Team-based learning (TBL) was implemented into a first-year course (Principles in Animal Behaviour, Welfare and Ethics) for BSc Veterinary Bioscience (VB) and Animal Science (AS) students. TBL is now used widely in teaching medical students, but has had more limited uptake in veterinary education. This study reports its use over 2 years with cohorts of 126 and 138 students in 2011 and 2012, respectively. Average individual marks for multiple-choice question (MCQ) tests in the Readiness Assurance component of TBL were higher for the teams than for individuals for each session, explicitly demonstrating the advantages of teamwork. Students reported that they felt actively involved and that TBL helped them both with their learning and in developing other important skills, such as teamwork and communication. Qualitative analysis of written feedback from the students revealed positive themes of discussion, application, revelation, socializing, engagement, clarification, and retention/revision. In 2011 negative comments included the need to shorten the TBL sessions, but in 2012 tightening of the timelines meant that this was no longer a major concern. Requests to provide better introductory and background materials and ambiguity in questions in the TBL activities were what students least liked about the TBL. However, most comments were positive rather than negative in nature, and many students preferred the TBL to lectures. With requirements for curricula to teach professional skills, such as communication and teamwork, and the positive results from TBL's implementation, it is hoped that this study will encourage others to trial the use of TBL in veterinary education.

Cardiac function parameters in hibernating bears are opposite to the chronic bradycardic effects detected in nonhibernating species, likely because of intrinsic cardiac muscle adaptations during hibernation. Understanding mechanisms and responses of the myocardium during hibernation could yield insight into mechanisms of cardiac function regulation in various disease states in nonhibernating species.

No abstract

Summary Background There is no information directly comparing midazolam with guaifenesin when used in combination with an alpha‐2 agonist and ketamine to maintain anaesthesia via i.v. infusion in horses. Objectives To compare ketamine–medetomidine–guaifenesin with ketamine–medetomidine–midazolam for total intravenous anaesthesia (TIVA) in young horses anaesthetised for computerised tomography. Study design Prospective, randomised, blinded, crossover trial. Methods Fourteen weanlings received medetomidine 7 μg/kg bwt i.v. and anaesthesia was induced with ketamine 2.2 mg/kg bwt i.v. On two separate occasions horses each received infusions of ketamine 3 mg/kg bwt/h, medetomidine 5 μg/kg bwt/h, guaifenesin 100 mg/kg bwt/h (KMG) or ketamine 3 mg/kg bwt/h, medetomidine 5 μg/kg bwt/h, midazolam 0.1 mg/kg bwt/h (KMM) for 50 min. Cardiorespiratory variables and anaesthetic depth were assessed every 5–10 min. Recovery times after the infusions ceased were recorded and recovery quality was assessed using a composite score system (CSS), simple descriptive scale (SDS) and visual analogue scale (VAS). Multivariable models were used to generate mean recovery scores for each treatment and each recovery score system and provide P‐values comparing treatment groups. Results Anaesthesia was uneventful with no difference in additional anaesthetic requirements and little clinically relevant differences in cardiopulmonary variables between groups. All horses recovered without incident with no significant difference in recovery times. Quality of the anaesthetic recovery was significantly better for the KMM group compared with the KMG group using the CSS (P<0.001), SDS (P<0.001) and VAS (P<0.001). Main limitations No surgical stimulus was applied and study animals may not represent general horse population. Conclusion Midazolam is a suitable alternative to guaifenesin when co‐infused with ketamine and medetomidine for anaesthesia in young horses undergoing noninvasive procedures. Both infusions produce a clinically comparable quality of anaesthesia; however, recovery from anaesthesia is of a better quality following an infusion of ketamine–medetomidine–midazolam.

No abstract