Labrador Retriever Forum

General Forum
Start a New Topic 
Author
Comment
practitioner vs specialist vs cardiologist

I am trying to understand OFA cardiac clearances and the different professionals that can perform echos. I know what a practitioner is. I know what a cardiologist is. But what is a "specialist", and how are they different from a practitioner or a cardiologist? I tried to find the info on OFA but was not having luck.

Re: practitioner vs specialist vs cardiologist

A cardiologist is a "board certified" cardiologist whose specialty is cardiology. A "specialist" might specialize in internal medicine, for example, but is not board certified in cardiology.

A veterinary specialist is a veterinarian (DVM, VMD) that has completed an approved residency and passed certification testing administered by the specialty college board. They are said to be “board-certified.” The ACVIM is the American College of Veterinary Internal Medicine, and has four subdivisions – Internal Medicine (small animal and large animal), Oncology, Neurology and Cardiology. A veterinary specialist is a Diplomate, and as such, their credentials read “DVM/VMD, Diplomate of …(college). A board-certified veterinary cardiologist’s credentials would therefore read as DVM, DACVIM (cardiology). Other recognized veterinary specialties include surgery (ACVS), radiology (ACVR) emergency and critical care (AVECCS), pathology, dermatology, ophthalmology, anesthesiology, among others.

Re: practitioner vs specialist vs cardiologist

echo
A cardiologist is a "board certified" cardiologist whose specialty is cardiology. A "specialist" might specialize in internal medicine, for example, but is not board certified in cardiology.

A veterinary specialist is a veterinarian (DVM, VMD) that has completed an approved residency and passed certification testing administered by the specialty college board. They are said to be “board-certified.” The ACVIM is the American College of Veterinary Internal Medicine, and has four subdivisions – Internal Medicine (small animal and large animal), Oncology, Neurology and Cardiology. A veterinary specialist is a Diplomate, and as such, their credentials read “DVM/VMD, Diplomate of …(college). A board-certified veterinary cardiologist’s credentials would therefore read as DVM, DACVIM (cardiology). Other recognized veterinary specialties include surgery (ACVS), radiology (ACVR) emergency and critical care (AVECCS), pathology, dermatology, ophthalmology, anesthesiology, among others.


So a "practitioner" did not take the certification test for basic internal medicine? I did not realize this was not required. And a cardiologist is a specialist but a "specialist" is not a cardiologist?

Is a "practitioner" or "specialist" required to have some sort of certification to administer an echo (or even special training for auscultations)?

Re: practitioner vs specialist vs cardiologist

Practitioners cannot administer/evaluate echos. A good portion of them miss murmurs on listening. I think it is rare to find a good practitioner who can confidently do just the ascultation. There is only 1 practitioner 1 hour away that I let listen to my dogs' hearts. She caught a tiny murmur (grade 1) on an older dog that my 2 competent previous Vets had missed. So, off we went for an echo. Turned out to be a slight regurgitation in mitral valve, diagnosed unequivocal. I was encouraged to go to another cardiologist who would PASS THE DOG! Oh joy! Didn't go of course!

This is why the Cardiologist Echo has become "mandatory" in breeding Labs,now. For all the good that does, really............

Re: practitioner vs specialist vs cardiologist

I recently had an echo done on a young dog at a clinic, there was no problem, just doing it to make sure since she will hopefully be bred and I routinely have been doing heart clearances for around 12 years now. The cardiologist was an elderly gentleman who had been practicing for a very long time, had credentials a mile long, had been the head of a big cardiology speciality center, taught veterinary cardiology at universities, so he was certainly quite qualified. Before the echo he did the ascultation, which is what OFA requires. When he was done he turned to me and said "this dog is perfectly fine, why waste your money on the echo?" He went on and it almost was like he was trying to talk me out of it. I told him it was already paid for anyway and I wanted to be sure so he went ahead with the echo, which she passed. I then asked him why he thought it was unnecessary since everything I had heard said a color doppler echo was the only way to know for sure, and he said that if the dog passes by ascultation, and remember, this is a cardiologist listening, not just a general practitioner, then the odds that there is a problem is extrememly small. However, he then said for
the small number of cases where a dog passes ascultation but fails the echo, the breed that has the highest incidence of this is the Labrador Retriever. He said it has something to do with the structure of the Lab's heart and the blood flow, it is more quiet than other breeds so easier to miss a murmur unless you really know what you are doing. I thought this was very interesting.

Re: practitioner vs specialist vs cardiologist

Cardio cred
Practitioners cannot administer/evaluate echos. A good portion of them miss murmurs on listening. I think it is rare to find a good practitioner who can confidently do just the ascultation. There is only 1 practitioner 1 hour away that I let listen to my dogs' hearts. She caught a tiny murmur (grade 1) on an older dog that my 2 competent previous Vets had missed. So, off we went for an echo. Turned out to be a slight regurgitation in mitral valve, diagnosed unequivocal. I was encouraged to go to another cardiologist who would PASS THE DOG! Oh joy! Didn't go of course!

This is why the Cardiologist Echo has become "mandatory" in breeding Labs,now. For all the good that does, really............


Do you mean that the slight regurgitation was undeniably a murmur of significance, ergo "unequivocal." Or did you mean to say that the murmur was "equivocal" meaning that the significance could not be determined or classified?

Re: practitioner vs specialist vs cardiologist

Very interesting indeed! Thank you for your post.

Re: practitioner vs specialist vs cardiologist

Significance undetermined and not classified through color doppler....so slight and at mitral valve. Several cardiologists were not sure why the dog wasn't passed as a wee bit is considered "normal" by most. Who knows.........decided not to show him and is just my buddy.

Re: practitioner vs specialist vs cardiologist

Cardio cred
Significance undetermined and not classified through color doppler....so slight and at mitral valve. Several cardiologists were not sure why the dog wasn't passed as a wee bit is considered "normal" by most. Who knows.........decided not to show him and is just my buddy.


I cannot understand why you believe that this particular experience demonstrates that an echocardiogram should be mandatory for Labs. A practitioner was able to hear regurgitation so slight that it could not unequivocally be diagnosed as a murmur by echocardiogram. You discovered that cardiologists do not agree about how much regurgitation seen on an echocardiogram is normal and how much indicates a problem.

To me your story indicates the effectiveness of an auscultation by a trained practitioner. The practitioner was so good at auscultation that he was able to hear equivocal sounds that were not confirmed as a murmur by echocardiogram.

Re: practitioner vs specialist vs cardiologist

The specialists (either cardiologists or internal medicine) have completed a internship (1 year) and residency (usually 3-4 years) after their 4 years of veterinary school as opposed to the practitioner. The board certifited specialists have also completed the requirements (and they are different for each specialty but include things like a list of all their cases, peer reviewed publications, written, oral and practical examinations) to be called "board certified.

Re: practitioner vs specialist vs cardiologist

specialist
The specialists (either cardiologists or internal medicine) have completed a internship (1 year) and residency (usually 3-4 years) after their 4 years of veterinary school as opposed to the practitioner. The board certifited specialists have also completed the requirements (and they are different for each specialty but include things like a list of all their cases, peer reviewed publications, written, oral and practical examinations) to be called "board certified.


Thank you. That does help clear things up.

I personally will stick to a cardiologist for my labs heart exams since they are certified in this area.

Re: practitioner vs specialist vs cardiologist

brdr1
Cardio cred
Significance undetermined and not classified through color doppler....so slight and at mitral valve. Several cardiologists were not sure why the dog wasn't passed as a wee bit is considered "normal" by most. Who knows.........decided not to show him and is just my buddy.


I cannot understand why you believe that this particular experience demonstrates that an echocardiogram should be mandatory for Labs. A practitioner was able to hear regurgitation so slight that it could not unequivocally be diagnosed as a murmur by echocardiogram. You discovered that cardiologists do not agree about how much regurgitation seen on an echocardiogram is normal and how much indicates a problem.

To me your story indicates the effectiveness of an auscultation by a trained practitioner. The practitioner was so good at auscultation that he was able to hear equivocal sounds that were not confirmed as a murmur by echocardiogram.


I was just identifying why most breeders consider the echo w/color doppler the "gold standard" for "clear"

Re: practitioner vs specialist vs cardiologist

Cardio cred
brdr1
Cardio cred
Significance undetermined and not classified through color doppler....so slight and at mitral valve. Several cardiologists were not sure why the dog wasn't passed as a wee bit is considered "normal" by most. Who knows.........decided not to show him and is just my buddy.


I cannot understand why you believe that this particular experience demonstrates that an echocardiogram should be mandatory for Labs. A practitioner was able to hear regurgitation so slight that it could not unequivocally be diagnosed as a murmur by echocardiogram. You discovered that cardiologists do not agree about how much regurgitation seen on an echocardiogram is normal and how much indicates a problem.

To me your story indicates the effectiveness of an auscultation by a trained practitioner. The practitioner was so good at auscultation that he was able to hear equivocal sounds that were not confirmed as a murmur by echocardiogram.


I was just identifying why most breeders consider the echo w/color doppler the "gold standard" for "clear"


I guess I must be dense. So I'll just ask. Are you speaking tongue in cheek?