Verified Veterinary Industry Statistics

Name: PupPilot Verified Veterinary Statistics
Creator: PupPilot
License: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

Every figure below is traced to a primary source you can open — with its sample, its method, and a clear note on what it does and does not measure.

Last verified: August 31, 2026 · 46 sources checked · changelog

Many widely quoted veterinary practice statistics are difficult to trace to a primary source. This page collects the ones that can be: each entry names its publisher, links a retrievable document, states its sample and method, and notes what the figure does and does not measure. It is maintained as a reference, reviewed on a schedule, and free to cite.

The inclusion standard

Four rules, applied to every entry — including PupPilot's own data.

A named publisher and a retrievable document. Every figure links to something a reader can open.
A stated sample and method. n, composition, geography, dates, and how it was collected.
The construct is stated, not implied. Every entry says what was actually counted — a booking-attempt failure rate is a different measurement from a missed-call rate, and the entry says which one it is.
Vendor data is labelled as vendor data — ours included. Self-selected cohorts, single-site measurements, and platform telemetry carry that label on the face of the entry.

The profession at a glance

Scale figures for the US veterinary profession — headcounts, pay, growth, establishments — from government and association sources.

How many veterinarians are there in the US?

133,475 US veterinarians as of December 31, 2025

Association

An administrative count of living US veterinarians maintained by AVMA — a registry figure, not a survey estimate.

Source: AVMA · Market research statistics: US veterinarians · 2025
Sample: Administrative count of all living US veterinarians; not a sample
Method: Registry count
What it can't tell you: A count of practicing clinicians — the figure includes retired and non-practicing veterinarians.
Verified: August 31, 2026

How many veterinarian jobs are there, and how fast is the profession growing?

91,100 US veterinarian jobs (2025)

$130,100 median pay (May 2025)

+9% projected growth, 2025–35 (+8,600 jobs; ~3,100 openings a year)

Government

BLS employment count, median wage, and ten-year projection; openings are mostly replacement demand.

Source: US Bureau of Labor Statistics · Occupational Outlook Handbook: Veterinarians · 2026-08-27
Sample: All US veterinarian employment; OOH projections refreshed August 27, 2026
Method: Government occupational statistics and projection model
What it can't tell you: The older 19–20% growth projection — superseded by the August 27, 2026 Occupational Outlook refresh; +9% (still “much faster than average”) is current.
Note: Re-verified at bls.gov on August 31, 2026.
Verified: August 31, 2026

How much do vet techs make, and how fast is the field growing?

131,400 US vet tech/technologist jobs (2025)

$47,380 median pay (May 2025)

+9% projected growth, 2025–35 (+12,300 jobs)

Government

BLS counts of veterinary technologist and technician employment, median annual wage, and projected ten-year growth; openings are mostly replacement demand.

Source: US Bureau of Labor Statistics · Occupational Outlook Handbook: Veterinary Technologists and Technicians · 2026-08-27
Sample: All US vet tech/technologist employment; OOH refreshed August 27, 2026
Method: Government occupational statistics and projection model
What it can't tell you: Credentialed-tech pay specifically — BLS pools credentialed and non-credentialed workers in one occupation code.
Note: Re-verified at bls.gov on August 31, 2026.
Verified: August 31, 2026

How many veterinary clinics are there in the US?

34,000 US veterinary establishments (2022; +18.5% since 2009)

Government

Census Bureau count of US veterinary-services establishments, reported through AVMA's economic report.

Source: US Census Bureau via AVMA · 2025 Report on the Economic State of the Veterinary Profession · 2025
Sample: All US veterinary establishments, County Business Patterns basis
Method: Government establishment census
What it can't tell you: “34,000 clinics” — establishments are not clinics; multi-site groups count once per location, and the count includes non-clinical veterinary services.
Verified: August 31, 2026

How competitive is veterinary school admission?

10,880 applicants to the DVM Class of 2028

2.4:1 national applicants-per-first-year-seat ratio

Association

AAVMC's count of DVM applicants and the ratio of applicants to available first-year seats across member schools.

Source: AAVMC · 2024–25 Annual Data Report · 2025
Sample: 33 US and 16 international AAVMC member schools
Method: Association admissions data collection
What it can't tell you: An acceptance-rate calculation from the raw count — applicants apply to 4–5 schools each, so 2.4 applicants per seat is the meaningful ratio.
Verified: August 31, 2026

Phone access & call handling

What is actually measured about reaching a veterinary practice by phone. The only peer-reviewed measurement in this category was published in 2025.

How often do attempts to book a veterinary appointment succeed?

67.0% of secret-shopper attempts to book a wellness appointment succeeded

Peer-reviewed

The share of simulated new-client wellness booking attempts that resulted in an available appointment.

Source: JAVMA · Secret shopper survey reveals generally reasonable access to preventive veterinary appointments for dogs, with notable gaps in rural areas and for other outliers (Aggarwal, Ramirez-Guillen & Haeder) · 2026;264(1):65–72· DOI 10.2460/javma.25.05.0311
Sample: n=5,053 US general practices in 6 states (CA, MN, OH, PA, TX, WA), randomly selected proportional to county population; fielded February 4 – April 11, 2025
Method: Secret-shopper telephone audit (callers posing as dog owners attempting to book a wellness appointment); excessive hold defined as over 5 minutes
What it can't tell you: Overall access or satisfaction claims — this measured new-client wellness booking attempts during business hours, not sick visits, emergencies, or existing clients.
Note: PMID 40961980. Figures re-verified against the free PubMed abstract on August 31, 2026. The authors concluded access is generally reasonable — the failures concentrate at the telephone, not in the exam room.
Verified: August 31, 2026

How many veterinary calls go unanswered?

15.1% of booking attempts failed because the caller could not connect with staff

Peer-reviewed

The share of secret-shopper booking attempts that failed at the phone layer — the caller never reached a staff member at all.

Source: JAVMA · Secret shopper survey reveals generally reasonable access to preventive veterinary appointments for dogs, with notable gaps in rural areas and for other outliers (Aggarwal, Ramirez-Guillen & Haeder) · 2026;264(1):65–72· DOI 10.2460/javma.25.05.0311
Sample: n=5,053 US general practices in 6 states (CA, MN, OH, PA, TX, WA), randomly selected proportional to county population; fielded February 4 – April 11, 2025
Method: Secret-shopper telephone audit (callers posing as dog owners attempting to book a wellness appointment); excessive hold defined as over 5 minutes
What it can't tell you: A general missed-call rate — this measured new-client wellness booking attempts during business hours, not a practice's total call traffic. It is the closest peer-reviewed measurement available.
Note: A further 1.9% failed on staff refusal, 2.2% on inaccurate contact information, and 3.9% because the practice lacked capacity for new patients.
Verified: August 31, 2026

How long will callers wait on hold at a veterinary clinic?

8.2% of booking attempts ended after more than 5 minutes on hold

Peer-reviewed

The share of secret-shopper booking attempts abandoned after an excessive hold, defined in the study as more than five minutes.

Source: JAVMA · Secret shopper survey reveals generally reasonable access to preventive veterinary appointments for dogs, with notable gaps in rural areas and for other outliers (Aggarwal, Ramirez-Guillen & Haeder) · 2026;264(1):65–72· DOI 10.2460/javma.25.05.0311
Sample: n=5,053 US general practices in 6 states (CA, MN, OH, PA, TX, WA), randomly selected proportional to county population; fielded February 4 – April 11, 2025
Method: Secret-shopper telephone audit (callers posing as dog owners attempting to book a wellness appointment); excessive hold defined as over 5 minutes
What it can't tell you: An average hold time or a hang-up-point threshold — it measures abandonment past a five-minute cutoff on booking attempts, nothing about typical waits.
Verified: August 31, 2026

How long do clients wait for a veterinary appointment?

6.36 days mean wait to appointment when booking succeeded

Peer-reviewed

Average days between a successful secret-shopper booking call and the offered wellness appointment (average travel: 11.1 minutes or 6.4 miles).

Source: JAVMA · Secret shopper survey reveals generally reasonable access to preventive veterinary appointments for dogs, with notable gaps in rural areas and for other outliers (Aggarwal, Ramirez-Guillen & Haeder) · 2026;264(1):65–72· DOI 10.2460/javma.25.05.0311
Sample: n=5,053 US general practices in 6 states (CA, MN, OH, PA, TX, WA), randomly selected proportional to county population; fielded February 4 – April 11, 2025
Method: Secret-shopper telephone audit (callers posing as dog owners attempting to book a wellness appointment); excessive hold defined as over 5 minutes
What it can't tell you: Urgent or sick-visit wait times — these were routine wellness requests.
Verified: August 31, 2026

What share of veterinary callers hang up before reaching a person?

26 in 100 callers hung up before reaching an agent

Vendor, disclosed

The share of inbound calls in one vendor's veterinary customer cohort that ended before the caller reached a person.

Source: Patient Prism · Veterinary Patient Access Report · 2026-07-02
Sample: 568,309 calls across 384 veterinary locations, calendar year 2025; vendor's own customer cohort, roughly 76% from two corporate groups, on marketing-tracked lines
Method: Vendor call-tracking telemetry
What it can't tell you: An industry-wide abandonment rate — the cohort is self-selected, corporate-weighted, and measured on marketing-tracked lines that skew toward new callers.
Verified: August 31, 2026

What share of veterinary calls end in a booked appointment?

22 in 100 calls resulted in a booked appointment

Vendor, disclosed

The share of inbound calls in the same vendor cohort that converted to a booked appointment.

Source: Patient Prism · Veterinary Patient Access Report · 2026-07-02
Sample: 568,309 calls across 384 veterinary locations, calendar year 2025; same cohort caveats as the hang-up figure
Method: Vendor call-tracking telemetry
What it can't tell you: A conversion benchmark for all veterinary calls — call mix on marketing-tracked lines differs from a practice's main line, where refills, results, and existing clients dominate.
Verified: August 31, 2026

42% general FAQs (hours, vaccination requirements, policies)

25% scheduling requests

13% emergencies

20% other

Vendor, disclosed

Call intent, not conversion: the after-hours call-type mix at one general practice, from the published case study.

Source: PupPilot · Case study: after-hours AI at a general practice · 2026
Sample: After-hours calls at 1 US general practice (published case study)
Method: Platform call classification
What it can't tell you: A booking-conversion rate or a daytime call mix — this measures what after-hours callers asked for, at one practice. It sits alongside the Patient Prism conversion figure because the two constructs are often conflated.
Verified: August 31, 2026

How many calls can a single busy practice miss?

35% of one practice's calls in a week were never picked up by a person

Vendor, disclosed

In five weekdays at one general practice before AI deployment, about 160 calls a day arrived and the team answered about 105 — roughly 280 calls in the week went unanswered.

Source: PupPilot · Platform case data: the 35% problem · 2026-08-25
Sample: 1 multi-doctor US general practice, 5 weekdays — a case, not a study
Method: Phone-system logs, before/after line migration
What it can't tell you: Any industry average — one practice, one week. It is also an undercount: the prior system could not separate hang-ups from voicemail, and callers who met a full queue never registered.
Note: Our own platform data, published with the same fields as every other entry: vendor, single site, n=1 clinic.
Verified: August 31, 2026

How many callers opt out of talking to an AI receptionist?

1.5–2% platform-wide opt-out rate across PupPilot clinics

4.3% at the single practice in the published case (~2,000 interactions, 5 weekdays)

Vendor, disclosed

The share of AI-handled interactions in which the caller asks for, and is transferred to, a person.

Source: PupPilot · Platform case data: the 35% problem · 2026-08-25
Sample: Platform-wide telemetry across active PupPilot clinics (rate varies by clinic and configuration); the published single-practice case covers ~2,000 interactions at 1 US general practice over 5 weekdays
Method: Platform interaction logs
What it can't tell you: An industry AI-acceptance rate — this is vendor telemetry, and rates vary with clinic configuration. The 4.3% is one practice's number from the published case, not a platform average.
Note: Our own platform data, published with the same fields as every other entry.
Verified: August 31, 2026

Client expectations & communication preferences

How pet owners want to reach their clinic, and what frustrates them when they try.

What frustrates pet owners about booking by phone?

35% cite long phone hold times

21% cite difficulty contacting the clinic

33% cite inability to book while the clinic is closed

Vendor, disclosed

Among pet owners who reported problems booking veterinary appointments, the share citing each friction.

Source: PetDesk · 2025 Pet Parent Research Report · 2025
Sample: n=1,000 North American pet owners, fielded July–December 2024; report is email-gated
Method: Vendor-commissioned consumer survey
What it can't tell you: Shares of all pet owners — the denominators are owners who reported booking problems, not the full sample.
Verified: August 31, 2026

Do pet owners want to text and book online with their veterinary clinic?

78% rate any-time, any-device booking important

77% want text or chat with the clinic

57% reported difficulty booking an appointment

31% say they are likely to switch clinics over it (40% among younger owners)

Vendor, disclosed

What surveyed pet owners say they want from clinic communication channels, and the switching risk when they don't get it.

Source: PetDesk with London Research · 2025 Pet Parent Research Report · 2025-03
Sample: n=1,000 North American pet owners; full report gated
Method: Vendor-commissioned consumer survey, third-party research partner
What it can't tell you: Mixing these figures with the variant cut shown on PetDesk's own landing page — the two sets differ; cite one, labeled.
Verified: August 31, 2026

Do prospective clients still use the phone to shop for veterinary care?

27–31% used the phone to research prices

29% used the phone to research service information

Government Not US

UK government-commissioned survey of how veterinary clients research providers before choosing one.

Source: Accent Marketing & Research for the UK Competition & Markets Authority · Vet Users Survey · 2025-01
Sample: n=2,376 UK veterinary users; push-to-web with telephone (CATI) follow-up
Method: Government-commissioned market survey
What it can't tell you: US claims — this is UK data from the CMA's veterinary market review.
Verified: August 31, 2026

Why do some clients never use online portals?

17% were unaware they had a portal

13% didn't know how to access it

36% would rather talk to a human

Named research firm Not veterinary

Among US adults who do not use their (human) healthcare portal, the stated reasons — while 81% of US adults do use one.

Source: Ipsos · Healthcare portals are gaining traction · 2025
Sample: n=3,010 US adults, fielded March 17–20, 2025, ±2.0pp
Method: Named-firm omnibus survey
What it can't tell you: Portal-rejection rates for the whole population — the percentages describe the non-user minority only, and this is human healthcare, not veterinary.
Verified: August 31, 2026

Do clients Google symptoms before calling the vet?

~68% consult online sources at least occasionally before a visit

12.1% ever disagreed with their veterinarian because of it

Peer-reviewed Not US

European survey of pet owners' use of internet health information — near-universal consultation, rare downstream conflict.

Source: Frontiers in Veterinary Science · Does “Dr. Google” improve discussion and decisions in small animal practice? (Springer et al.) · 2024· DOI 10.3389/fvets.2024.1417927
Sample: n=2,117 dog and cat owners in Austria, Denmark, and the UK; fielded March 2022
Method: Peer-reviewed online questionnaire
What it can't tell you: US rates, or claims that online research routinely damages the clinical relationship — 12.1% ever disagreeing is the finding pointing the other way.
Verified: August 31, 2026

Practice economics & client value

What a patient is worth, what practices produce, and how demand is moving — with each figure’s denominator stated.

What is a veterinary patient worth per year?

$622 average annual revenue per patient ($499 services + $203 products)

Association

Average yearly revenue per active patient across a large practice panel — the defensible per-patient value figure.

Source: Vetsource / VetSuccess via AVMA · Veterinary industry revenue-per-patient analysis · 2024
Sample: ~6,000 US practices, August 2023 – August 2024
Method: Practice-management-system transaction data via data provider
What it can't tell you: New-client first-year value or lifetime value — this is an annual average across active patients of network practices.
Verified: August 31, 2026

How much revenue does a veterinarian generate?

$616,667 median gross revenue per FTE veterinarian, companion-exclusive practices (2023)

$554,982 all-practice average (2024)

~$288 revenue per DVM-hour

Association

Practice revenue per full-time-equivalent veterinarian, median and average, with the per-hour equivalent.

Source: AVMA · 2025 Report on the Economic State of the Veterinary Profession + AVMA benchmarking (Oct 2025) · 2025
Sample: n=524 practices (93.9% independent), 8.8% response rate; free PDF
Method: Association practice survey
What it can't tell you: Treating the median (2023, companion-exclusive) and the average (2024, all practices) as one trend — they are different constructs from different cuts.
Verified: August 31, 2026

How many support staff should a practice have per veterinarian?

2.21 medical staff (techs + assistants) per DVM, 2024 actual

2.7 medical staff per DVM at the most efficient hospitals

4–5 optimal all-staff per FTE DVM (VEBF 2024)

Association

AVMA benchmarking of actual versus most-efficient staffing ratios.

Source: AVMA · AVMA practice benchmarking · 2025-10
Sample: AVMA benchmarking analysis, October 2025
Method: Association benchmarking analysis
What it can't tell you: Any staffing ratio attributed to AAHA — AAHA does not publish staffing benchmarks.
Verified: August 31, 2026

How many appointments does a veterinarian see per day?

13–14 appointment slots per FTE veterinarian per weekday (companion/mixed practice)

Association

Scheduled appointment capacity per full-time veterinarian in companion and mixed practices.

Source: AVMA · 2025 Report on the Economic State of the Veterinary Profession · 2025
Sample: n=524 practices, 8.8% response rate
Method: Association practice survey
What it can't tell you: Specialty or emergency scheduling claims — this is general companion/mixed practice.
Verified: August 31, 2026

Are veterinary revenue and visits growing or shrinking?

+3.4% revenue, trailing 12-month year-over-year

−2.0% visits, trailing 12-month year-over-year

Vendor, disclosed

Trailing-twelve-month revenue and visit change across the Vetsource/AVMA tracker panel; panel practices average about $2.2M revenue and ~9.7K visits a year.

Source: Vetsource / AVMA · Veterinary Industry Tracker weekly summary · 2026-08-25
Sample: 6,488 US practices; panel skews larger than the median practice
Method: PIMS transaction telemetry, updated weekly
What it can't tell you: A fixed industry statistic — the tracker updates weekly and this snapshot is dated August 25, 2026; re-pull before quoting.
Verified: August 31, 2026

Did veterinary visits decline in 2025?

−3.1% total visits, 2025 vs 2024

−3.8% wellness visits, 2025 vs 2024

Vendor, disclosed

Full-year 2025 visit decline across a large practice panel; corroborated directionally by Vetwatch (~3,000 practices: 2026 YTD revenue +2.4%, unique patients −2.3%).

Source: Vetsource · 2025 full-year white paper · 2026-01-15
Sample: ~6,500 US practices in the Vetsource panel
Method: PIMS transaction telemetry
What it can't tell you: Industry totals — panel practices skew larger than the median practice.
Verified: August 31, 2026

How often does the average patient visit?

2.39 visits per active patient per year across Vetsource-tracked practices

Vendor, disclosed

Average annual visits per active patient in a large practice network (network visits fell 2.7% between August 2021 and August 2023).

Source: AVMA (citing VetSource network data) · AVMA news analysis of VetSource data · 2023-11
Sample: Vetsource-tracked US practices; network data, not a population sample
Method: PIMS transaction telemetry via association reporting
What it can't tell you: Population-wide per-pet averages — network practices are not all US pets. AVMA's dated household-survey means (1.5 dog / 0.7 cat) are 2016 vintage; label or drop them.
Verified: August 31, 2026

How many patients quietly lapse?

≈20% of the average practice's active patient count has no transaction in over 18 months

Vendor, undisclosed method

Lapsed patients as a share of the active patient base — a stock at a point in time, not an annual churn rate.

Source: Vetsource · Practice Overview data · 2024
Sample: Vetsource practice panel; methodology undisclosed
Method: Vendor analysis of PIMS data
What it can't tell you: An annual churn rate — this is a stock measure at a point in time.
Verified: August 31, 2026

How compliant are veterinary clients with recommendations?

48% heartworm-preventive recommendations

35% dental treatment (grade 2+ disease)

87% core vaccines

64% → 73% overall compliance, 2003 to the 2009 follow-up

Association Archival

The canonical AAHA compliance measurements. Key insight: much “noncompliance” is a recommendation never made.

Source: AAHA · The Path to High-Quality Care (2003) and Compliance: Taking Quality Care to the Next Level (2009) · 2003/2009
Sample: 2003 study: 240 practices plus ~1,400 medical-record audits; 2009 follow-up survey
Method: Association field study with record audits (out of print; figures verified via contemporaneous dvm360 coverage)
What it can't tell you: Current compliance rates — this is 2003/2009 canonical data, still the only benchmark that exists. Label the vintage whenever quoted.
Verified: August 31, 2026

What is the veterinary no-show rate?

0 studies peer-reviewed US veterinary no-show rate measurements in the published literature

Verified absence

A verified absence: PubMed returns no results for veterinary no-show appointment terms, and the one 2025 community-clinic paper describes the problem without publishing a rate.

Source: PupPilot verification pass · Verified absence: veterinary no-show rate · 2026-08-31
Sample: PubMed search across veterinary no-show / missed-appointment terms, August 2026
Method: Literature search — publishing the absence as the finding
What it can't tell you: An industry no-show benchmark — none has been published. A practice's own PIMS is the reliable source for its rate.
Verified: August 31, 2026

Are veterinary clients becoming more price-sensitive?

81% of veterinarians report clients have become more price-sensitive (2025, up from 72%)

Named research firm

Practitioner perception of client price sensitivity, tracked year over year.

Source: Brakke Consulting via AVMA · Brakke practitioner survey, reported by AVMA news · 2026-02
Sample: ~350 practitioner respondents
Method: Named-firm practitioner survey
What it can't tell you: Client behavior — this measures what veterinarians perceive, not what clients do.
Verified: August 31, 2026

How fast are veterinary prices rising?

+4.7% veterinary-services CPI, year-over-year, July 2026

+3.4% all-items CPI, year-over-year, July 2026

Government

Consumer-price inflation for veterinary services against the all-items index, computed from BLS series CUUR0000SS62054.

Source: US Bureau of Labor Statistics · Consumer Price Index, series CUUR0000SS62054 (veterinary services) · 2026-07
Sample: National CPI series
Method: Government price index (computation from published index values)
What it can't tell you: A fixed multiple of overall inflation — the relationship changes year to year, so date any comparison. (The veterinary series is CUUR0000SS62054; series CUUR0000SEEB03 is day care and preschool.)
Verified: August 31, 2026

How much of veterinary medicine is corporate-owned?

~25% of general practices

~75% of specialty and emergency practices

~50% of revenue

Named research firm Archival

Brakke's consolidation estimates — the practice-count share and the revenue share are different denominators.

Source: Brakke Consulting via AVMA and AAHA Trends · Brakke consolidation estimates · 2021–22
Sample: Analyst estimates, 2021–22; no primary publication with disclosed method
Method: Named-firm market estimates
What it can't tell you: “Half of America's vet clinics are corporate-owned” — ~50% is the revenue share; the general-practice count share is ~25%. Dated estimates; label the vintage.
Verified: August 31, 2026

How big is the US veterinary services industry?

$72.6B US veterinary-services industry revenue, 2026 estimate (+1.4%)

Vendor, undisclosed method

IBISWorld's market-size estimate for US veterinary services.

Source: IBISWorld · Veterinary Services in the US — industry report (free-facing market size page) · 2026
Sample: Model-based market estimate; methodology undisclosed
Method: Named-firm industry model
What it can't tell you: Precision beyond “IBISWorld estimates” — the model is not disclosed; treat as an order-of-magnitude figure.
Verified: August 31, 2026

Technology adoption & AI

Who has actually adopted what, measured at the practice or professional level.

How many veterinary practices offer online booking?

33.4% of practices had online appointment scheduling (2024)

Association

The share of practices offering online scheduling — the cleanest published basis for the fact that most veterinary appointments still route through the phone.

Source: AVMA · 2025 Report on the Economic State of the Veterinary Profession · 2025
Sample: n=524 US practices, 8.8% response rate; 2024 fieldwork
Method: Association practice survey
What it can't tell you: A call-volume-reduction effect — this measures adoption only.
Verified: August 31, 2026

What technology do veterinary practices actually use?

76.5% practice management system (PIMS)

66.8% electronic medical records

64.1% online pharmacy

59.9% client-communication software integrated with the PIMS

33.4% online appointment scheduling

29.2% telehealth — the least-utilized of the seven

Association

Practice-level adoption across the seven technologies AVMA surveyed. 75.1% of owners describe their practice's digital pace as “about right.”

Source: AVMA · 2025 Report on the Economic State of the Veterinary Profession (pp. 51–52) · 2025
Sample: n=524 US practices, 94% independent
Method: Association practice survey
What it can't tell you: Individual-professional usage — these are practice-level adoption rates.
Verified: August 31, 2026

Are veterinary practices adopting AI?

91% adopted or changed at least one technology in the past year

48% use AI in some capacity — led by records/SOAP notes (63%) and diagnostic assistance (38%)

Vendor, disclosed

Practice-level technology and AI adoption in a vendor-funded, third-party-fielded survey.

Source: Instinct Science · The State of General Practice Veterinary Care, 2026 Edition · 2026-03-03
Sample: n=763 veterinary professionals; fielded by UserEvidence
Method: Vendor-funded survey, third-party fielded
What it can't tell you: Attribution to aggregators — the survey was conducted by Instinct Science and fielded by UserEvidence.
Verified: August 31, 2026

How many veterinary professionals use AI at work?

39.2% use AI at work (69.5% of users daily or weekly)

83.8% are familiar with AI

43.1% / 36.9% optimistic / skeptical about AI

Peer-reviewed

Individual-level AI use, familiarity, and sentiment among veterinary professionals.

Source: AJVR · Veterinary professionals' attitudes toward artificial intelligence (Gabor, Danylenko & Voegeli) · 2025· DOI 10.2460/ajvr.24.10.0293
Sample: n=3,968, recruited via AAHA and Digitail channels, December 2023 – January 2024; convenience sample with a tech-adjacent skew
Method: Peer-reviewed survey
What it can't tell you: Practice-level adoption or population inference — the unit is individuals and the sample is convenience; the 2026 wave of this survey is not yet published.
Verified: August 31, 2026

Triage & clinical communication

How well urgency gets judged over the phone — by owners, by front desks, and by teletriage.

Can pet owners judge how urgent a condition is?

28.4% of vignette responses judged a condition less urgent than veterinary consensus

Peer-reviewed Not US

UK dog owners assessed hypothetical condition vignettes against a veterinary consensus benchmark; underestimation ranged from 2.2% (cataracts) to 56.5% (otitis externa).

Source: PLOS One · To see or not to see the vet: decision-making by UK dog owners for commonly presenting conditions (Farrow, O'Neill & Packer) · 2026-01-16· DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0339723
Sample: n=1,772 UK dog owners; 5,316 vignette responses across 30 conditions, benchmarked to 14 general practitioners
Method: Peer-reviewed vignette study
What it can't tell you: Real-world triage error rates — vignettes measure judgment on hypotheticals, and this is UK data.
Verified: August 31, 2026

How well do untrained front desks triage urgent calls?

21.5% of emergent scenarios were correctly triaged by front-desk staff

Peer-reviewed Not veterinary

Mystery-call audit of (human) OB/GYN front desks: 21.5% of emergent scenarios triaged correctly, and 29.4% of urgent callers were wrongly directed to the ER.

Source: Cureus · Mystery-caller assessment of telephone triage in OB/GYN offices (Mandell et al.), 2025;17(9):e92541 · 2025· DOI 10.7759/cureus.92541
Sample: 1,114 mystery calls to 557 OB/GYN offices across 48 US states; open access
Method: Peer-reviewed mystery-call audit
What it can't tell you: Veterinary triage rates — this is human medicine; it is here as the best measurement of what untrained telephone triage looks like anywhere.
Verified: August 31, 2026

How many teletriage calls actually need the ER?

23% of vet-led video teletriage consults for canine GI signs ended in an ER-referral recommendation

Peer-reviewed

In 1,575 veterinarian-led video teletriage consultations for canine gastrointestinal signs, 77% were not referred to emergency care.

Source: Open Veterinary Journal · Video teletriage outcomes for canine gastrointestinal presentations (Ireifej, Morello & Lesser) · 2026-01· DOI 10.5455/OVJ.2026.v16.i1.33
Sample: 1,575 consults; open access; the first author founded the teletriage service (disclosed)
Method: Peer-reviewed retrospective of teletriage consults
What it can't tell you: Outcome claims — these are referral recommendations, not outcomes, and gastrointestinal presentations only.
Verified: August 31, 2026

What share of video vet consults turn out to be emergencies?

~5.5% of UK non-prescription video consults ended with an emergency in-person recommendation

Peer-reviewed Not USArchival

Clinical audit of a UK veterinary telemedicine app, April–October 2020: of 21,383 total consults, 17,482 non-prescription consults were audited for emergency escalation.

Source: Veterinary Evidence (RCVS Knowledge) · Clinical audit of remote consultations via a veterinary video telemedicine smartphone application (Smith et al.), Vol 7 No 2 · 2022
Sample: n=17,482 non-prescription consults of 21,383 total, UK, April–October 2020; authors affiliated with the app vendor (Vet-AI/Joii)
Method: Peer-reviewed clinical audit
What it can't tell you: Current or US rates — COVID-era UK data with vendor-affiliated authors; all three caveats travel with the figure.
Verified: August 31, 2026

Do digital follow-ups improve home-care compliance?

7 of 10 RCTs found adding a digital component to home exercise rehab significantly improved adherence

Peer-reviewed Not veterinary

Systematic review of randomized trials of digitally supported home rehabilitation in human physiotherapy.

Source: Archives of Physiotherapy · Digital support for home exercise programmes: systematic review (Lang, McLelland, MacDonald & Hamilton), 2022;12(1) · 2022· DOI 10.1186/s40945-022-00148-z
Sample: 10 randomized controlled trials, n=1,117 (human rehabilitation)
Method: Peer-reviewed systematic review
What it can't tell you: Veterinary or long-term effects — human rehab, and the authors hedge the effect as short-term.
Verified: August 31, 2026

Pet owners: spending, insurance & access

Ownership, spending, insurance, and barriers to care, from government, association, and named-firm research.

How much do Americans spend on pets?

$158B total US pet spending, 2025 actual (+3.7%)

$41.0B veterinary care and product sales segment

$165B projected for 2026

Association

APPA's industry spending totals.

Source: APPA · State of the Industry (March 2026 release + public statistics page) · 2026-03
Sample: Industry aggregate; methodology undisclosed. 2025 actuals as published; the 2026 figure is APPA's projection
Method: Association industry estimate
What it can't tell you: “Veterinary spending was $41B” — the segment includes veterinary product sales, not just services.
Verified: August 31, 2026

How many US households own a pet?

95M US households owning a pet (2025 National Pet Owners Survey)

Association

APPA's household ownership count. Publish the count, not a percentage — no overall ownership percentage appears on any live APPA page.

Source: APPA · 2025 National Pet Owners Survey · 2025
Sample: APPA National Pet Owners Survey panel
Method: Association consumer survey
What it can't tell you: An ownership percentage — no current percentage appears on APPA's published pages; the household count is the stated figure.
Verified: August 31, 2026

What share of US households have a dog or cat, and what do they spend at the vet?

42.6% of households own dogs (56.3M households; 87.3M dogs)

32.6% of households own cats (43.1M households; 76.3M cats)

$598 mean annual veterinary spend per dog-owning household

$529 mean annual veterinary spend per cat-owning household

Association

AVMA's household ownership rates, pet populations, and mean annual veterinary spend per owning household.

Source: AVMA · 2025 Pet Ownership & Demographics Sourcebook (public summary) · 2025
Sample: n=7,519, weighted opt-in panel, fielded spring 2025
Method: Association household survey
What it can't tell you: Blending with APPA's household figures — the methodologies differ materially, and the two sets should never be mixed in one sentence.
Verified: August 31, 2026

What does the average US household spend on pets?

$880 mean annual “Pets” spend per US consumer unit, 2024 — across ALL households, pet-owning or not

Government

BLS Consumer Expenditure Survey mean for the Pets category, averaged over every consumer unit.

Source: US Bureau of Labor Statistics · Consumer Expenditure Survey, series CXUPETSLB0101M · 2024
Sample: National CE survey; 2025 data lands ~September 2026
Method: Government expenditure survey
What it can't tell you: Per-pet-owner spending — the denominator is all households. (A commonly cited $1,733 figure is a third-party re-analysis of CE microdata, not a BLS-published number.)
Verified: August 31, 2026

How many pets are insured, and what does pet insurance cost?

7.6M insured pets in North America, year-end 2025 (up 8.5% from 7.03M)

+9.0% US insured-pet growth, 2024 to 2025

4.27% US penetration rate (dogs 5.99%, cats 2.29%)

$836 average US accident & illness premium, dogs

$435 average US accident & illness premium, cats

$5.7B US gross written premium (+19.7%)

Association

NAPHIA's industry totals for insured pets, growth, penetration, and average premiums — US penetration measured against 163.6M owned pets (87.3M dogs and 76.3M cats, per AVMA 2025).

Source: NAPHIA · State of the Industry Report 2026 (compiled by Willis Towers Watson from carriers representing ~99% of premium) · 2026-06-21
Sample: Carrier-reported data covering ~99% of written US/Canada premium; public data page + highlights PDF
Method: Association census of carriers, compiled by an independent actuarial firm
What it can't tell you: A share of pet owners — penetration is a share of pets. The US absolute insured-pet count appears only as a chart datapoint in the public highlights; the figures here are the ones stated in text.
Note: Confirmed against the public 2026 highlights PDF; some secondary coverage reports different premium figures, and the numbers above are as stated in the primary document.
Verified: August 31, 2026

What does a dog cost over its lifetime?

$22,125–$60,602 modeled 15-year cost of dog care

$20,073–$47,106 modeled 15-year cost of cat care

~8 in 10 owners underestimate lifetime costs

31% could comfortably absorb a major unexpected expense

58% have used a credit card for pet care

Vendor, disclosed

Synchrony's modeled lifetime cost ranges and owner-finance findings.

Source: Synchrony · Pet Lifetime of Care Study 2025 · 2025
Sample: n=4,861 US pet owners, fielded January 31 – February 22, 2025; press-release level; modeling assumptions unpublished; Synchrony owns CareCredit
Method: Vendor-commissioned survey with cost modeling
What it can't tell you: “The average lifetime cost of a dog” — these are modeled ranges that include non-veterinary spending, and the modeling assumptions are unpublished.
Verified: August 31, 2026

How many pet owners skip veterinary care over cost?

52% skipped or declined needed veterinary care

71% of those cite cost as the key factor

64% could at least double lifesaving-care spending with an interest-free 12-month plan

23% say they have ever been offered such a plan

41% of veterinarians say they often or always offer financing (companion wave)

Named research firm

Probability-panel measurement of skipped care and financing — note the gap between the 41% practitioner perception and the 23% client report.

Source: Gallup with PetSmart Charities · State of Pet Care study · 2025
Sample: n=2,498 US dog/cat owners, probability panel, fielded November 13, 2024 – January 9, 2025; practitioner wave n=933, September–October 2025, ±3.3pp
Method: Named-firm probability-panel survey
What it can't tell you: Clinical-outcome claims — this measures reported skipping and reported financing offers; the 41%-vs-23% gap contrasts practitioner perception with client reports.
Verified: August 31, 2026

How many pet owners face barriers to veterinary care?

~28% of pet-owning households experienced a barrier to veterinary care (2017–18)

Association Archival

The foundational access-to-care measurement; financial reasons were behind 80% of unobtained preventive care.

Source: Access to Veterinary Care Coalition / University of Tennessee · Access to Veterinary Care: Barriers, Current Practices, and Public Policy · 2018-12
Sample: US household survey, 2017–18; the full report PDF is delinked from utk.edu — headline verified at the UT news release; the commonly cited n could not be re-verified
Method: University-hosted coalition study
What it can't tell you: Current rates — the fieldwork is 2017–18; Gallup/PetSmart (2025) is the modern successor. Label the vintage.
Verified: August 31, 2026

Does the human-animal bond drive veterinary visits?

95% call their pet family

71% visit the vet 2+ times a year among high-bond owners

62% among mid-bond owners

45% among low-bond owners

Vendor, disclosed Not US

International bond survey linking self-reported bond strength to visit frequency.

Source: HABRI / Zoetis · International survey of pet owners and veterinarians (CM Research) · 2021
Sample: n=16,140 across 8 countries (2021 wave); press-release level. habri.org now shows an expanded 10-country dataset where the figures are 94% and 71/61/48 — cite one wave, labeled, never blended
Method: Association/vendor international survey
What it can't tell you: Causality, or US-only claims — international survey data showing association between bond and visits.
Verified: August 31, 2026

How many pet owners actually visit the vet each year?

74.2% dog owners with at least one veterinary visit in the past year

57.3% cat owners with at least one visit

86.8% dog owners who report having a regular veterinarian

77.1% cat owners who report having a regular veterinarian

Association

The gap between having a regular veterinarian and going. Modal visit frequency: twice yearly for dogs (56.5% of visiting owners), once yearly for cats (44.9%).

Source: AVMA · AVMA news and chart of the month (2024 Sourcebook data) · 2024
Sample: n=7,539, weighted household panel
Method: Association household survey
What it can't tell you: The share of PETS seen annually — these are household rates, and multi-pet households complicate per-pet inference.
Verified: August 31, 2026

Workforce & the shortage question

Wellbeing, retention, and the shortage models — including the fact that the three credible shortage models disagree.

Is there a veterinarian shortage?

14,000–24,000 projected shortage of companion-animal veterinarians by 2030 (Mars / Lloyd model)

Vendor, disclosed

A demand model built from pet-spending growth, projecting a companion-animal shortfall of roughly 11–18%; the report's larger “up to 55,000” figure is total need, not shortage.

Source: Mars Veterinary Health · Pet Healthcare in the US: Another Look at the Veterinarian Workforce (James Lloyd, Animal Health Economics) · 2023-08
Sample: Economic demand model; methodology PDF public on marsveterinary.com
Method: Commissioned economic model
What it can't tell you: Profession-wide claims — companion-animal only; and never “a 55,000 shortage,” which misreads total need as shortfall.
Verified: August 31, 2026

“Remote” likelihood of longer-term shortages — capacity adequate through ~2035 (AVMA / Brakke model)

Peer-reviewed

The AVMA-commissioned forecast concluding national capacity is adequate, noting 13 proposed new veterinary schools (~40% capacity growth).

Source: AVMA / Brakke Consulting · Veterinary workforce forecast, presented October 2024, published in JAVMA · 2024· DOI 10.2460/javma.24.09.0624
Sample: National workforce forecast model
Method: Peer-reviewed commissioned forecast
What it can't tell you: “No shortage anywhere” — rural and food-animal gaps are excluded from the adequacy claim.
Verified: August 31, 2026

~76% of need projected graduates cover about 76% of projected demand through 2032 (AAVMC / Gitter & LaFayette model)

Association

Independent economists project 70,092 veterinarians needed against 52,926 projected graduates through 2032 — graduates covering about 76% of projected need, most of which is replacement demand. The report's table figure for the difference is 17,166.

Source: AAVMC · Demand for and Supply of Veterinarians in the U.S. to 2032 (Gitter & LaFayette) · 2024-06
Sample: National demand/supply projection by independent economists, AAVMC-hosted
Method: Association-commissioned economic projection
What it can't tell you: “17,166 unfilled jobs” — most of projected need is replacement demand, not vacancies. The three credible shortage models disagree; they are best quoted together.
Verified: August 31, 2026

What do vet techs earn, and how satisfied are they?

$32.89/hr average credentialed-tech wage (up from $26.50 in 2022)

8% describe themselves as “extremely satisfied” (down from 25%)

57% would choose the career again

Association

NAVTA's member survey of wages and career satisfaction.

Source: NAVTA · 2024 Demographic Survey · 2024
Sample: n=1,404 NAVTA members, 83% credentialed
Method: Association member survey
What it can't tell you: National tech pay — the member sample skews credentialed; BLS's all-worker median is $47,380.
Verified: August 31, 2026

How many veterinary staff are planning to leave?

30% of practice team members plan to leave their current role

Association

AAHA's retention study measurement of intent to leave; about half of those planning to leave intend to exit clinical practice entirely.

Source: AAHA · Stay, Please retention study · 2023
Sample: ~15,000 veterinary professionals; per-role turnover tables sit inside registration-gated white papers
Method: Association workforce survey
What it can't tell you: Realized turnover, or any per-role “turnover rate per AAHA” — only intent-to-leave is publicly verifiable until the gated white papers are opened.
Verified: August 31, 2026

Adjacent-industry benchmarks

Not veterinary — reference points only

Not veterinary. Human medicine, dental, and contact-center measurements — useful as reference points, labeled so they cannot be mistaken for veterinary data.

What answer rate can a small practice actually achieve?

66% of calls to (human) general practices were answered; mean wait 25 seconds

Peer-reviewed Not veterinaryNot USArchival

The telephone company recorded every call to 100 Norwegian GP practices for one week — carrier-level measurement, not self-report. The best small-practice answer-rate measurement in existence.

Source: Tidsskrift for Den norske legeforening · Telephone accessibility of Norwegian general practices (Sandvik & Hunskår), 2005;125(2):182–185 · 2005
Sample: 100 Norwegian general (human) practices; every inbound call for one week, recorded by the carrier
Method: Peer-reviewed carrier-level call measurement
What it can't tell you: Veterinary or US claims — Norwegian human general practice, 2005. It is here because nothing this rigorous exists for veterinary phones.
Verified: August 31, 2026

What does it take to improve call abandonment at scale?

12.0% → 8.3% call abandonment across VA medical facilities, 2014–2016; average speed of answer 87s → 69s

Peer-reviewed Not veterinary

A very large health system worked at its phones for two years: abandonment fell from 12.0% to 8.3% against VA targets of ≤30s answer speed and ≤5% abandonment — and it got to 8.3%, not 5%.

Source: American Journal of Managed Care · Call center performance in the Veterans Health Administration (Griffith et al.), 2019;25(9):e282–7 · 2019
Sample: 285 VA medical facilities, 2014–2016; free full text
Method: Peer-reviewed administrative-data analysis
What it can't tell you: Reputation or satisfaction effects — the paper found abandonment was not associated with satisfaction outcomes.
Verified: August 31, 2026

How do dental practices compare on missed calls?

31 in 100 dental callers hung up before reaching an agent

Vendor, disclosed Not veterinary

The dental sibling of the veterinary access report — and the source pool from which “dental” numbers get relabeled as veterinary.

Source: Patient Prism · Dental Patient Access Report · 2026-07-02
Sample: 11,552,668 calls across 8,280 dental locations, calendar year 2025; vendor cohort, DSO-weighted
Method: Vendor call-tracking telemetry
What it can't tell you: Veterinary claims — this is dental call-tracking data.
Verified: August 31, 2026

How much do people hate phone menus?

85% had hung up on an automated phone menu in the past year

51% had abandoned a business entirely after a bad automated-phone experience

Vendor, disclosed Not veterinaryArchival

Consumer survey on IVR frustration; top complaints: reason not listed (65%), irrelevant options (63%), couldn't reach a live person (54%), menu too long (46%).

Source: Vonage · IVR consumer survey (conducted by Opinion Matters) · 2019-09-26
Sample: n=2,010 US adults, September 2019
Method: Vendor-commissioned consumer survey
What it can't tell you: Veterinary-specific rates or anything about voicemail — this measured automated phone menus, in 2019.
Verified: August 31, 2026

Are consumers comfortable talking to AI on the phone?

33% comfortable with AI on voice calls

85% say easy access to a live human remains very important

Vendor, disclosed Not veterinary

Consumer attitudes toward AI in customer service among recent users of AI customer support.

Source: Vonage · AI in customer experience survey (conducted by Pollfish) · 2024-11-21
Sample: n=1,000 US adults, September 2024, pre-screened as recent users of AI customer support
Method: Vendor-commissioned consumer survey
What it can't tell you: General-population comfort levels — the sample was screened to recent users of AI customer support, which travels with the figure.
Verified: August 31, 2026

What is a good call abandonment rate?

Not a standalone KPI ICMI: abandonment “is not a concrete measure of call center performance, because it is driven by caller behavior which the center cannot directly control”

Association Not veterinary

The contact-center standards body's own guidance: read abandonment alongside answered rate and service level, and treat 80/20 as one option among several, not an official standard.

Source: ICMI · Call Center Metrics: Key Performance Indicators (free PDF) · 2020
Sample: Standards-body guidance document
Method: Industry standards guidance
What it can't tell you: A specific veterinary abandonment threshold — published thresholds vary between sources, so the direction is the durable guidance.
Verified: August 31, 2026

Citations we could not independently verify

The publication titles below circulate as citations for veterinary statistics. In our source-verification work we could not locate a retrievable document for any of them. That does not settle what the underlying figures should be — it means we could not verify these titles as sources, so nothing on this page rests on them. If you can point us to one of these documents, we will gladly review it (see corrections).

“AAHA Client Experience Benchmark”
PupPilot could not verify that AAHA publishes a document titled “AAHA Client Experience Benchmark.” AAHA's benchmarking product is the AAHA Benchmarking platform (built with Petabyte Technology).
“AAHA Client Retention Analysis”
PupPilot could not verify that AAHA publishes a document titled “AAHA Client Retention Analysis.” AAHA's benchmarking product is the AAHA Benchmarking platform.
“AAHA Practice Efficiency Benchmark Report”
PupPilot could not verify that AAHA publishes a document titled “AAHA Practice Efficiency Benchmark Report.” AAHA's published benchmarking series is Financial & Productivity Pulsepoints, alongside the AAHA Benchmarking platform.
“AVMA Pet Owner Communication Study 2025”
PupPilot could not verify that AVMA publishes a document titled “AVMA Pet Owner Communication Study 2025.” AVMA's pet-owner research is published through the Pet Ownership & Demographics Sourcebook and AVMA news.
“AVMA Economic Analysis of Veterinary Practice Operations”
PupPilot could not verify that AVMA publishes a document titled “AVMA Economic Analysis of Veterinary Practice Operations.” AVMA's economics publication is the annual Report on the Economic State of the Veterinary Profession.
“AVMA Veterinary Practice Economic Report”
PupPilot could not verify that AVMA publishes a document titled “AVMA Veterinary Practice Economic Report.” AVMA's economics publication is the annual Report on the Economic State of the Veterinary Profession.
“AVMA Veterinary Economics Lifetime Value Study”
PupPilot could not verify that AVMA publishes a document titled “AVMA Veterinary Economics Lifetime Value Study.” The lifetime-of-care research in circulation is Synchrony's Pet Lifetime of Care study, which is not an AVMA publication.
“Veterinary Economics Client Communication Survey”
PupPilot could not verify a survey published under the title “Veterinary Economics Client Communication Survey.” Veterinary Economics was a trade magazine later folded into dvm360.
“VHMA Benchmarking Study”
PupPilot could not verify that VHMA publishes a document titled “VHMA Benchmarking Study.” VHMA's published benchmark products are the Compensation & Benefits Survey and the Insiders' Insight Monthly Report; missed-call cost figures are sometimes credited to VHMA benchmarking, and neither product contains telephone metrics.
“VHMA Economic Study”
PupPilot could not verify that VHMA publishes a document titled “VHMA Economic Study.” A figure often credited to it (a 5% retention increase yielding a 25–95% profit increase) appears to originate with Reichheld & Sasser, Harvard Business Review, 1990. VHMA's published benchmark products are the Compensation & Benefits Survey and the Insiders' Insight Monthly Report.
“VECCS Call Analysis”
PupPilot could not verify that VECCS (a real veterinary emergency and critical care society) publishes a document titled “VECCS Call Analysis.”
“Veterinary Practice News Client Acquisition Report”
PupPilot could not verify that Veterinary Practice News (a real trade outlet) publishes a document titled “Client Acquisition Report.”
“APPA Consumer Expectations Survey”
PupPilot could not verify that APPA publishes a document titled “APPA Consumer Expectations Survey.” APPA's actual survey is the National Pet Owners Survey.
“Veterinary Practice Analytics Call Volume Study”
PupPilot could not identify an organization named “Veterinary Practice Analytics” or verify a document titled “Call Volume Study.”
“Veterinary Practice Management Association Scheduling Survey”
PupPilot could not identify a US organization named “Veterinary Practice Management Association.” VHMA is the US practice-management body; the British VPMA merged into the Veterinary Management Group (VMG).

How to cite this page

Cite the primary source first

Where a primary source exists, cite it — every entry links its source directly. Cite this page for the compilation itself and its verification notes.

PupPilot Verified Veterinary Statistics. https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics. Last verified August 31, 2026.

License: CC BY 4.0

Free to reuse, quote, and republish with attribution and a link to this page — Creative Commons Attribution 4.0. The full verified set is downloadable:

JSON · CSV

Corrections

This page expects to be scrutinised. If a figure has moved, a source has a newer edition, or you can supply a document we could not locate, reach the team via puppilot.co/company/contact — we review and credit corrections.

Changelog

The dateline above moves only when re-verification actually happens.

August 31, 2026 updated
The opt-out entry now leads with the platform-wide rate (1.5–2%) with the single-practice 4.3% case figure alongside. Unverified-citation notes expanded to state explicitly what PupPilot could not verify, with pointers to each publisher's actual publications.
August 31, 2026 added
Added the after-hours call-type mix from PupPilot's published general-practice case study (42% FAQs, 25% scheduling, 13% emergencies, 20% other) alongside the Patient Prism conversion figure, with the intent-vs-conversion distinction stated.
August 31, 2026 updated
Readability: entries carrying several figures restructured into per-figure breakdowns, with presentation and wording refinements across the set. No figures or sources changed.
August 31, 2026 link-fixed
Pre-launch link-check: four source URLs updated to their post-redirect canonical locations (Vetsource tracker, AAHA Stay Please, AAVMC public data, IBISWorld).
August 31, 2026 updated
Launch verification pass: the per-patient value figure standardized on the AVMA/Vetsource $622 annual revenue per patient; BLS growth references aligned to the August 27, 2026 Occupational Outlook refresh; NAPHIA figures confirmed against the primary highlights PDF.
August 31, 2026 added
Launch. 62 verified entries across 9 categories, plus a registry of circulating citations we could not independently verify, assembled from the August 2026 source-verification passes. Every source URL opened during verification; JAVMA figures confirmed against the PubMed abstract, BLS Occupational Outlook figures against the August 27, 2026 refresh, and NAPHIA figures against the public 2026 highlights PDF.