IN Vet Tech common mistakes
IN Vet Tech · Understand the traps and how to avoid them.
Calculating a drug dose to the nearest whole tablet or rounding the mg/kg result without checking the patient's actual weight in kilograms, then stating the volume or tablet count as final without verifying it against the concentration on the label.
Candidates memorize the mg/kg formula but rush the arithmetic under time pressure, mix pounds and kilograms, or forget that the concentration on the vial (e.g., 50 mg/mL vs 100 mg/mL) changes the volume entirely. The error compounds because a plausible-looking number is accepted without a sanity check.
What to do instead
Before answering any dose question, write the three-part chain explicitly: weight in kg x dose in mg/kg = total mg; total mg / concentration = volume or tablet count. Convert pounds to kilograms by dividing by 2.2 and show the conversion. After computing, ask whether the result is physiologically plausible (a 5 kg cat should not receive 30 mL of anything). Practice with mixed-unit and mixed-concentration problems until the chain is automatic.
Confusing the roles of premedication, induction agent, and maintenance anesthetic, or selecting a protocol that ignores the species-specific contraindication (e.g., mask induction in a vomiting patient, ketamine in a patient with a head injury, or alpha-2 agonists in a cardiovascularly unstable animal).
Candidates learn drug lists by rote and can name agents but not sequence them, so they pick the drug that sounds familiar rather than the one that fits the patient's ASA status and procedure. The exam frequently presents a scenario where the obvious drug is the wrong one.
What to do instead
Build a one-page grid for each common protocol: premedication (sedation plus analgesia), induction (rapid airway control), maintenance (titratable). For each class, write the contraindication in one line. Rehearse scenarios by ASA class and species rather than by drug name. If a question gives a specific comorbidity, eliminate any agent whose known effect worsens that comorbidity before choosing.
Interpreting a laboratory value in isolation without anchoring it to the reference range, the species, and the collection or handling artifact (e.g., calling a high potassium in a cat hemolyzed sample true hyperkalemia, or reading a dog's PCV with a normal range borrowed from another species).
Candidates memorize numbers but not ranges, and the exam deliberately offers values that are abnormal for one species or one sample type and normal for another. Hemolysis, lipemia, delayed processing, and EDTA contamination are classic distractors that candidates miss because they read the number, not the context.
What to do instead
For every lab question, state the reference range and the species before judging the value. Keep a short list of common artifacts and their direction of effect (hemolysis raises potassium and LDH; EDTA contamination raises potassium and lowers calcium; delayed separation raises glucose consumption). When a value is borderline, look for the artifact clue in the stem before choosing a diagnosis.
Describing a surgical nursing task in the wrong order, such as preparing the surgical site before clipping, or setting up the instrument pack and sterile field after the patient is already draped, or scrubbing in without first removing jewelry and trimming nails.
Candidates know the individual steps but not the dependency chain, so they list correct actions in an incorrect sequence. Aseptic technique questions reward order as much as content, and a single out-of-order step invalidates the whole preparation.
What to do instead
Write each routine as a numbered timeline from patient prep to closure: clip, then scrub (alternating antiseptic and alcohol, from incision outward), then drape, then gown and gloves, then instrument check. Memorize the rule that hair is removed before skin antisepsis and that the sterile field is established only after the patient is positioned and the site is prepped. Practice by narrating a full routine aloud in order.
Missing the recognition of pain or distress because the candidate relies on a single sign (e.g., only vocalization) instead of a validated composite assessment, or treats pain scoring as optional documentation rather than a driver of analgesic dosing.
Candidates underestimate how subtle feline and prey-species pain behavior is, and they conflate sedation with analgesia. The exam presents animals that are quiet and still, which candidates read as comfortable when the animal is actually guarding or immobile from pain.
What to do instead
Learn one validated composite scale (e.g., the Glasgow Composite Measure Pain Scale for dogs and the Feline Grimace Scale) and its categories: posture, activity, attention to wound, facial expression, and response to palpation. Practice scoring the same animal before and after analgesia. Remember that a sedated animal can still be painful, and that reassessment after intervention is part of the nursing record.
Failing to identify the first three actions in an emergency scenario, instead listing diagnostics or definitive treatment before airway, breathing, circulation, and vascular access are addressed.
Candidates study disease management in depth but not resuscitation priorities, so under time pressure they jump to the diagnosis-specific step (e.g., giving insulin to a DKA patient, or antibiotics to a septic patient) before stabilizing perfusion and oxygenation.
What to do instead
Drill a fixed primary survey: airway patency, breathing effort and oxygenation, circulation (heart rate, pulse quality, mucous membrane color, blood pressure), then vascular access and fluid bolus. For each common emergency (GDV, urethral obstruction, anaphylaxis, hemorrhage, status epilepticus), write the first three interventions in order and practice stating them in under 30 seconds. Choose the answer that stabilizes before the answer that diagnoses.
Forgetting that dental charting and periodontal staging require probing and radiographs, and treating a visual exam of the crown as sufficient to grade disease or decide on extraction.
Candidates equate tartar severity with disease severity. The exam tests the distinction between gingivitis (reversible, no attachment loss) and periodontitis (attachment loss, requires probing depth and radiographs), and candidates who grade by appearance alone pick the wrong stage or miss painful pathology under the gingiva.
What to do instead
Memorize the staging criteria: gingival inflammation, probing depth, attachment loss, mobility, and furcation involvement, plus the role of intraoral radiographs for root and bone assessment. Practice charting a full mouth in quadrants and recording probing depths. When a question describes heavy calculus with no probing data, recognize that staging cannot be completed and that further assessment is the correct next step.
Treating avian, reptile, and small mammal patients with dog and cat norms, such as using mammalian reference intervals, injectable anesthesia protocols, or restraint methods that are dangerous for the species (e.g., scruffing a bird, or wrapping a rabbit in a towel across the abdomen).
Candidates receive most of their training on dogs and cats and assume physiology transfers. Exotic and avian patients have different thermoregulation, drug sensitivities, and restraint hazards, and the exam specifically probes these differences.
What to do instead
Build a species card for each exotic group covering normal temperature, heart and respiratory rate, key drug cautions (e.g., avoid certain antibiotics in rodents and rabbits; beware of xylazine sensitivity in birds), and safe restraint. Learn that birds mask illness until decompensated and that rabbits are obligate nasal breathers. When a question names an exotic species, discard any answer that assumes mammalian defaults before evaluating the rest.
Answering a client communication or practice management question with the clinically correct fact while ignoring the communication process, such as giving a diagnosis or cost estimate without confirming understanding, documenting the conversation, or offering options.
Candidates treat these questions as clinical knowledge checks and choose the answer that is medically accurate rather than the one that reflects informed consent, shared decision-making, and defensible record keeping. The exam scores the process, not just the fact.
What to do instead
For communication items, look for the answer that uses open-ended questions, plain language, teach-back, and documented consent, and that presents options with costs before treatment. For management items, separate the clinical recommendation from the business or legal step (estimate, consent form, record entry). Practice rewriting a clinical explanation in owner-friendly language and note what must be charted.
Administering or recommending a medication without checking the route, the species-specific formulation, and the legal or withdrawal implications, such as using a food-animal drug without considering withdrawal time or giving an owner a prescription without verifying the veterinary-client-patient relationship.
Candidates focus on the drug's indication and skip the regulatory and formulation context. Large-animal and food-producing species questions hinge on withdrawal periods and extra-label use rules, and pharmacy questions hinge on valid prescription requirements, both of which are easy to overlook when the mechanism of action seems obvious.
What to do instead
Before finalizing any drug answer, run a four-point check: correct route and formulation for the species, dose and frequency verified against a formulary, withdrawal time and residue status for food animals, and legal basis (valid VCPR, prescription labeling, controlled-substance handling). For extra-label use, confirm the drug is not prohibited and that the client is informed. Keep a short list of prohibited substances and species-specific toxicities to review.