The complainant took her dog in for a C-section with Knoblich. She tells us
that the dog had no health problems prior to the surgery. She says that no
blood work was done prior to the procedure and has concerns about the use of
Gentocin on the dog. When she went to pick up the dog it turns out that one
of the puppies was already dead inside and another was struggling, yet she
says Knoblich did not mention the other puppy was also quite likely to die.
Her dog started to get quite sick. At a follow-up visit she says Knoblich
finally did some blood work and discovered the dog was in acute kidney failure.
At this point she took the dog to Southern Arizona Veterinary Specialty and
Emergency Center; they concluded after a fashion that the dog either needed to
go to California for $10,000 in dialysis or be euthanized. The complainant did
not believe the dog would survive the trip and couldn't afford it, so the dog
was euthanized. She said that she wanted the sick puppy to survive to carry on
her mother's spirit but learned from Jessica (a vet tech) that the puppy had died
as well. She says she received the puppy's body in a box during a rendezvous
at a local Circle K. She mentions that she wished her own life would end after
all this, then also says that the death of the dog ended her breeding business.
She asks how Knoblich would feel if someone destroyed her life and her business
like that. She would also like a new puppy at Knoblich's expense.
Knoblich's response states that she initially informed the complainant that she
should take the dog to another facility for a C-section. She also says that the
complainant waited to think about it even though this could have a negative
effect. She also says she warned the complainant that her clinic did not have
24-hour staff so the dog would have to go home for monitoring. The C-section
was performed and the already-dead puppy was put in the freezer for cremation.
She says the surviving mother and dog were sent home with discharge instructions.
The mother came back with problems and there was allegedly discussion of going to
an emergency service; the puppy came back for a tail docking and dewclaw removal
but wasn't eating well. The next day the mother came back in very bad shape. She
says she was in touch with a veterinarian at the referral center who had questions
about the case; it appears she made incorrect notations in her medical records
regarding the Gentocin. Knoblich says that she owes the complainant nothing as she
did not fall below the standard of care, but she does admit that she never provided
her with the medical records she requested. She also says that Jessica (the tech)
is actually very compassionate and the dog was not returned in a cardboard box; she
says the dead puppy was returned on the same bed it came in on.
The Investigative Committee had serious concerns regarding the use of the Gentocin.
They stated it was not the standard of care, and they also said that the large
number of medical records issues meant that there could be bigger problems; they
also noted some other medical concerns regarding the case. They also found room to
blame the complainant for dilly-dallying about the C-section, as they felt the dead
puppies were more likely the result of waiting to perform the C-section. They found
several violations ranging from a failure to use current professional and scientific
knowledge to a failure to release the dog's medical records. The Board sentenced
Knoblich to eight hours of continuing education, a $1000 civil penalty, and required
her to reimburse the complainant for $1211.50.
ARS 32-2232 (12) as it relates to AAC R3-11-501 (1) failure to use current professional andscientific knowledge in the administration of gentamicin, and its route of administration,in a patient that had significant risk factors that could potentially lead to toxicity.
ARS 32-2232 (21) as it relates to AAC R3-11-502 (L) (7) for failure to document the dispensing of Clavamox and meloxicam on August 1, 2019 and Entyce on August 5, 201 9; and (7) (b) for failure to document the amount of SQ fluid administered to the dog on August 2, 2019.
ARS 32-2232 (21) as it relates to AAC R3-11-502 (L) (2) for failure weigh the puppy on August 5, 2019 and document it in the medical record; and (4) for failure to perform an exam on puppy on August 5, 2019 and document it in the medical record.
ARS 32-2232 (18) as it relates to AAC R3-11-501 (8) for failure to provide a copy of the dog's medical record to the pet owner in a timely manner.
Result:
Passed
Board Motion: Offer consent agreement with modified conclusions of law
A.R.S. § 32-2232 (22) Medical incompetence in the practice of veterinary medicine for using the antibiotic, gentamicin, as an abdominal flush as well as the calculation of the dose of gentamicin.
A.R.S. § 32-2232 (12) as it relates to A.A.C. R3-11-501 (8) for failure to provide a copy of the dog's medical record to the pet owner.
A.R.S. § 32-2232 (21) as it relates fo A.A.C. R3-11-502 (L) (2) for failure weigh the puppy on August 5, 2019 and document it in the medical record.
A.R.S. § 32-2232 (21) as it relates to A.A.C. R3-11-502 (L) (4) for failure to perform an exam on puppy on August 5, 2019 and document it in the medical record.
Penalties:
Probation (1 year)
Continuing education (4 hours in medical record keeping)
Continuing education (4 hours in antibiotics)
Civil penalty ($1000)
Reimburse fees ($1211.50)
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.