British Veterinary Nursing Association

BVNA response to VSA Consultation

The present RCVS VN training scheme has enabled standardisation of trained veterinary nurses in this country and has provided a template for the training of veterinary nurses in many other countries. In its present format it enables student nurses to attain upon qualification a level of clinical competence similar to that of human-centred nurses and indeed, the original VN training scheme was based on that of the SRN when it was introduced in 1961. Qualified veterinary nurses are trained to work in a number of aspects of veterinary practice including:

Nursing care of inpatients
Client education and support
Monitoring of anaesthesia
Performing laboratory analysis on clinical samples
Radiography

The special status of qualified veterinary nurses was recognised in 2002 when an Amendment to Schedule Three specified that listed VN/EVNs were able to perform minor acts of surgery.

The BVNA considers that the 1966 Veterinary Surgeons Act, whilst appropriate for its time, has now been superseded by the requirements of modern veterinary practice. Today’s small animal clients demand a more sophisticated approach to the care of their pets and veterinary practice has developed to meet these demands. One of the most significant of these developments has been the broadening of the role of the qualified veterinary nurse (VN). The availability of qualified nursing care for veterinary patients has enabled the veterinary surgeon to delegate appropriate aspects of clinical management to suitably trained individuals which in turn allows for the maximisation of patient welfare.

The identification and delegation of specific nursing responsibilities mirrors the development that has taken place in human-centred nursing and the BVNA would advocate that the resultant increase in the assumption of responsibility for patient care be restricted to regulated individuals to ensure standardisation of patient care and professional accountability. These would therefore be persons who have received appropriate training and who are required to subscribe to a framework of accountability as stipulated by an appropriate regulatory body. The RCVS would appear to be the most logical regulatory body at this time and it has taken the first step towards formal regulation of VN/EVNs by introducing a non-statutory register in September of this year.

The BVNA would see this move towards regulation and accountability for qualified veterinary nurses as a positive one in that it would provide a framework for the VN/EVN to work with the veterinary surgeon in a complementary manner as part of a team of healthcare professionals. This framework should ideally promote and develop the existing role of the VN rather than undermine the existing role of the veterinary surgeon which is predominately to diagnose and treat illness and to take overall responsibility for the care of veterinary patients.

Whilst the 2002 amendment to Schedule Three of the 1966 Veterinary Surgeons Act formally recognises that qualified, listed VNs receive training that allows them to perform techniques such as minor acts of surgery, this has had no significant effect upon the development of a professional ethos for veterinary nurses that recognises the increased levels of nursing care that VN/EVNs are able to provide. This requires the definition of an individual and specific role separate to that of the veterinary surgeon. Although the recent introduction of veterinary nursing degree programmes has prompted a growth of this nursing culture, there is still a need to fully recognise the role that the veterinary nurse plays in today’s veterinary practice and the BVNA believes that this can only be fully facilitated by means of the legal recognition of the existing VN/EVN qualification.

A formal framework as developed by the RCVS will allow for standardisation of training which should promote confidence in the provision of veterinary nursing care. The RCVS proposal and introduction of non-statutory regulation will, if further supported by a new Veterinary Surgeons Act which recognises the importance of the role played by these uniquely qualified individuals enable this standardisation to take place by means of compulsory regulation, retraining for those individuals who opt to return to veterinary nursing following a significant period of absence and a formal disciplinary procedure to deal with complaints against registered VNs.

In principle, the BVNA supports mandatory regulation of veterinary practices by means of further development of the existing RCVS Practice Standards Scheme. However, this should not undermine the principle of individual professional accountability based upon the use of a professional code of conduct/ethics for both the veterinary surgeon as well as other potentially accountable veterinary staff such as qualified veterinary nurses.

If the principle of regulation for qualified veterinary nurses is accepted, the BVNA fully supports the proposed RCVS model of compulsory CPD, a formal disciplinary process and revalidation of those VNs who have not practised for a significant period of time. However, whilst the initial stages of this process are being implemented by RCVS at the present time, the BVNA would welcome the eventual inauguration of a separate body specifically dedicated to the regulation of veterinary nurses. It is envisaged that this would mirror the existing regulatory structure of both doctors and nurses within the medical profession.

The BVNA is fully supportive of the concept of appointing appropriate lay persons to play an important role in the regulation of all veterinary professionals. The inclusion of lay persons is integral to a transparent regulatory mechanism which would help to ensure fair treatment of both veterinary nurses and the public as well as maintaining the all important concept of duty of care to patients.

The BVNA strongly believes that separate conduct committees for both veterinary surgeons and veterinary nurses are essential as a separate VNC conduct committee composed of nurses and lay persons would be better placed to deal with disciplinary matters concerning VNs in a fair and unbiased manner. As the majority of VN/EVNs are directly employed by veterinary surgeons it could be argued that there is a potential conflict inherent in a dual role for veterinary surgeons in this respect.

The BVNA believes that the RCVS should have the power to delegate specified procedures to qualified, registered veterinary nurses as this concept is entirely compatible with the emerging role of the qualified veterinary nurse. The precedent has already been created with the amendment to Schedule 3 of the Veterinary Surgeons Act which allowed legal recognition of qualified veterinary nurses. However, the actual details of what may be performed by qualified and listed VNs has been kept deliberately vague and if regulation is introduced the BVNA would strongly support the identification of a specific role for the VN which would allow for a greater degree of autonomy whilst ensuring compatibility with the existing role of the veterinary surgeon.