The resolution, dated May 22, 2026, orders a veterinarian to pay compensation for malpractice in administering two vaccines from different laboratories to an animal. The COVB considers this issue relevant, as the practice of combining vaccines from different manufacturers is common in companion animal clinics.
The ruling is based on a restrictive interpretation of the incompatibilities indicated in the technical data sheets of the vaccines. The professional college's concern focuses on how to interpret the absence of studies on certain drug combinations: whether this lack of specific evidence should be understood as a prohibition or if it can be compatible with clinical practice according to available scientific evidence and the lex artis.
The COVB points out that this interpretation could contradict the vaccination protocols of WSAVA and AVEPA. Therefore, it has asked the OCV's Committee on Medicines, or another body designated by the General Council, to analyze the case with experts in immunology and pharmacology.
The objective is to scientifically determine whether the lex artis ad hoc permits the use of vaccines from different laboratories or if it should be discouraged. Once this criterion is established, the COVB proposes to forward it to the Spanish Agency of Medicines and Health Products (AEMPS) to request a clarifying note on the interpretation of the technical data sheets.
Furthermore, it is proposed to consider whether laboratories should review the leaflets of immunological treatments to clarify whether the lack of studies on a specific combination equates to a prohibition of use.
Through this initiative, the COVB seeks to provide legal certainty and evidence-based criteria to avoid divergent interpretations between technical data sheets, scientific evidence, and clinical decisions, and will continue to monitor the issue.
