<p>Our elderly (14 year old) Lab, who has had a cast iron stomach all her life, was struck down by a virulent (explosive is the better word) case of the runs on Wednesday–big dog, massive clean up and sanitation job, as she didn’t come close to making it outside. (We’re talking up the walls, folks.) Per the vet’s advice, we withheld all food for 24 hours, during which time she was quite lethargic, and on Friday introduced a very small meal of rice and boiled chicken, which she gobbled. Friday night, another bout of the runs, another major clean up effort in the wee hours (I don’t think my house will ever smell good again), and a thoroughly be-fouled animal.</p>
<p>H took her to the vet on Saturday morning. He administered a shot, and was ready to send her home, but H was fairly insistent that she be kept in the hospital ward there for observation until it was clear she was recovered–we really didn’t feel we were able to cope with her care if this kept recurring, and were leery of exposing our other pets to whatever was affecting her. The vet agreed to this, then hit H with a “treatment plan” involving a panoply of tests and $3700 in charges. When H balked at the cost (the dog had surgery last fall for less money), the vet arbitrarily cut the fee in half, and H signed off. What makes no sense to me, and what I would have argued had I been there, is that if they thought it was appropriate for her to be sent home, why would she need all these tests now that she is staying overnight? H thinks it was a sort of penalty for their having to care for a stinky, incontinent dog–but the very high cost of hospital boarding should have covered that, as well as any extra for baths. I don’t see why x-rays, blood tests etc. are called for just because she is staying there. If watchful waiting was adequate care at home, why is is not adequate care there? H suggested perhaps a different standard of care applies if she is in their custody, but I don’t see it that way. I feel like we’ve been taken for a very nasty ride.</p>
<p>I’d appreciate hearing the thoughts of pet parents and any vets or vet techs. We are seriously considering switching vets once this illness has (hopefully) been resolved.</p>
<p>Poor doggy.
I’m not a vet, but I did have a lab that lived till she was 16. However by that point she had been through a couple emergencies, including suspected pancreatitis when she gobbled a chicken carcass out of the trash.
I agree with you, if the dog was safe to go home, but your H wanted to be on the safe side and have her stay overnight, possibly with an iv if she was dehydrated, it seems odd that then a lot of tests would need to be run.
If they needed to be run, wouldn’t she have been required to stay in the first place?
My dog had major surgery when she was 14, and it was very expensive, but she was also ill to the point where the vet was suggesting that I consider the options. ( she also had to stay a long time in the critical care clinic)</p>
<p>Is she on any meds? When our dog was 14, she was on thyroxine ( thyroid) and Rimadyl. I noticed that she had significant blood in her stool, and suspected the Rimadyl. Her regular vet had me take her to the critical care clinic, and they did an ultrasound that indicated her spleen/liver was involved. I wanted to see how she did after stopping the Rimadyl, but the vet wanted to play it safe so she had surgery, and had her spleen removed. </p>
<p>What sort of shot was she given?
I normally wouldn’t change vets if you had been generally happy up to this point, but I think itis worth having a conversation about it.</p>
<p>Actually, pet insurance has gotten a lot better. Look into Pet Plan and Trupanion. I have Trupanion. Thankfully, my dog hasn’t had any really major incidents, but they have covered 90% of pet poison control fee, when he ate frog food and 90% of antibiotics and washing the wound, etc. when he was bitten by another dog. </p>
<p>Trupanion covers 90% of everything (no limit for the year or lifetime) except routine visits and shots and the base fee the vet charges (the fee just to walk in the door). I find it very worth it. They cover issues like cancer, etc. They will even cover hip displacia (sp?) now, the only condition that wasn’t covered before. </p>
<p>You can Google insurance review - there is a great site that compares them.</p>
<p>It’s just a starting point, because their cost column is way off, but you can read people’s reviews here. </p>
<p>From my personal research Pet Plan and Trupanion are definitely the better ones, and VPI stinks. Also, make sure to give the companies a call to see of there are any conditions they won’t cover.</p>
<p>I have adopted older dogs. We have been very clear with our vets that at a certain point it’s all about comfort and we do not want unnecessary overpriced and difficult tests that stress the dog. Sometimes the treatment is harder then the illness. </p>
<p>If I were your husband I would cal the vet and ask that only the most urgent tests be done. And what he thinks it is…a blocker, a tumor, food poisoning…</p>
<p>We had a dog that had a major seizure type episode. We could have done dozens of tests with no real diagnosis possible. We waited and and didn’t do any tests, she was fine. Just old dogs stuff</p>
<p>Having all the tests while the dog is in such distress and then what? How much trauma does an old dog need? Would you treat cancer? If tis a blockage would the dog survive surgery? These are questions you need to ask before doing tests.</p>
<p>MommaJ - No to the tests, and that is a RIDICULOUS fee for an overnight stay. Not having looked at your dog I can’t say anything definitively, but my hunch is that your dog’s system just had a stomach bug. It happens. It’s also much safer when the… explosiveness… is really bad to not feed for 48 hours except tiny pieces of treats. 24 hours is too little time. I would have very stern words with your vet, because it sounds like he decided to pump you and your H for money.</p>
<p>I’m not a fan of pet insurance, for the simple reason that insurance has, on average, negative expected value. And if you take good care of your dog (most don’t), then you’re certainly on the losing side of that more often than not. Unlike human medical bills, they’re generally not bankruptcy-inducing, and if they are for you then pet insurance would be a considerable strain in and of itself. That said, I do understand some people like the peace of mind it provides.</p>
<p>I think the pet insurance looks like it would be worth it. Our cats lived till they were 21 & 19, and the older one was on daily sub-q fluids for four years, not to mention she had laser surgery for a nasal sarcoma when she was about ten.
The medications and treatments didn’t bankrupt us, but it was probably a factor in not having any pets for a while.</p>
<p>Not trying to doubt your husband, but it’s hard to see how a vet could cut the money and do the actual tests. Many of them have specific costs and a lot - like ultrasounds - often involve specialists to do them. I assume some things are not being done from the larger menu. Maybe the vet was describing what could be done. </p>
<p>Our vet is big on recommending tests; his clientele very often wants their beloved to be kept alive no matter what. The numbers can become absurd. We spent $2500 on a cat that was in heart failure and all that happened was an x-ray, fluid draining, cytology - which costs - and a ton of nursing care, including oxygen. We rejected the diagnostics, brought him home to die and he lived for 4 really great months.</p>
<p>I definitely understand why some people may not want insurance, but I definitely think it depends on your position in life. I have seen (in other threads on this forum, not this one) people say they wouldn’t do certain procedures because of cost (NOT because of quality of life, etc. issue). For me, that is not an option. My pets are my family, and I would go bankrupt before I didn’t get them a life-saving medical procedure (again, talking about if cost was the reason not to do it, not some other issue) , no matter how much they had left. </p>
<p>That being said, I don’t want to go bankrupt. I am a recent college grad, self-supporting, and I don’t have a lot of savings. I know of a dog falling off a roof (in a freak accident), and the owners had to pay $20,000 to save his life. I don’t have that kind of money, but not paying would not be an option. I know thousands can be spent on cancer treatments and chronic illness.</p>
<p>I make sure to feed my dog best quality food available, take him on walks, etc., but just like for people I know it’s not a guarantee of health. Plus, in New York City an overnight emergency stay can easily be $3,000. On top of it all, I have two other pets (guinea pigs) who don’t have insurance, because no good policies are available, and their vet bills easily exceed the dog’s vet bills. </p>
<p>I guess the point I am trying to make is that I would rather have a net loss than have the possibility of going thousands of dollars in debt overnight.</p>
<p>One thing I want to clarify is that this animal is not on her last legs. While she is elderly and has gradually failing eyesight and hearing, as well as some arthritis, she manages to do well day to day. So this isn’t one of those cases of going to extraordinary lengths to drag out the inevitable. She needs what is essentially palliative care, with someone to check and make sure she isn’t getting dehydrated or overly weakened from lack of nutrition for 4 days and confirm that the illness is abating. The vet thought that could be done at home, and when we said we didn’t feel we could manage it, suddenly a host of test came into the picture. I just felt like he said to himself–well, they’re willing to pay good money for me to take this dog off their hands for a while, so let’s really go to town. He will be making plenty of money from the hospital stay alone–there was no need to lard on more procedures. If the stomach trouble does not improve after the expected interval, then I can see how some further investigation may be warranted. But we aren’t at that point.</p>
<p>Yeah, that would make me switch vets, but I have to admit that I’m now on my 4th vet. My last switch was due to a quote of $200 for a basic urine test, in addition to the office visit. Switch before that was due to vet wanting to clean teeth every 9 months. Seems to be a lot of this going on.</p>
<p>If it is a stomach bug it should abate, whether under the watchful eye of the vet or home. But in elderly animals (and even younger ones) there can be other underlying issues that we dont know about until a symptom surfaces. I’ve known of pets with tumors (benign and cancerous), gastric torsion (stomach twists on its axis), cardiac problems with pulmonary hypertension, aortic stenosis, congestive heart failure, etc. A friend thought her dog was merely tired and had a cough. It was end stage CHF. So, if the vet is going to keep the dog, it may make perfect sense to do tests to find out if in fact it is more than just a virus or upset stomach. If you don’t do the recommended tests and it is one of these issues, you’ll possibly be back again with another emergency, or a deceased pet.</p>
<p>The vet may be making perfectly appropriate recommendations. Dont be too quick to jump and call him a charlatan, or assume he’s just wanting ro run up bills. If you’ve had a good relationship with the vet, dont jump the gun. JMO.</p>
<p>jym - If the vet was concerned about a real breakdown somewhere, he would’ve recommended the tests regardless. X-rays and blood tests don’t exactly require any large amount of operating time or recovery time to only recommend it for an overnight stay. Besides, I’m fairly certain an X-ray is NOT a relevant test for a dog with diarrhea.</p>
<p>OP I do think it is odd that the treatment changed so vastly just because the dog was staying over but it doesn’t surprise me. </p>
<p>I actually had a similar experience with myself when I was in the hospital. One time I had a problem and my kidneys shut down. I was told I had to stay for a few days on an IV. I had the same problem again several months later and there was a huge blizzard starting. They decided I could get the same benefit from taking 4 pills (larger than horse pills) and sent on my way!</p>
<p>It sounds like pet insurance is probably a good idea. But, if you don’t have insurance here is something interesting that I didn’t know. When my dog needed antibiotics the vet sent us to the local supermarket for them. I didn’t know that is where you get doggie meds, but the supermarket provides free generic antibiotics to everyone including doggies. I was shocked.</p>
<p>Time for a new vet. Our beloved vet sold his practice a while back. I had two bad experiences with the new vet. One with an aging dog and one with our cat. The cat needed a tooth pulled. The vet kept her all day and then told me they didn’t do it because they detected a heart murmur and needed to run a bunch of expensive tests before putting her under. I said no and picked her up. Took her to another vet who detected nothing. I him I would sign anything that said he was not responsible if she had a problem under anesthesia. He did the tooth pull with no issues. Umm…ya. Time for a new vet. And that was the short story. The dog one is long and I won’t bore you all with it.
I have never had pet insurance but generally our animals have lived long lives and we have decided when it was their time prior to doing any expensive treatments for potential problems.</p>
<p>CollectivSynergy,
The dog was brought in on a Saturdfay morning. Our vet closes at noon on Saturday, and if the dog has to be taken to the emergency facility and tests run on the weekend, they can be expensive.</p>
<p>ITs not unreasonable to offer ome than one option to the owner, and give them the reasons for each option so they can make a reasoned decision with the options and facts.
I am just really tired of assumptions that the Dr is a crook. Tired of the bashing of human or animal doctors. There is usually more to the story, and its understandible that we will respond based on the information we are provided, and the perspective of teh person sharing it. Thats normal.</p>