| Complaint: | Complaint 19-16 |
|---|---|
| Respondent: | Sarah Bashaw |
| Premises: | El Dorado Animal Hospital |
The complainant says he brought his dog to Bashaw and she found that the dog had a troublesome tooth. A dental was scheduled and it turns out that tooth was okay but four other teeth had to come out. The dog had a lot of dental work done at the rescue so they thought it was probably okay. They say Bashaw told them the dog did great. When the dog came home, the dog was lethargic and refused to eat or drink. It also had dark liquid diarrhea. They called the clinic the next day and the clinic gave them antibiotic pills. The dog was nonresponsive by the following morning so they immediately took the dog back to the clinic where Bashaw said he was septic and should be euthanized. The complainant requested and paid for a necropsy at Midwestern. The complainants ask for the situation to be investigated as they can't understand how their dog died so horribly from getting teeth pulled.
Bashaw responds by going all the way back to her first meeting with the dog after he was rescued from Love of Dogs rescue. She found the records transferred from the various prior dentals difficult as they apparently weren't the most clear to follow; she also noticed references to vital pulp therapy and was suspicious of that tooth holding up. She states that all the relevant warnings and disclaimers were given to the complainant and that he signed the relevant form. The dog was apparently resistant to being handled but they got the dog sedated and did the procedure. She found that she instead needed to remove four other teeth and tells us how it went, including teeth breaking in the process. She says that the next day she was planning to call for follow-up but that her staff informed her the complainant had already called regarding diarrhea. She said that she assumed this was the normal diarrhea some pets get after anesthesia. She then says that the dog was brought in the next morning unresponsive and came up with a diagnosis of sepsis. The dog also had a seizure. She informs us that she told the complainant that she was very concerned about the prognosis, but the complainant asked her to try and give the dog a few more hours. She also called Smith, a criticalist at AVECCS (?), who also allegedly had the impression the dog probably wasn't worth messing with any longer. She states that the dog was euthanized. We then have a summary of the events after the death including the necropsy and the filing of the complaint.
The Investigative Committee's findings of fact quote the necropsy report as stating that "the findings are consistent post-dental surgical site infection followed by sepsis and multi-organ failure." The Investigative Committee says that things like this happen in veterinary medicine and that it can definitely happen when dealing with the mouth. They do say that it's uncommon and unforeseen, and that the use of postoperative antibiotics is still being debated; they're not frequently used in humans, and they point out the dog could still have died even if antibiotics had been given.
| Source: | November 11, 2018 PM Investigative Committee Meeting |
|---|---|
| People: | |
| Sarah Bashaw | Respondent |
| Roll Call: | |
| Adam Almaraz | Absent |
| Amrit Rai | Aye |
| Christine Butkiewicz | Aye |
| Donald Noah | Aye |
| William Hamilton | Aye |
| Result: | Passed |
| Source: | December 12, 2018 Board Meeting |
|---|---|
| People: | |
| Sarah Bashaw | Respondent |
| Proposed By: | Christina Bertch-Mumaw |
| Seconded By: | Sarah Heinrich |
| Roll Call: | |
| Christina Bertch-Mumaw | Aye |
| Darren Wright | Aye |
| J Greg Byrne | Aye |
| Jane Soloman | Aye |
| Jessica Creager | Aye |
| Jim Loughead | Aye |
| Nikki Frost | Aye |
| Robyn Jaynes | Absent |
| Sarah Heinrich | Aye |
| Result: | Passed |
The primary source for the above summary was obtained as a public record from the Arizona State Veterinary Medical Examining Board. You are welcome to review the original records and board meeting minutes by clicking the relevant links. While we endeavor to provide an accurate summary of the complaint, response, investigative reports and board actions, we encourage you to review the primary sources and come to your own conclusions. In some cases we have also been able to reach out to individuals with knowledge of specific complaints, and where possible that information will be included here.