Objectives: To investigate the effect of client complaints on small animal veterinary internists' welfare, job satisfaction and medical practices. Materials and MethOds: Cross-sectional anonymous survey study. Between February 1 and March 31, 2017, a web-based questionnaire was made available through the American College Veterinary Internal Medicine sub-specialty Small Animal Internal Medicine E-mail List Serve. results: A total of 92 completed surveys were available for review. Fifty-nine (64•1%) respondents received a client complaint during the previous 6 months with cost of care the most common reason (53•3%). Eighty-nine (96•7%) respondents worry about client complaints being made against them with 33 (35•8%) stating they worry "most of the time" or "all of the time." Thirty-two (34•8%) reported being verbally assaulted by a client in the previous 6 months and 27 (29•4%) reported being threatened with litigation during the previous 6 months. Sixty-six (71•7%) have reported changing the way they practice medicine to avoid a client complaint and 40 (43•5%) have considered changing their career because of complaints made against them. clinical relevance: Client complaints are a frequent problem among small animal veterinary internists that have detrimental effects on job satisfaction, psychological distress and medical practices.

Background: Veterinarians and support staff have been reporting the negative mental health effects from client complaints (CC). A previous study was performed evaluating these effects in veterinarians however no such study has been performed on veterinary support staff (VSS). Objectiv:The purpose of this study was to investigate the frequency and effects of CCs on VSS. Methods:A cross sectional anonymous survey using a web-based questionnaire was created evaluating the frequency, type, and effects from CC. The survey was distributed to five different VSS Facebook groups and respondents provided demographic information and reported the frequency and effects of such complaints.Results: A total of 681 questionnaires were collected during the study period but 130 were incomplete and were excluded from analysis. This resulted in 551 completed questionnaires available for review. One hundred and ninety (34.4%) VSS reported being subject to a CC in the previous 6 months with cost of care the most common reason (78.6%). Two hundred and sixty VSS (47.2%) reported feeling depressed because of CCs made against them, 295 VSS (53.5%) stated CCs negatively affected their enjoyment of their job, and 146 (26.5%) have considered changing their career because of CCs.Conclusions: CC have detrimental effects on VSS career satisfaction, mental health and hospital practices. Further studies are warranted to mitigate the detrimental effects of CCs.

Previous studies in human medicine have found that patients prefer their doctors to be more formally attired, and that this influences their trust and confidence in their physician. The purpose of this study was to evaluate how veterinarians’ attire affected owners’ impressions and trust in the small animal specialty medicine setting. A questionnaire based study conducted during a 2‐month period at an urban based small animal private practice specialty hospital. Respondents completed a written survey after reviewing pictures of the same male and female veterinarian in five different dress styles. Respondents were asked for their preference for male and female veterinarian attire in different clinical scenarios and whether it would affect their willingness to discuss sensitive issues. Two hundred and thirty‐eight questionnaires were completed during the study period with 76.1% of respondents being female. Female respondents did not have a preference to how a male or female veterinarian was attired with the attire examples provided. However, male respondents tended to have fairly equal response rates between no preference and preferring a male veterinarian to be in either clinical or professional attire. Male owners either had no preference or preferred their male veterinarian to be attired in clinical or professional attire and had no preference or preferred their female veterinarian to be clinical attire. Most respondents do not feel it is necessary for a veterinarian to wear a white coat or neck ties and most do not feel it is inappropriate for a veterinarian to wear blue jeans, have coloured hair, or have visible tattoos.

OBJECTIVE To determine how veterinarians' attire affected clients' perceptions and trust in the small animal emergency medicine setting. DESIGN Cross-sectional study. SAMPLE 154 clients of a 24-hour small animal emergency clinic in a rural location. PROCEDURES A survey was administered to clients in the waiting room over a 1-month period to elicit their impressions of veterinarians' attire in various clinical scenarios and whether that attire would affect their perceptions. Respondents completed the survey after examining photographs of 1 male and 1 female veterinarian in 5 styles of attire (business, professional, surgical, clinical, and smart casual). RESULTS 83 (53.9%) respondents were female, and 71 (46.1%) were male; age was evenly distributed. Across all clinical scenarios, the most common response was no preference regarding the way a male or female veterinarian was dressed and that this attire would have no effect on the respondents' trust in their veterinarian. Most respondents were indifferent or preferred that their veterinarians not wear neckties and white coats. Twenty-six percent (40/154) of respondents indicated that they believed their veterinarian's attire would influence their opinion of the quality of care their pet received. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE In this small animal emergency medicine setting, most clients indicated no preference regarding their veterinarian's attire, yet approximately one-fourth indicated this attire would influence their perception of the quality of care their pet received. Further studies are warranted in other practice settings and locations to determine whether these findings are generalizable or unique to this particular setting.

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the internet‐use among pet owners seeing a veterinary oncologist. Over a two‐month period, 137 questionnaires were collected at three specialty hospitals around a large urban city. Approximately 85% of respondents reported using the internet to research their pet's condition and/or treatment. A search engine was the most employed means however veterinary university websites were considered to provide the most accurate information. The odds of owners who researched their own health condition online researching their pet's condition was 4.3 (95% CI: 1.2–23.1, p < .021) times as high as owners who did not research their own health condition. The odds of owners who have been to their oncologist previously to research their pet's condition was 4.7 (95% CI: 26.9.3, p < .001) times as high than owners who have not been to an oncologist previously. Oncologists should be aware internet use among pet owners appears common and further research to assess the accuracy and readability of veterinary medical websites appears indicated.