BackgroundConcerns about ethical conflicts, moral distress, and burnout in veterinary practice are steadily increasing. Root causes of these problems have not been rigorously identified. Little research has been done to evaluate the existence of moral distress in North American veterinarians or to explore its impact on career sustainability and poor well‐being.Hypothesis/ObjectivesEthical conflict and resultant moral distress are common occurrences in contemporary veterinary practice and negatively impact daily practice life, but may not be identified or labeled by veterinarians as such.AnimalsNo animals were used in this study.MethodsMixed methods sequential explanatory design; confidential and anonymous on‐line sampling of 889 veterinarians in North America.ResultsA majority of respondents reported feeling conflict over what care is appropriate to provide. Over 70% of respondents felt that the obstacles they faced that prevented them from providing appropriate care caused them or their staff moderate to severe distress. Seventy‐nine percent of participants report being asked to provide care that they consider futile. More than 70% of participants reported no training in conflict resolution or self‐care.Conclusions and Clinical ImportanceVeterinarians report widespread ethical conflict and moral distress across many practice types and demographics. Most veterinarians have little to no training on how to decrease the impact of these problems. Ethical conflict and resulting moral distress may be an important source of stress and poor well‐being that is not widely recognized or well defined. Well‐researched and effective tools used to decrease moral distress in human healthcare could be adapted to ameliorate this problem.

A retrospective study evaluated cases of feline esophageal dysfunction. Cats identified had contrast esophagrams performed during a six-year period. Of 56 cases undergoing esophagography, 51 had complete records available for review. Forty-four cases were felt to be abnormal and were included in the study. Cases were analyzed for signalment, presenting complaints, and identifiable causes of abnormal esophageal motility. Response to treatment and case outcome were also reviewed. The signalment of the cases varied widely, especially in age. The occurrence of esophageal motility dysfunction was low, comprising only 0.05% of all feline cases seen in a six-year period. Forty-three percent of cases were considered idiopathic, and 57% were congenital or diagnosed with conditions known to cause esophageal motility dysfunction. The causative disease states included myasthenia gravis, mediastinal masses, vascular ring anomalies, dysautonomia, and esophageal stricture. Seventy-eight percent of those treated with medical therapy (i.e., combinations of sucralfate, H2 receptor antagonists, and either metoclopramide or cisapride) showed clinical improvement.

No abstract