Sign in

Folsom Veterinary Hospital

Sharing is caring! Have something to share about Folsom Veterinary Hospital? Use RevDex to write a review
Reviews Veterinarian Folsom Veterinary Hospital

Folsom Veterinary Hospital Reviews (2)

Review: Vet mislead us regarding dogs health and promoted surgery over euthinization to make more money. Spent over $3600 and continue to have sick dog.

We brought our dog in on April 30, 2013 very sick. They did an exam on her and said surgery was the only option or she would die due to pancriatitis. We informed them that we financially couldn't afford the surgical procedure and asked about euthanizing the dog. Instead of being ethical and recommending euthanizing the dog they, in my mind relentlessly, talked me into surgery. What was not discussed is that we would have to incur a continued financial burden for recovery visits or check ups, insulin checks and injections, or anything else. Now the dog is sick again with the same exact symptoms and they continue to hold the pay me or else line. This doctor and her staff have not provided the necessary level of care or sympathy for the decision they pushed us into. It is clear that this company (Doctor)chose to improve their pocket book rather than ethically telling the truth and recommending putting the dog down. Now the dog is sick again with the same symptoms, the vet wont see her unless paid, we will probably have to have the dog euthanized, or dying in front of my 3 children. This is the worst business I have ever come in contact with and am appalled by the service provided and rude, "to bad" office assistance. Desired Settlement: We would like some sort of refund for the expenses we had to pay. One month later and we are back to how she was before surgery probably even worse.

Business

Response:

Business' Initial Response

I saw [redacted] on 4/30/2013 for vomiting and not eating for "a few days" On physical exam, this dog was extremely thin (backbone, ribs and bones of the head were very prominent) and severely dehydrated (to the point where her eyes were sunken and crusted with mucus and her nose was crusted with dried mucus). She was so weak that she stumbled into the exam room and fell. She vomited in the room several times. This dog was critically ill and in my opinion, this did not happen over the course of a "few days". I explained the rule outs for vomiting and inappetance to the owner, which is a very long

list, including GI obstruction, toxin exposure, mass (neoplasia), parasites, viral disease (parvovirus), inflammation of the GI tract, pancreas, or lining of the abdomen, liver disease, kidney disease, diabetes complications or Addison's disease. I explained to the owner that we would need to do further diagnostics including parvo testing, general chemistry panel, specific tests for pancreatitis, and abdominal radiographs (x"rays) to begin with. This type of testing is the standard of care in a case like

this. I also, at this time, explained to the owner that euthanasia was an option, to which the owner either chose NOT to hear or blocked it out. I do not make financial decisions for any owner and ALWAYS include euthanasia on the list of options. It is written in the record and available for review.

The owner was presented with an estimate for services and potential treatment. The owner chose to pursue blood work. The blood work k was run and a tentative diagnosis of anemia, liver disease,

inflammation/ infection and pancreatitis (inflammation of the pancreas) was reached. I explained to the owner that these results could be related. The pancreatitis can cause transient or permanent diabetes due to destruction of the insulin producing cells of the pancreas. The liver disease could or could not be

related. Often chronic vomiting (as seen with pancreatitis) can cause liver inflammation, but we have not ruled out abdominal cancer or inflammation of all the internal organs due to peritonitis (inflammation of the entire abdominal cavity) due to leakage of pancreatic enzymes. I suggested an abdominal ultrasound - to be performed by either a board certified radiologist for $450.00 or a less expensive, in house scan to be performed by me. I explained to the owner that I am not board certified, but can detect large masses or fluid in the abdomen to help rule out obvious cancer or peritonitis. The owner opted to have me do the less expensive abdominal ultrasound. On ultrasound, I did not find any

masses, nor did I see any free fluid in the abdomen, however, some of the bowel loops appeared

abnormally large and distended with gas, which can indicate a bowl loop twist or obstruction. At this point, we performed radio graphs (x-rays) AT NO CHARGE to verify my findings. (This is over $200 worth of diagnostics at no charge). The radio graphs supported my suspicion of an obstructed bowel. At this point, I explained the options to the owner - GI surgery or euthanasia and gave a written estimate to

the owner. The owner again apparently chose NOT to hear about the euthanasia option informed us

that they wanted to proceed with the surgery, knowing full well how much it would cost. I never said "surgery was the only option", nor did I ever "promote surgery over euthanasia to make more money" I get paid the same per day and my income is NOT based on the hospital's profits.

We proceeded to place an IV catheter and start shock treatment fluids for the severe dehydration. We stabilized Sierra and started IV antibiotics in order to prepare her for surgery. This was all included in the original estimate for surgery presented to the owner. The surgery was performed and there were several abnormalities noted within the abdomen. The pancreas was extremely large and the omentum (fatty curtain over the abdominal organs) was a very abnormal texture. This was consistent with severe and long term pancreatitis, enzyme leakage and inflammation/ damage and adhesions. There were also fecal impactions/ obstructions present, probably secondary to the severe, long term dehydration that

[redacted] had suffered. No masses were noted in the abdomen. All omental adhesions were broken down

and the fecal impactions were surgically removed. [redacted] recovered uneventfully from the surgery and

we kept her in the hospital for 4 days. During this time, she improved significantly and began to eat and get up and walk around with assistance. No vomiting was noted. My staff went "above and beyond" to accommodate the owner's visits; sit and hand feed [redacted] help her out on potty walks and lavish the dog with extra attention. The owners appeared to be grateful and happy and told my staff this. At this point, blood glucose levels were monitored at no charge in order to determine if the diabetes (due to the destruction of the insulin producing cells of the pancreas) was transient or permanent. There was medically no way to tell if they would come back or not, and at this point, we began [redacted] on insulin and

showed her owner how to monitor the blood glucose levels and administer the insulin herself. When

[redacted] was discharged on 5/04/2013, she was eating and keeping food down and able to walk with

assistance. I called the owner for a status report on 5/05, 5/06, 5/08 and a recheck appointment was performed at no charge on 5/10. At this time, [redacted] was bright and alert, eating well, urinating and defecating normally and weak, but able to stand and walk around on her own. Follow up blood work was performed and still showed a high glucose level, and high liver values, but there was improvement

of the pancreatitis and anemia. [redacted] appeared to be clinically getting better. I again explained to the owner that the diabetes could be transient or permanent and that there was no way to tell at this point which way it would go. For the owner to say that she "continued to have a sick dog" depends on whether she was referring to the diabetes due to the pancreatic damage (which can be controlled, but not cured), or to the vomiting and inappetance, which the dog was presented for and which was alleviated by the surgery. The owner was presented with estimated costs for all services and all services were performed as stated. It was further explained to the owner that the diabetes could be or could not

be resolved and it was not within my abilities to determine this outcome. Her claim that the "continued financial burden was not discussed" is insinuating that I would have predicted the outcome of whether the diabetes was going to be transient or permanent , and this I could not know.

I continued to call the owner to check on the progress of [redacted] weekly. I called 5/14 and 5/21. She seemed to be doing well, but the blood glucose levels continued to be erratic. I called on 6/03 to check on the patient and suggest that we do blood work to see how the dog was doing with the liver values.

The owner became "short" with me and stated that she would not do any more blood work or rechecks

due to the expense. On 6/25, the owner called us to tell us the [redacted] had been lethargic and had

vomited twice that day, didn't want to eat or drink and had developed a rash on her legs. I spoke with the owner and informed her that I could not diagnose anything over the phone and that I needed to see [redacted] I explained to her that it could be a reoccurrence of the pancreatitis, but it could be gastroenteritis from eating something that doesn't "agree' with her, toxin exposure, diabetes complication, obstruction, liver disease, etc. We can never assume that it is the same cause as before since there are so many varied causes of the same clinical manifestation. The owner then asked if we would do blood work to which I responded that I would need to in order to diagnose the problem. The

owner became belligerent and wanted a diagnosis over the phone, which I cannot do. She stated that

she would not pay for an exam or blood work and will "just let the dog die at home" At this point, I transferred the call to my office manager because I could not do anything medically over the phone. My office manager noted in the record that the owner wanted an exam and blood work at no charge. When my office manager stated that we could not do that, the owner hung up. Approximately one minute later, her husband called and began yelling at my office manager, upset, because we "wouldn't treat his

dog at no charge" and threatened to turn us into the Revdex.com. The veterinary industry is a service oriented industry, just like physicians, physical therapists, dentists, etc. It is unreasonable to expect exams, full diagnostics and treatments from any service oriented medical business, human or animal, at no cost.

I called the owner back on 6/27 to check on the patient. The owner stated that [redacted] seemed to be doing better, eating a bland diet of chicken and rice and had not been vomiting, but the owner reported that she appeared to be straining to defecate and the owner noted bloody stool. I explained to the owner that this could be colitis, an anal mass, anal gland rupture, colonic mass, bleeding disorder (auto immune or rat bait ingestion) or hemorrhagic gastroenteritis, which is life threatening. I recommended an exam again and the owner declined and hung up. The owner called back again later stating that there was a lot of blood dripping from Sierra's rectum. Again, I re-iterated to the owner all of the possible causes and again recommended an exam. The owner declined. The owner later reported to one of my staff members that the dog had passed away. Condolences were offered, but the owner was

inconsolable.

This was a sad and tragic even and we all truly wish that the outcome would have been different.

However, the owner's statements of how I "mislead" them and "promoted surgery over euthanasia to

make more money" are unfounded. It was made clear from the beginning that euthanasia was an

option and all estimates were given for services rendered. I personally do not profit from "promoting surgery" The owners statements that they "continued to have a sick dog" are untrue. There were unfortunate long term health ramifications due to the chronic damage to the pancreas, but the dog was presented for vomiting and inappetance and surgical correction alleviated these clinical signs. All services that were estimated for were performed and [redacted] was eating and no longer vomiting on discharge. The long term diabetes was an unusual and unfortunate consequence of the pancreatic damage. When the [redacted] subsequently showed the same clinical signs approximately 6 weeks later, the owner assumed that it was due to the same cause, which is an inaccurate assumption to make in the medical field.Despite numerous attempts at public relations, calls to check on the patient and recommendations for exams, our hands were tied. This owner refused to bring Sierra in, refused exams and diagnostics and vehemently demanded free services. Unfortunately veterinary medicine can be an emotionally charged industry and often, during high stress times, owner's perceptions of what they hear and interpret can be different from what is actually being portrayed or intended. While this is indeed a sad and tragic event, I and my staff did everything that we could do within the guidelines of the veterinary medical practice act and the confines of medical ethics and business ethics. You are welcome to review the records.

Rebuttal from: [redacted]-"Owner of Folsom Veterinary Hospital:

Folsom Veterinary Hospital, doctor and staff feel for the loss of [redacted] came in with severe symptoms. As you read in her rebuttal, Dr. [redacted] made clear to

the owners that the condition [redacted] came in with was very serious. They chose to treat. They

chose to continue treatment all along even though they never discussed finances with us.

There was clear communication from the doctor and the staff as to how [redacted] looked and was

doing. [redacted] continued with "hope" to treat [redacted] even though the charges were

mounting and her recovery was slow. Anyone could see her condition was tentative. No one

made promises that she was going to be alright after this ordeal.

I think the owners regret treating [redacted] because of the financial investment.

Animals are not inanimate objects; they are living breathing creatures. Medicine is science and

there are variables no one can predict.

A refund is not warranted. The owners were involved in the care and treatment decisions and

they approved everything. I feel there was communication, no carelessness, nor malpractice

involved. All services that were quoted for, were provided.

Check fields!

Write a review of Folsom Veterinary Hospital

Satisfaction rating
 
 
 
 
 
Upload here Increase visibility and credibility of your review by
adding a photo
Submit your review

Folsom Veterinary Hospital Rating

Overall satisfaction rating

Description: Veterinarians

Address: 803 Reading St, Folsom, California, United States, 95630

Phone:

Show more...

Web:

This website was reported to be associated with Folsom Veterinary Hospital.



Add contact information for Folsom Veterinary Hospital

Add new contacts
A | B | C | D | E | F | G | H | I | J | K | L | M | N | O | P | Q | R | S | T | U | V | W | X | Y | Z | New | Updated