Andisa Posted October 1, 2011 Share Posted October 1, 2011 As people may have read early on in this thread I had my dogs xrays done and scored February this year. Here are my first lot of xrays Lavelle scored these 10:6 I wasn't happy with the xray position or the score so requested my vet do a second xray Lavelle scored these 9:4 I was still not happy with these scores, both Shelby's parents have very low scores and I was very disappointed so I sent them to Rawlinson in SA and he have the second lot of xrays a 3:1 I'm over the moon with those and I HIGHLY recommend Rawlinson! I sent the second lot of xrays on Monday and had the results by today (Saturday) That is a huge difference in scores - we all hope for low scores but when they vary that much it makes me wonder which was most accurate. Naturally the lowest score is preferred. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stolzseinrotts Posted October 1, 2011 Share Posted October 1, 2011 Risyntira thank you for sharing the HD plates and the information with us! Very interesting and so glad you got a better score, what a big difference from the 1st to the 2nd plates / score! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Risyntira Posted October 1, 2011 Share Posted October 1, 2011 Thanks guys! In no way am I trying to bad mouth Dr. Lavelle at all, Just thought I would try to save people the trouble and heart ache I had from the first two scores. It almost came to me rehoming this girl. I'm so glad I waiting ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angelsun Posted October 1, 2011 Share Posted October 1, 2011 This isn't the first time I've heard this about Lavelle. There are a few dogs out there (that were in this house) that were given very bad scores. changes in the scores were done when the dogs were not indicated to be 'show dogs'. We are very happy with Rawlinson, as he was the recommended vet from Wyburn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lils mum Posted October 1, 2011 Share Posted October 1, 2011 That is a huge difference in scores - we all hope for low scores but when they vary that much it makes me wonder which was most accurate. Naturally the lowest score is preferred. Ditto - I wonder if the anatomical landmarks that 'scored' were consistent throughout? Certainly makes you think.... I was under the impression that you could not get two scores on any set of films, unless it was under appeal? http://www.ava.com.au/sites/default/files/documents/Other/CHEDS_manual.pdf I also wondered if the first report from Lavelle suggest that the positioning was less than good? Not commenting on this particular situation, but I guess what we really want is the 'most valid' result, rather than the most pleasing. As a friend said - 'if there is a soft reading, do we delude ourselves into thinking we have something better than it is in reality?' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mystiqview Posted October 2, 2011 Share Posted October 2, 2011 I had heard similar stories back when Wyburn was scoring as compared to the AVA. I know of the same plates being scored by the AVA being double what Wyburn scored them later. It is still concerning that there is such a difference between two people scoring the same plates. I can understand poor positioning and I know of people who have on the resport have a score then a comment afterwards, "on tilt" or similar. Personally, I would be considering the score somewhere between the two scores to be conservative. I would split the difference between those two scores when it comes to choosing a stud. I also know of dogs with 0:0 hips producing HD affected puppies, so just because parents have low scores, does not mean the puppies will automatically have low scores too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goldrag Posted October 2, 2011 Share Posted October 2, 2011 Was your dog sedated for the xrays? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Risyntira Posted October 2, 2011 Share Posted October 2, 2011 Yes. she was under GA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miss B Posted October 2, 2011 Share Posted October 2, 2011 If I wasn't happy with the positioning, I wouldn't have sent the plates in for scoring in the first place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bjazld Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 Very Happy with Rawlinson's service, we had our dog's xrayed at QVS on a monday, we sent off the xrays the tues and had our results by thurs arvo (via phone). happy with the scores also. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hilaryo Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 (edited) As people may have read early on in this thread I had my dogs xrays done and scored February this year. Here are my first lot of xrays Lavelle scored these 10:6 I wasn't happy with the xray position or the score so requested my vet do a second xray Lavelle scored these 9:4 I was still not happy with these scores, both Shelby's parents have very low scores and I was very disappointed so I sent them to Rawlinson in SA and he have the second lot of xrays a 3:1 I'm over the moon with those and I HIGHLY recommend Rawlinson! I sent the second lot of xrays on Monday and had the results by today (Saturday) Wow, you can see how poorly the positioning is in the first set. Seems to me the positioning is everything with these xrays? Even more important than the person who reads/scores them. How can you expect an accurate reading if the legs and hips are positioned incorrectly for the xray. Edited October 7, 2011 by hilaryo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mystiqview Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 As people may have read early on in this thread I had my dogs xrays done and scored February this year. Here are my first lot of xrays Lavelle scored these 10:6 I wasn't happy with the xray position or the score so requested my vet do a second xray Lavelle scored these 9:4 I was still not happy with these scores, both Shelby's parents have very low scores and I was very disappointed so I sent them to Rawlinson in SA and he have the second lot of xrays a 3:1 I'm over the moon with those and I HIGHLY recommend Rawlinson! I sent the second lot of xrays on Monday and had the results by today (Saturday) Wow, you can see how poorly the positioning is in the first set. Seems to me the positioning is everything with these xrays? Even more important than the person who reads/scores them. How can you expect an accurate reading if the legs and hips are positioned incorrectly for the xray. If the first plate was poorly positioned, it would not account for the second plate still being scored 9:4 from the same person, then from how I read the post, those same plates sent to a different person who scored them 3:1 I was also under the impression for other breeds at least where hip scoring is a requirement, the same plates cannot be scored by two different people and then used in an official capacity. While I know of breeders who have sent the same plates to Wyburn after having the AVA doing them, they still required to get a separate set of plates done for an official score. Something is still suss with the two readings. It makes you question the whole validity of the people doing the scoring. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Risyntira Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 As people may have read early on in this thread I had my dogs xrays done and scored February this year. Here are my first lot of xrays Lavelle scored these 10:6 I wasn't happy with the xray position or the score so requested my vet do a second xray Lavelle scored these 9:4 I was still not happy with these scores, both Shelby's parents have very low scores and I was very disappointed so I sent them to Rawlinson in SA and he have the second lot of xrays a 3:1 I'm over the moon with those and I HIGHLY recommend Rawlinson! I sent the second lot of xrays on Monday and had the results by today (Saturday) Wow, you can see how poorly the positioning is in the first set. Seems to me the positioning is everything with these xrays? Even more important than the person who reads/scores them. How can you expect an accurate reading if the legs and hips are positioned incorrectly for the xray. If the first plate was poorly positioned, it would not account for the second plate still being scored 9:4 from the same person, then from how I read the post, those same plates sent to a different person who scored them 3:1 I was also under the impression for other breeds at least where hip scoring is a requirement, the same plates cannot be scored by two different people and then used in an official capacity. While I know of breeders who have sent the same plates to Wyburn after having the AVA doing them, they still required to get a separate set of plates done for an official score. Something is still suss with the two readings. It makes you question the whole validity of the people doing the scoring. Thats why I got a second opinion. I believe Lavelle didnt want to hear from me that I doubted his scores. I contacted Rowlinson, told him what had happened with Shelby and asked if he would be able to score the second lot of xrays even though they had been scored before. He told me to send them without payment until he saw them. I had someone call me from his office saying that they can be scored and asked me to transfer money and email them the reciept details. Within half hourthe lady looked up Shelby's file with the score. 3:1 is what I got from them. I had some many people on this forum, Facebook and in person tell me what scores they got from Lavelle compaired to the scores they got sending the SAME xray to Rowlinson. Lots of BC's and one Ridgie breeder told me a elbow score from Lavelle was 1:1 but but sending them to Rowlinson got 0:0 The ridgie breeder I spoke to had a 3:3 from Lavelle on hips but with Rowlinson was 1:1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Risyntira Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 I'll see if I can do the joint's graph here... From Lavelle 1st report: Norburg Angle: 4:2 Subluxation: 4:2 Cranail acetabular edge: 2:2 2nd report Norburg Angle: 3:1 Subluxation: 4:1 Cranail acetabular edge: 2:2 (the rest of the hip joint scores are 0:0 I haven't yet recieved Rowlinson's report in the mail. only The scores via email which have 3:1 hips and 0:0 score. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mystiqview Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 I had heard rumors that Lavelle likes to "play games". If this is true, then it is concerning. I am yet to score my young bitch as all my previous ones were sent to Wyburn, except my first bitch who was scored by the AVA. So these anomalies are of interest. As I said in a previous post, I know of similar high/low scoring cases with AVA vs Wyburn. So it brings to question the whole Hip Scoring process and really how accurate is it when the same supposed xrays can have so drastically differnet scores. The concerning part is that someone can score hips that high (as seen with your Lavelle scores), whilst another person supposedly using the same matrix/foruma or whatever you want to call it, can score the same plates half what was originally scored. I have heard similar stories like this regarding Lavelle to Rowlinson as well. Not just your case. Realistically I believe the hip score average is no where near the 8 as the official average. By pure numbers and stats of dogs being scored compared to the puppies born, the data is incomplete. Factor also in those who you know do not send in bad xrays or those who do not hip score to start with. Not to mention on average a breeder keeps one or two dogs for breeding in a litter and only scores those while the other PET quality ones never get scored. It has long been said the real score is somewhere around the 12-16, given this basis. Personally,I would still regard the bitch with having higher than average hip scores due to this to play it safe, given the variance in the scoring. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Risyntira Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 I guess in regards to the AVA, Wyburn, Lavelle and Rowlinson (Have had no experience with the others) they all have their own methods of scoring. Something that should not be a 'game' for those breeders who count on these scores for breeding purposes. As I said in my previous posts, I am not here to tell people not to use Lavelle, just telling my story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lils mum Posted October 8, 2011 Share Posted October 8, 2011 (edited) I'll see if I can do the joint's graph here... From Lavelle 1st report: Norburg Angle: 4:2 Subluxation: 4:2 Cranail acetabular edge: 2:2 2nd report Norburg Angle: 3:1 Subluxation: 4:1 Cranail acetabular edge: 2:2 (the rest of the hip joint scores are 0:0 I haven't yet recieved Rowlinson's report in the mail. only The scores via email which have 3:1 hips and 0:0 score. Looks fairly consistent to me....given that the positioning was not satisfactory on the first, these are consistent findings IMHO Edited October 8, 2011 by lils mum Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts