Describe the Issue
The current rules governing horse racing require state that licensed Animal Health Technologists must be under the supervision and control of a licensed veterinarian without explicitly defining 'supervision'. The current Alberta Veterinary Medical Association (ABVMA) rule states the following with respect to supervision of AHT's: the supervising veterinarian is on the same premises as the supervised AHT at least once a day where the veterinary practice activity takes place and has direct communication with the supervised AHT. The veterinarian need not be on the premises at the time the activity takes place.
What specific problems or concerns are involved in this issue?
The current ambiguity with respect to supervising the activities of AHT's by veterinarians could be misinterpreted to suggest that a veterinarian has to be present at all times while an AHT is working, when in fact this is not the case per current ABVMA regulations.
Who does the issue affect?
Primarily veterinarians and AHT'salthough there is implications for other stakeholders who may not be able to receive treatment for their horses in a timely manner if a veterinarian is not available to supervise.
What existing HRA rules relate to this issue?
38 (2) (f) 40 (3) 42 (b) 44 (2) (d)
What solution does this proposal provide?
The HRA definition of veterinarian supervision of AHT's should match the ABVMA (provincial regulators) definition.
How will the solution fix the problem?
It will make clear what supervision of an AHT by a veterinarian specifically entails and allow AHT's on the racetrack to work in the capacity that they would be able to in a non racetrack practice.
How will the change affect any entities or stakeholders?
It will allow AHT's to work to the extent that they are permitted to in a non racetrack practice. It will allow AHT's to treat covered horses as per the veterinarian's instructions without the veterinarian being on the premises at the actual time of treatment as per current ABVMA regulations.
What are the benefits of the proposed change?
More availability of veterinary care throughout the day for horses and clients.
What are the possible drawbacks of the proposed change?
None.
For those stakeholder groups that have expressed an opinion, please list the points on which they agree or disagree, and the arguments they have expressed.
Dr Gibson supports this proposal. Myself and Dr Santarossa support this proposal. None opposes it.
Are there any affected stakeholder groups that have not been consulted on this proposal?
None relavant.
Please show new language in a new paragraph below the current wording. If you are proposing that current rule language be eliminated, please indicate the text to be deleted with [DELETE: copy to be deleted in square brackets]
38 (2) (f)failing to supervise or inadequately supervising an assistant veterinarian or licensed animal health technologist or unregistered veterinary auxiliary who is licensed under these rules and is under the supervision and control of the licensee
should now just read failing to supervise (as defined) and remove inadequately supervise.
Under 42 add a new definition defining supervision of an AHT by a licensed veterinarian that matches the ABVMA definition: the veterinarian must be on the premises at least once a day, communicate any treatment to the AHT, but need not be on the premises at the time of treatment.
Submit proposed amendments to those rules to comply with changes that would be made by this proposal.
No other rules affected except what has been stated above.
Terms & Conditions
Report
My comments