Virginia Regulatory Town Hall
Agency
Department of Health Professions
 
Board
Board of Veterinary Medicine
 
chapter
Regulations Governing the Practice of Veterinary Medicine [18 VAC 150 ‑ 20]
Previous Comment     Next Comment     Back to List of Comments
5/22/13  8:15 am
Commenter: Lara Bartl, DVM VMRCVM

Support for Non-clinical CE allowance
 

I am in support of allowing a limited number of CE credits (3-4) to apply toward the Virginia annnual requirement.   I support this for the following reasons.

1)  non clinical CE (business management topics) would not be a requirement for all practitioners but for those who are interested this they would have this option to attend non-clinical CE an have it count toward their annual requirement.

2)  Veterinary medicine is a sevice oriented business.  Having been a practice owner business management CE was critical in the success of our practice for the owner(s) and anyone involved in management.  In addition it is imporant for associates  to understand the basics of business management to understand the goals and mission of their practice.

3)  Non-clincial CE should include topics such as advances in IT and other technology, social media and electronic medical records.  The state of medical records in our profession is often despicable. Topics in the legal ramificaitons of incomplete or sparse medical records should be included.  Practitioners should have more exposure to what could be done with electronic medical records that would both protect them and improve efficiency  to allow more profitablility in practice.

4)  "Soft skills" are essential to the successful veterinarian whether anyone wants to admit this or not.  In my experience the most successful clinicans are those that not only have excellent clinical skills but also have exellent communication skills.  For some this is natural, but for others it is somethiing that requires work. I think wen should having CE count that would include communication style and skills, conflict management, leadership, etc.  

CommentID: 28182