26 Aug 2025
New system, which could be introduced next year, will address “operational challenges” of current platform, body says.
Allister Webb
Job Title
Image: Miha Creative / Adobe Stock
The VMD has admitted communication failures as it outlined plans to replace an online portal for reporting medicine concerns that has itself been out of action for several months.
Officials claim the new system, which they hope to introduce early next year, will address what they described as “operational challenges” with the existing platform.
Concerns about the portal’s removal were initially raised publicly at the Veterinary Osteoarthritis Congress in May, amid growing controversy over dog health outcomes associated with the use of Librela.
The VMD has been heavily criticised by affected pet owners who believe it has not done enough to address adverse events (AEs) linked to the drug.
But a new letter to clinicians from the organisation, which Vet Times has seen, claimed the system had been temporarily suspended “to maintain the quality and efficiency of our pharmacovigilance operations”.
Giles Paiba, the directorate’s head of pharmacovigilance, wrote: “The system, while well-intentioned, created operational challenges that impacted data quality.
“It was resource-intensive to validate and deduplicate reports against those submitted by marketing authorisation holders (MAHs) and the system was limited in its ability to allow reporters to provide full and accurate information efficiently.
“As such we decided to suspend our online reporting tool while we develop a new more efficient system.”
The letter does not state when the suspension was first implemented, and critics of the VMD’s approach to Librela say they fear the actual level of AEs associated with the drug may never be known without a direct reporting platform being accessible.
Although the drug’s manufacturer, Zoetis, has insisted it remains confident of its safety and effectiveness, at least two online petitions have called on the VMD to do more beyond previously issued guidance to prevent its usage.
The letter stressed the VMD recognised the preference among many clinicians and members of the public to report concerns directly to it and stressed a commitment to “providing multiple reporting routes to ensure no AEs go unreported”.
But while Dr Paiba argued they had to ensure reporting routes were “efficient and effective for all parties”, he also conceded the organisation had not met its own commitment to “transparent and robust” communications on the portal issue.
He wrote: “We recognise that our communications about the suspension of our AE report tool did not meet the standards our community rightly expects from us.”
However, he did maintain sufficient reporting routes for AEs were available, either through email contact to the VMD or through MAHs, despite the portal’s suspension.
The letter further claimed that high levels of reporting through MAH channels, which were said to account for around 86 per cent of all AE reports last year, showed the system was operating “effectively”.
But officials have so far declined to confirm whether members of the public can currently report AEs directly to the VMD or whether the new system will allow them to do so.
