Complaints

• Initial Complaint

  04/03/2024

  Complaint Type:

  Service or Repair Issues

  Status:

  Answered

  More info

  My wife took our 5 year old Labrador retriever into Teir 1 because she was vomiting. The vet ************************************* conducted a exam and only found our dog showed "slightly painful on cranial abdominal palpation" see attachment. Teir 1 has a CT scanner that they could have used for diagnosis. My wife said the vet used xray and did not use all other means to determine if there was a problem. Instead the vet did an exploratory laparotomy surgery on Sept 10 2023. My wife was not provided the opportunity to use all the non-invasive diagnostic tools. A laparotomy is very invasive and puts the animal through a lot of pain/suffering. This procedure was not needed and should not have been done. We cannot tell you how disappointed we are with the diagnosis and procedure that ************************ put our dog through that was not needed and should not have been done. The laparotomy found NO FOREIGN MATERIAL NOTED and determined that the diagnosis of "acute gastroenteritis suspect secondary to dietary indiscretion". This very intrusive and expensive surgery should not have been conducted and was not needed. Our dog died on January 4 2024. She was only 5 years and 7 months old. This unnecessary surgery likely caused her death.

  Business response

  04/09/2024

  April 09, 2024
  
  Better Business Bureau
  ***********************************;
  Anchorage, AK 99503-5927 
  RE: ****************** and *********;
  
  To whom it may concern,
  We are writing in response to the complaint filed by Mr. ***************** concerning the medical treatment of his dog, Fancy, at our veterinary hospital. We appreciate the opportunity to address the concerns outlined and wish to provide our perspective and the facts surrounding *****'s care. Our Medical Director reviewed the medical records in depth and discussed the matter with ************************, which we will summarize here.
  Fancy was presented to our Hospital on September 10, 2023, with a three-day history of vomiting, a known history of ingesting cloth, and wheezing post-vomiting. Our standard protocol in such presentations is to perform a thorough physical examination followed by radiographs, which in *****'s case showed potential signs of a foreign object causing intermittent obstruction.
  ************************ discussed the radiographic findings with **********, explaining the implications and the options for further diagnostic work. The options of abdominal ultrasound, ** scan, repeat radiographs, gastroscopy, and exploratory laparotomy were considered. While the ** scan was available, its use would have entailed higher costs and was not guaranteed to provide additional clarity over the chosen exploratory laparotomy.
  After discussion between the Foxs and ************************, an exploratory laparotomy was agreed upon as it is a definitive diagnostic procedure that would confirm the absence of any obstruction, allowing for targeted treatment of gastroenteritis. It's worth noting that this procedure is less invasive than other surgical interventions and *****'s recovery post-operation was uneventful. Uneventfulness is always a good outcome post surgery. 
  It is important to acknowledge that without a necropsy, determining the exact cause of *****'s unfortunate passing six months after the surgery is speculative. While we deeply sympathize with the loss ********** has endured, it is medically unsound to definitively correlate the exploratory laparotomy with *****'s cause of death given the time elapsed and the lack of post-mortem examination. The period between the surgery and *****'s sudden collapse, as well as the absence of any notable complications during her postoperative recovery, suggests that her passing could have resulted from a multitude of other medical possibilities unrelated to the procedure. In veterinary medicine, as in human medicine, outcomes can be influenced by a complex interplay of factors, many of which can remain hidden even with the most advanced and non-invasive diagnostic tools available.
  After careful review of the case, we stand by the medical decisions and treatment provided by ************************ at the time. The choices made were aligned with standard veterinary practices and were in the best interest of Fancy given the symptoms and clinical findings at the time.
  We strive to provide the best possible care for our patients and to communicate effectively with their owners so that informed decisions can be made. We regret that ********** was not satisfied with the outcome, despite our efforts to provide ***** with the appropriate care.
  We are open to discussing this matter further with ********** to address any remaining concerns and to find a mutually acceptable resolution.
  Thank you for your attention to this matter.
  
  Sincerely,
  ************** **************;
  Chief Financial Officer 
  
  

  Customer response

  04/12/2024

   
  Complaint: 21525998
  
  I am rejecting this response because:

  The response I received from the business contained inaccurate/untrue information regarding the unnecessary surgery and they refuse to consider my claim.  They stated that I was offered alternative diagnostic methods at the time of the incident (unnecessary surgery) and this was not true.  Upon examining my dog they jumped to the conclusion there was an intestinal blockage and there was not.They did not offer me a CT Scan or other less invasive methods to diagnose what was wrong with my dog.  The public information from this vet clinic states that they have a CT scan available, but they did not offer it to me.  Screen shot attached.  Here is the ******* video: *******************************************

  When I brought the dog in to the clinic for vomiting, I relied on the vet to judge what was wrong with the dog and instead of taking advantage of the tools available, the vet jumped directly to the invasive surgery option to diagnose what was wrong.  I am not a vet and at the time trusted their judgement which was a mistake.  Upon performing surgery, nothing was found to be wrong with my dog and the surgery was completely unnecessary.  They could have used a CT scan or recommended additional xrays or ultrasound before performing this procedure on my dog.

  This surgery is dangerous for the animal due to risks from anesthesia and complications.  It was negligent of this vet clinic to embark on such an invasive procedure when they were unsure that my dog had an intestinal blockage, which was not the case.  I asked for the clinic to refund the cost of the surgery and they have refused,  
  
  Sincerely,
  *****************

  Business response

  04/18/2024

  April 17, 2024 
  
  Better Business Bureau
  *****************
  Anchorage, AK 99503-5927
  RE: Complaint ID ********, *****************
  
  Dear ************,
  
  Thank you for forwarding the concerns raised by Mr. ***************** regarding the treatment his dog received at Tier 1 Veterinary Medical Center. We understand the distress caused by the loss of a beloved pet and extend our deepest sympathies to **********. However, we believe it is important to clarify the medical decisions and procedures undertaken to ensure that they are understood in the context of veterinary standards and practices.
  Choice of Diagnostic Tool: The decision to proceed with an exploratory laparotomy over other diagnostic methods, including a CT scan, was made with thorough consideration of the dogs symptoms and history. The use of a CT scan, while beneficial in certain scenarios, was not deemed necessary in this case due to the specific presentation and clinical signs observed by ************************. Exploratory laparotomy, though invasive, is a standard diagnostic approach to ascertain the presence of an obstruction when clinical signs and initial imaging (X-rays) suggest such a possibility.
  
  
  Informed Decision-Making: We emphasize that the decision to proceed with surgery was not made unilaterally. It involved detailed discussions with Mr. and ***********, during which the risks, benefits, and alternatives were thoroughly explained. The consent for surgery was obtained after ensuring that the pet owners were fully informed and agreed with the proposed course of action.
  
  
  Post-Surgical Care and **************operatively, the dog was closely monitored, and her recovery initially progressed without notable complications, which is indicative of the care and attention provided by our team. The unfortunate passing of the dog months later is deeply saddening but linking it directly to the surgery without a necropsy does not align with medical evidence or standard veterinary practice.
  
  
  Commitment to Veterinary Standards: Our hospital adheres to the highest standards of veterinary care and all decisions are made with the aim of providing the best possible outcome for our patients. The use of diagnostic tools and surgical interventions are always aligned with contemporary veterinary practices and tailored to the individual needs of each patient.

  
  Additionally, we would like to note that ********** had every opportunity to request specific diagnostic methods if he had strong preferences regarding the approach to his pets care. Our team is always open to discussing all available options and respecting the wishes of the pet owners whenever possible.
  

  Furthermore, while our hospital is equipped with a wide array of advanced medical technologies, it is not practical or medically advisable to list every possible diagnostic tool during a consultation. Our responsibility is to recommend the most appropriate diagnostic and treatment plans based on the specific symptoms and clinical findings of each case. This approach ensures that we provide not only effective but also efficient medical care, avoiding unnecessary procedures that *** not benefit the patient.

  
  We are committed to resolving this matter to the satisfaction of all parties involved and are open to further dialogue with ********** to discuss any residual concerns or to explore potential avenues for reconciliation.
  

  Thank you for the opportunity to explain our position. Recently, within the last day,  *** reached out to our Hospital and is scheduling a meeting with our Medical Director to resolve this matter and we are hoping that after this meeting, while nothing will bring their beloved pet back, they have a solid understanding of what transpired and can find closure.
  
  
  
  
  

  
  

*Some consumers may elect to not publish the details of their complaints, some complaints may not meet BBB's standards for publication, or BBB may display a portion of complaints when a high volume is received for a particular business. ↩