Disciplinary Actions in 2023
A public record request can be done by completing the online request form.
What is a Consent Order?
An order involving a type of disciplinary action may be made to the board by the investigating board member with the consent of the person. To be accepted, a consent order requires formal consent of a majority of the quorum of the board. Such quorum does not include the investigating board member. It is not the result of the board’s deliberation; it is the board’s acceptance of an agreement reached between the board and the person. A proposed consent order may be rejected by the board in which event a formal hearing will occur. The consent order, if accepted by the board, is issued by the board to carry out the parties’ agreement. (Rule §1411 of the LA Veterinary Practice Act)
Case 23-0501, Consent Order (Meeting Date – October 5, 2023)
The Board approved a consent order emanating from a complaint filed by the client of the licensee. Gist: following surgery (C-section) performed by the licensee the patient presented a month later with symptoms of incontinence with the presence of blood and mucus. The licensee diagnosed the patient was suffering from a urinary tract infection and prescribed anti-biotics. However, the patient’s symptoms persisted for almost one year post-surgery and treatment was provided based on the same diagnosis until the Respondent suspected the patient may have pyometra. A referral was then made to an emergency facility where radiographs were taken. A foreign object (surgical sponge) was found in the patient, who exhibited no signs of any pathology of the uterus. The sponge had migrated to the bladder. It, along with a substantial portion of the bladder, was removed. A spay was necessary. For the failure to remove all surgical sponges and the misdiagnosis made over the course of approximately one year, without adequate diagnostics during that term, the Respondent was fined $1500 and made to reimburse the Board for the costs of the investigation ($500). No action was taken on Respondent’s license.
Case 23-1207, Consent Order (Meeting Date – October 5, 2023)
A complaint was filed by the client of a licensed veterinarian for veterinary malpractice in the treatment of a snake bite sustained by a canine patient. The patient was administered Banamine 1.36 ml, Ketoprofen 1.36 ml for pain; Tripelennamine 1.36 ml; Geneticin 1.36 ml, Excenel .68 ml and Baytril 3.5 ml 100mg/ml in four injections. The patient was also sent home with a ten-day supply of Sulfamethoxazole and Trimethoprim. The patient began vomiting blood the next day and was seen at an emergency facility and diagnosed to have sustained gastrointestinal ulceration caused by acute diarrheal syndrome/hemorrhagic diarrhea v. adverse reaction to medications. The investigating board member determined the medication regimen to be inappropriate and the board approved a consent order. The Respondent was fined $1000 for malpractice, ordered to reimburse the board for the costs of investigation ($1000) and was issued a public reprimand.
Case 21-1006 I, Consent Order (Meeting Date – May 23, 2023)
A licensee practicing under the terms of a Consent Order, which had been modified by the Board during the term of treatment and a maintenance contract with HPFL to ease restrictions, breached the terms of the maintenance contract for the treatment of addiction with HPFL and the eased terms of the current CO with the Board. A hearing was scheduled under the confidential provisions of the Practice Act to determine what sanctions the Board would impose on the license. The licensee offered testimony at the hearing, as did the licensee’s employer at the time of the breach, along with representatives of HPFL. After much discussion and debate and considering the unusual circumstances presented to the Board, the license to practice veterinary medicine was suspended by the Board anew under a five-year consent order, with the suspension stayed as long as the licensee successfully and without exception participated in a peer assistance program administered by HPFL, which includes enhanced drug screening qualitatively and quantitatively, restricted employment and enhanced supervision, the impositions of fines and reimbursement to the Board of investigative costs, and other restrictions.
Case 19-0405, Petition for Consent Order Modification (Meeting Date – February 2, 2023)
A practitioner petitioned the board for modification of a consent order still in effect which required continuous individual therapy to practice veterinary medicine. The licensee was well within a period of compliance with the other terms of the consent order, and the counsellor had given the board a report stating she was moving from the area and the licensee no longer needed the support. Motion was made to accept the licensee’s request at the recommendation of the counsellor and the request granted. All other terms of the consent order continue until its expiration.