Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 2 of 2 items for

  • Author or Editor: Philip D. Riggs x
  • Refine by Access: Content accessible to me x
Clear All Modify Search


Objective—To determine the pharmacokinetics of butorphanol tartrate after IV and IM single-dose administration in red-tailed hawks (RTHs) and great horned owls (GHOs).

Animals—6 adult RTHs and 6 adult GHOs.

Procedures—Each bird received an injection of butorphanol (0.5 mg/kg) into either the right jugular vein (IVj) or the pectoral muscles in a crossover study (1-week interval between treatments). The GHOs also later received butorphanol (0.5 mg/kg) via injection into a medial metatarsal vein (IVm). During each 24-hour postinjection period, blood samples were collected from each bird; plasma butorphanol concentrations were determined via liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry.

Results—2- and 1-compartment models best fit the IV and IM pharmacokinetic data, respectively, in both species. Terminal half-lives of butorphanol were 0.94 ± 0.30 hours (IVj) and 0.94 ± 0.26 hours (IM) for RTHs and 1.79 ± 1.36 hours (IVj), 1.84 ± 1.56 hours (IM), and 1.19 ± 0.34 hours (IVm) for GHOs. In GHOs, area under the curve (0 to infinity) for butorphanol after IVj or IM administration exceeded values in RTHs; GHO values after IM and IVm administration were less than those after IVj administration. Plasma butorphanol clearance was significantly more rapid in the RTHs. Bioavailability of butorphanol administered IM was 97.6 ± 33.2% (RTHs) and 88.8 ± 4.8% (GHOs).

Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—In RTHs and GHOs, butorphanol was rapidly absorbed and distributed via all routes of administration; the drug's rapid terminal half-life indicated that published dosing intervals for birds may be inadequate in RTHs and GHOs.

Full access
in American Journal of Veterinary Research


Objective—To evaluate the differences among each state's Interstate Certificate of Veterinary Inspection (ICVI) form and the legibility of data on paper ICVIs used to support disease tracing in cattle.

Design—Descriptive retrospective cross-sectional study.

Sample—Examples of ICVIs from 50 states and 7,630 randomly sampled completed paper ICVIs for cattle from 48 states.

Procedures—Differences among paper ICVI forms from all 50 states were determined. Sixteen data elements were selected for further evaluation of their value in tracing cattle. Completed paper ICVIs for interstate cattle exports in 2009 were collected from 48 states. Each of the 16 data elements was recorded as legible, absent, or illegible on forms completed by accredited veterinarians, and results were summarized by state. Mean values for legibility at the state level were used to estimate legibility of data at the national level.

Results—ICVIs were inconsistent among states in regard to data elements requested and availability of legible records. A mean ± SD of 70.0 ± 22.1% of ICVIs in each state had legible origin address information. Legible destination address information was less common, with 55.0 ± 21.4% of records complete. Incomplete address information was most often a result of the field having been left blank. Official animal identification was present on 33.1% of ICVIs.

Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—The inconsistency among state ICVI forms and quality of information provided on paper ICVIs could lead to delays and the need for additional resources to trace cattle, which could result in continued spread of disease. Standardized ICVIs among states and more thorough recording of information by accredited veterinarians or expanded usage of electronic ICVIs could enhance traceability of cattle during an outbreak.

Full access
in Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association