Promoting access to care in pyometra treatment: pathways to collaboration between high-quality, high-volume spay-neuter clinics and private practices.

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To compare results from 2 previously published surveys aimed at determining how pyometra is treated in high-quality, high-volume spay-neuter clinics (HQHVSNCs) and private practices (PPs), with a specific focus on identifying opportunities for partnership between the clinic types to improve access to care in pyometra treatment. SAMPLE Responses from 123 PPs and 87 HQHVSNCs. METHODS: A previously published survey of PPs conducted from June to July 2021 and a similar previously published survey of HQHVSNCs conducted from June to July 2020 were compared regarding demographics, pyometra treatment availability, estimated outcome, alternative outcome, disruption, cost, and protocol between HQHVSNCs and PPs. A comparison was also run of the surveys' responses regarding referral of a pyometra to an HQHVSNC by a PP. RESULTS: Although PPs estimated that economic euthanasia is the most likely alternative outcome for 13% of patients unable to access care at their practice, 80% would be reluctant to refer to an HQHVSNC. The 3 primary reasons indicated by PPs with a reluctance to refer were a perceived lack of prompt appointment availability (20%), lack of aftercare (18%), and lack of adequate equipment (14%). In contrast, most HQHVSNCs estimated that they generally accept referrals the same day (50%) or the next day (30%) and 95% of HQHVSNCs reported having the resources needed to treat most pyometras. CLINICAL RELEVANCE There are several opportunities for partnership between PPs and HQHVSNCs in the treatment of pyometra. The most frequent concerns expressed by PPs regarding referral to HQHVSNCs were not shared by HQHVSNCs or could be ameliorated by referral to an HQHVSNC for surgery and transfer back to the PP for aftercare.