

    Huntley SJ, Dean RS, Massey A, Brennan ML. International evidence-based medicine survey of the veterinary profession: information sources used by veterinarians. PLoS One. 2016;11:e0159732.doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0159732

    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 34.

    Delgado-Rodríguez M, Llorca J. Bias. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2004;58(8):635–641.doi: 10.1136/jech.2003.008466

  • 35.

    Sackett DL. Bias in analytic research. J Chronic Dis. 1979;32(1-2):51–63.doi: 10.1016/0021-9681(79)90012-2

  • 36.

    Giuffrida MA. Type II error and statistical power in reports of small animal clinical trials. J Am Vet Med Assoc. 2014;244(9):1075–1080.doi: 10.2460/javma.244.9.1075

    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 37.

    Beaufrère H, Kearney MT, Tully TN Jr. Can we trust the avian medical literature: survey and critical appraisal of the use of statistics in avian medicine from 2007 to 2011. J Exot Pet Med. 2015;24(4):415–426.doi: 10.1053/j.jepm.2015.08.005

    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 38.

    Sargeant JM, Elgie R, Valcour J, et al. Methodological quality and completeness of reporting in clinical trials conducted in livestock species. Prev Vet Med. 2009;91(2-4):107–115. doi:10.1016/j.prevetmed.2009.06.002

    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 39.

    Di Girolamo N, Meursinge Reynders R. Deficiencies of effectiveness of intervention studies in veterinary medicine: a cross-sectional survey of ten leading veterinary and medical journals. PeerJ. 2016;4:e1649. doi:10.7717/peerj.1649

    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 40.

    Page JR. Accessibility of published research to practicing veterinarians. J Med Libr Assoc. 2018;106(3):330–339. doi:10.5195/jmla.2018.196

  • 41.

    Maranville RE, Popken A, Meursinge Reynders R, Brandão J, Di Girolamo N. Reporting quality of abstracts of veterinary randomized controlled trials. J Am Vet Med Assoc. 2021;258(3):303–309.doi: 10.2460/javma.258.3.303

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 42.

    Robinson NJ, Brennan ML, Cobb M, Dean RS. Capturing the complexity of first opinion small animal consultations using direct observation. Vet Rec. 2015;176(2):48.doi: 10.1136/vr.102548

    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 43.

    Belshaw Z, Asher L, Dean RS. The attitudes of owners and veterinary professionals in the United Kingdom to the risk of adverse events associated with using non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) to treat dogs with osteoarthritis. Prev Vet Med. 2016;131:121–126.doi: 10.1016/j.prevetmed.2016.07.017

    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 44.

    Gochenauer AE, Holmes ER, Barber KE, Forsythe LR. The current landscape of veterinary compounding in the pharmacy setting. Int J Pharm Compd. 2019;23(5):422–427.

    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 45.

    Adrian DE, Rishniw M, Scherk M, Lascelles BDX. Prescribing practices of veterinarians in the treatment of chronic musculoskeletal pain in cats. J Feline Med Surg. 2019;21(6):495–506.doi: 10.1177/1098612X18787910

    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 46.

    Wiant K, Geisen E, Creel D, et al. Risks and rewards of using prepaid vs. postpaid incentive checks on a survey of physicians. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2018;18(1):104.doi: 10.1186/s12874-018-0565-z

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 47.

    Meade AW, Craig SB. Identifying careless responses in survey data. Psychol Methods. 2012;17(3):437–455.doi: 10.1037/a0028085

Advertisement