{ "schemaVersion": "1", "name": "PupPilot Verified Veterinary Statistics", "description": "Verified veterinary industry statistics, each traced to a primary source with sample, method, and scope notes on what the figure does and does not measure.", "license": "https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/", "url": "https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics", "dateModified": "2026-08-31", "categories": [ { "id": "profession-at-a-glance", "label": "The profession at a glance", "description": "Scale figures for the US veterinary profession — headcounts, pay, growth, establishments — from government and association sources." }, { "id": "phone-access", "label": "Phone access & call handling", "description": "What is actually measured about reaching a veterinary practice by phone. The only peer-reviewed measurement in this category was published in 2025." }, { "id": "client-expectations", "label": "Client expectations & communication preferences", "description": "How pet owners want to reach their clinic, and what frustrates them when they try." }, { "id": "practice-economics", "label": "Practice economics & client value", "description": "What a patient is worth, what practices produce, and how demand is moving — with each figure’s denominator stated." }, { "id": "technology-ai", "label": "Technology adoption & AI", "description": "Who has actually adopted what, measured at the practice or professional level." }, { "id": "triage-clinical", "label": "Triage & clinical communication", "description": "How well urgency gets judged over the phone — by owners, by front desks, and by teletriage." }, { "id": "pet-owners", "label": "Pet owners: spending, insurance & access", "description": "Ownership, spending, insurance, and barriers to care, from government, association, and named-firm research." }, { "id": "workforce-shortage", "label": "Workforce & the shortage question", "description": "Wellbeing, retention, and the shortage models — including the fact that the three credible shortage models disagree." }, { "id": "adjacent-benchmarks", "label": "Adjacent-industry benchmarks", "description": "Not veterinary. Human medicine, dental, and contact-center measurements — useful as reference points, labeled so they cannot be mistaken for veterinary data." } ], "entries": [ { "slug": "us-veterinarian-count", "status": "verified", "category": "profession-at-a-glance", "question": "How many veterinarians are there in the US?", "figure": "133,475", "unit": "US veterinarians as of December 31, 2025", "construct": "An administrative count of living US veterinarians maintained by AVMA — a registry figure, not a survey estimate.", "source": { "publisher": "AVMA", "title": "Market research statistics: US veterinarians", "date": "2025", "url": "https://www.avma.org/resources-tools/reports-statistics/market-research-statistics-us-veterinarians" }, "sample": "Administrative count of all living US veterinarians; not a sample", "method": "Registry count", "strength": "association", "cannot_support": "A count of practicing clinicians — the figure includes retired and non-practicing veterinarians.", "scope": [], "verified_on": "2026-08-31", "added_on": "2026-08-31", "citation": "133,475 US veterinarians as of December 31, 2025 (AVMA, 2025; via PupPilot Verified Veterinary Statistics) https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#us-veterinarian-count", "anchorUrl": "https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#us-veterinarian-count" }, { "slug": "bls-veterinarian-outlook", "status": "verified", "category": "profession-at-a-glance", "question": "How many veterinarian jobs are there, and how fast is the profession growing?", "figure": "+9%", "unit": "projected US veterinarian job growth, 2025–35", "figures": [ { "value": "91,100", "label": "US veterinarian jobs (2025)" }, { "value": "$130,100", "label": "median pay (May 2025)" }, { "value": "+9%", "label": "projected growth, 2025–35 (+8,600 jobs; ~3,100 openings a year)" } ], "construct": "BLS employment count, median wage, and ten-year projection; openings are mostly replacement demand.", "source": { "publisher": "US Bureau of Labor Statistics", "title": "Occupational Outlook Handbook: Veterinarians", "date": "2026-08-27", "url": "https://www.bls.gov/ooh/healthcare/veterinarians.htm" }, "sample": "All US veterinarian employment; OOH projections refreshed August 27, 2026", "method": "Government occupational statistics and projection model", "strength": "government", "cannot_support": "The older 19–20% growth projection — superseded by the August 27, 2026 Occupational Outlook refresh; +9% (still “much faster than average”) is current.", "scope": [], "note": "Re-verified at bls.gov on August 31, 2026.", "verified_on": "2026-08-31", "added_on": "2026-08-31", "citation": "+9% projected US veterinarian job growth, 2025–35 (US Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2026-08-27; via PupPilot Verified Veterinary Statistics) https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#bls-veterinarian-outlook", "anchorUrl": "https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#bls-veterinarian-outlook" }, { "slug": "bls-vet-tech-outlook", "status": "verified", "category": "profession-at-a-glance", "question": "How much do vet techs make, and how fast is the field growing?", "figure": "+9%", "unit": "projected US vet tech job growth, 2025–35", "figures": [ { "value": "131,400", "label": "US vet tech/technologist jobs (2025)" }, { "value": "$47,380", "label": "median pay (May 2025)" }, { "value": "+9%", "label": "projected growth, 2025–35 (+12,300 jobs)" } ], "construct": "BLS counts of veterinary technologist and technician employment, median annual wage, and projected ten-year growth; openings are mostly replacement demand.", "source": { "publisher": "US Bureau of Labor Statistics", "title": "Occupational Outlook Handbook: Veterinary Technologists and Technicians", "date": "2026-08-27", "url": "https://www.bls.gov/ooh/healthcare/veterinary-technologists-and-technicians.htm" }, "sample": "All US vet tech/technologist employment; OOH refreshed August 27, 2026", "method": "Government occupational statistics and projection model", "strength": "government", "cannot_support": "Credentialed-tech pay specifically — BLS pools credentialed and non-credentialed workers in one occupation code.", "scope": [], "note": "Re-verified at bls.gov on August 31, 2026.", "verified_on": "2026-08-31", "added_on": "2026-08-31", "citation": "+9% projected US vet tech job growth, 2025–35 (US Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2026-08-27; via PupPilot Verified Veterinary Statistics) https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#bls-vet-tech-outlook", "anchorUrl": "https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#bls-vet-tech-outlook" }, { "slug": "us-veterinary-establishments", "status": "verified", "category": "profession-at-a-glance", "question": "How many veterinary clinics are there in the US?", "figure": "34,000", "unit": "US veterinary establishments (2022; +18.5% since 2009)", "construct": "Census Bureau count of US veterinary-services establishments, reported through AVMA's economic report.", "source": { "publisher": "US Census Bureau via AVMA", "title": "2025 Report on the Economic State of the Veterinary Profession", "date": "2025", "url": "https://www.avma.org/resources-tools/reports-statistics/economic-state-veterinary-profession" }, "sample": "All US veterinary establishments, County Business Patterns basis", "method": "Government establishment census", "strength": "government", "cannot_support": "“34,000 clinics” — establishments are not clinics; multi-site groups count once per location, and the count includes non-clinical veterinary services.", "scope": [], "verified_on": "2026-08-31", "added_on": "2026-08-31", "citation": "34,000 US veterinary establishments (2022; +18.5% since 2009) (US Census Bureau via AVMA, 2025; via PupPilot Verified Veterinary Statistics) https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#us-veterinary-establishments", "anchorUrl": "https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#us-veterinary-establishments" }, { "slug": "dvm-school-applicants", "status": "verified", "category": "profession-at-a-glance", "question": "How competitive is veterinary school admission?", "figure": "2.4:1", "unit": "applicants per first-year veterinary seat", "figures": [ { "value": "10,880", "label": "applicants to the DVM Class of 2028" }, { "value": "2.4:1", "label": "national applicants-per-first-year-seat ratio" } ], "construct": "AAVMC's count of DVM applicants and the ratio of applicants to available first-year seats across member schools.", "source": { "publisher": "AAVMC", "title": "2024–25 Annual Data Report", "date": "2025", "url": "https://www.aavmc.org/resources/public-data/" }, "sample": "33 US and 16 international AAVMC member schools", "method": "Association admissions data collection", "strength": "association", "cannot_support": "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.", "scope": [], "verified_on": "2026-08-31", "added_on": "2026-08-31", "citation": "2.4:1 applicants per first-year veterinary seat (AAVMC, 2025; via PupPilot Verified Veterinary Statistics) https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#dvm-school-applicants", "anchorUrl": "https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#dvm-school-applicants" }, { "slug": "javma-booking-success", "status": "verified", "category": "phone-access", "question": "How often do attempts to book a veterinary appointment succeed?", "figure": "67.0%", "unit": "of secret-shopper attempts to book a wellness appointment succeeded", "construct": "The share of simulated new-client wellness booking attempts that resulted in an available appointment.", "source": { "publisher": "JAVMA", "title": "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)", "date": "2026;264(1):65–72", "doi": "10.2460/javma.25.05.0311", "url": "https://doi.org/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", "strength": "peer-reviewed", "cannot_support": "Overall access or satisfaction claims — this measured new-client wellness booking attempts during business hours, not sick visits, emergencies, or existing clients.", "scope": [], "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_on": "2026-08-31", "added_on": "2026-08-31", "citation": "67.0% of secret-shopper attempts to book a wellness appointment succeeded (JAVMA, 2026;264(1):65–72; via PupPilot Verified Veterinary Statistics) https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#javma-booking-success", "anchorUrl": "https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#javma-booking-success" }, { "slug": "javma-booking-failure-connect", "status": "verified", "category": "phone-access", "question": "How many veterinary calls go unanswered?", "figure": "15.1%", "unit": "of booking attempts failed because the caller could not connect with staff", "construct": "The share of secret-shopper booking attempts that failed at the phone layer — the caller never reached a staff member at all.", "source": { "publisher": "JAVMA", "title": "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)", "date": "2026;264(1):65–72", "doi": "10.2460/javma.25.05.0311", "url": "https://doi.org/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", "strength": "peer-reviewed", "cannot_support": "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.", "scope": [], "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_on": "2026-08-31", "added_on": "2026-08-31", "citation": "15.1% of booking attempts failed because the caller could not connect with staff (JAVMA, 2026;264(1):65–72; via PupPilot Verified Veterinary Statistics) https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#javma-booking-failure-connect", "anchorUrl": "https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#javma-booking-failure-connect" }, { "slug": "javma-booking-failure-hold", "status": "verified", "category": "phone-access", "question": "How long will callers wait on hold at a veterinary clinic?", "figure": "8.2%", "unit": "of booking attempts ended after more than 5 minutes on hold", "construct": "The share of secret-shopper booking attempts abandoned after an excessive hold, defined in the study as more than five minutes.", "source": { "publisher": "JAVMA", "title": "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)", "date": "2026;264(1):65–72", "doi": "10.2460/javma.25.05.0311", "url": "https://doi.org/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", "strength": "peer-reviewed", "cannot_support": "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.", "scope": [], "verified_on": "2026-08-31", "added_on": "2026-08-31", "citation": "8.2% of booking attempts ended after more than 5 minutes on hold (JAVMA, 2026;264(1):65–72; via PupPilot Verified Veterinary Statistics) https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#javma-booking-failure-hold", "anchorUrl": "https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#javma-booking-failure-hold" }, { "slug": "javma-appointment-wait", "status": "verified", "category": "phone-access", "question": "How long do clients wait for a veterinary appointment?", "figure": "6.36 days", "unit": "mean wait to appointment when booking succeeded", "construct": "Average days between a successful secret-shopper booking call and the offered wellness appointment (average travel: 11.1 minutes or 6.4 miles).", "source": { "publisher": "JAVMA", "title": "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)", "date": "2026;264(1):65–72", "doi": "10.2460/javma.25.05.0311", "url": "https://doi.org/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", "strength": "peer-reviewed", "cannot_support": "Urgent or sick-visit wait times — these were routine wellness requests.", "scope": [], "verified_on": "2026-08-31", "added_on": "2026-08-31", "citation": "6.36 days mean wait to appointment when booking succeeded (JAVMA, 2026;264(1):65–72; via PupPilot Verified Veterinary Statistics) https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#javma-appointment-wait", "anchorUrl": "https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#javma-appointment-wait" }, { "slug": "patient-prism-vet-hangups", "status": "verified", "category": "phone-access", "question": "What share of veterinary callers hang up before reaching a person?", "figure": "26 in 100", "unit": "callers hung up before reaching an agent", "construct": "The share of inbound calls in one vendor's veterinary customer cohort that ended before the caller reached a person.", "source": { "publisher": "Patient Prism", "title": "Veterinary Patient Access Report", "date": "2026-07-02", "url": "https://www.patientprism.com/report/veterinary-patient-access-report/" }, "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", "strength": "vendor-disclosed", "cannot_support": "An industry-wide abandonment rate — the cohort is self-selected, corporate-weighted, and measured on marketing-tracked lines that skew toward new callers.", "scope": [], "verified_on": "2026-08-31", "added_on": "2026-08-31", "citation": "26 in 100 callers hung up before reaching an agent (Patient Prism, 2026-07-02; via PupPilot Verified Veterinary Statistics) https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#patient-prism-vet-hangups", "anchorUrl": "https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#patient-prism-vet-hangups" }, { "slug": "patient-prism-vet-bookings", "status": "verified", "category": "phone-access", "question": "What share of veterinary calls end in a booked appointment?", "figure": "22 in 100", "unit": "calls resulted in a booked appointment", "construct": "The share of inbound calls in the same vendor cohort that converted to a booked appointment.", "source": { "publisher": "Patient Prism", "title": "Veterinary Patient Access Report", "date": "2026-07-02", "url": "https://www.patientprism.com/report/veterinary-patient-access-report/" }, "sample": "568,309 calls across 384 veterinary locations, calendar year 2025; same cohort caveats as the hang-up figure", "method": "Vendor call-tracking telemetry", "strength": "vendor-disclosed", "cannot_support": "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.", "scope": [], "verified_on": "2026-08-31", "added_on": "2026-08-31", "citation": "22 in 100 calls resulted in a booked appointment (Patient Prism, 2026-07-02; via PupPilot Verified Veterinary Statistics) https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#patient-prism-vet-bookings", "anchorUrl": "https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#patient-prism-vet-bookings" }, { "slug": "puppilot-call-mix", "status": "verified", "category": "phone-access", "question": "What share of veterinary calls end in a booked appointment?", "figure": "25%", "unit": "of after-hours calls at one measured practice were scheduling requests", "figures": [ { "value": "42%", "label": "general FAQs (hours, vaccination requirements, policies)" }, { "value": "25%", "label": "scheduling requests" }, { "value": "13%", "label": "emergencies" }, { "value": "20%", "label": "other" } ], "construct": "Call intent, not conversion: the after-hours call-type mix at one general practice, from the published case study.", "source": { "publisher": "PupPilot", "title": "Case study: after-hours AI at a general practice", "date": "2026", "url": "https://www.puppilot.co/resources/case-studies/gp-clinic-after-hours-ai" }, "sample": "After-hours calls at 1 US general practice (published case study)", "method": "Platform call classification", "strength": "vendor-disclosed", "cannot_support": "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.", "scope": [], "verified_on": "2026-08-31", "added_on": "2026-08-31", "citation": "25% of after-hours calls at one measured practice were scheduling requests (PupPilot, 2026; via PupPilot Verified Veterinary Statistics) https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#puppilot-call-mix", "anchorUrl": "https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#puppilot-call-mix" }, { "slug": "puppilot-35-percent", "status": "verified", "category": "phone-access", "question": "How many calls can a single busy practice miss?", "figure": "35%", "unit": "of one practice's calls in a week were never picked up by a person", "construct": "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": { "publisher": "PupPilot", "title": "Platform case data: the 35% problem", "date": "2026-08-25", "url": "https://www.puppilot.co/resources/insights/the-35-percent-problem" }, "sample": "1 multi-doctor US general practice, 5 weekdays — a case, not a study", "method": "Phone-system logs, before/after line migration", "strength": "vendor-disclosed", "cannot_support": "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.", "scope": [], "note": "Our own platform data, published with the same fields as every other entry: vendor, single site, n=1 clinic.", "verified_on": "2026-08-31", "added_on": "2026-08-31", "citation": "35% of one practice's calls in a week were never picked up by a person (PupPilot, 2026-08-25; via PupPilot Verified Veterinary Statistics) https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#puppilot-35-percent", "anchorUrl": "https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#puppilot-35-percent" }, { "slug": "puppilot-opt-out", "status": "verified", "category": "phone-access", "question": "How many callers opt out of talking to an AI receptionist?", "figure": "1.5–2%", "unit": "of AI-handled interactions end with the caller opting out to a person (platform-wide)", "figures": [ { "value": "1.5–2%", "label": "platform-wide opt-out rate across PupPilot clinics" }, { "value": "4.3%", "label": "at the single practice in the published case (~2,000 interactions, 5 weekdays)" } ], "construct": "The share of AI-handled interactions in which the caller asks for, and is transferred to, a person.", "source": { "publisher": "PupPilot", "title": "Platform case data: the 35% problem", "date": "2026-08-25", "url": "https://www.puppilot.co/resources/insights/the-35-percent-problem" }, "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", "strength": "vendor-disclosed", "cannot_support": "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.", "scope": [], "note": "Our own platform data, published with the same fields as every other entry.", "verified_on": "2026-08-31", "added_on": "2026-08-31", "citation": "1.5–2% of AI-handled interactions end with the caller opting out to a person (platform-wide) (PupPilot, 2026-08-25; via PupPilot Verified Veterinary Statistics) https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#puppilot-opt-out", "anchorUrl": "https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#puppilot-opt-out" }, { "slug": "petdesk-booking-friction", "status": "verified", "category": "client-expectations", "question": "What frustrates pet owners about booking by phone?", "figure": "35%", "unit": "of pet owners reporting booking problems cite long phone hold times", "figures": [ { "value": "35%", "label": "cite long phone hold times" }, { "value": "21%", "label": "cite difficulty contacting the clinic" }, { "value": "33%", "label": "cite inability to book while the clinic is closed" } ], "construct": "Among pet owners who reported problems booking veterinary appointments, the share citing each friction.", "source": { "publisher": "PetDesk", "title": "2025 Pet Parent Research Report", "date": "2025", "url": "https://petdesk.com/pet-parent-research-report" }, "sample": "n=1,000 North American pet owners, fielded July–December 2024; report is email-gated", "method": "Vendor-commissioned consumer survey", "strength": "vendor-disclosed", "cannot_support": "Shares of all pet owners — the denominators are owners who reported booking problems, not the full sample.", "scope": [], "verified_on": "2026-08-31", "added_on": "2026-08-31", "citation": "35% of pet owners reporting booking problems cite long phone hold times (PetDesk, 2025; via PupPilot Verified Veterinary Statistics) https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#petdesk-booking-friction", "anchorUrl": "https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#petdesk-booking-friction" }, { "slug": "petdesk-anytime-booking", "status": "verified", "category": "client-expectations", "question": "Do pet owners want to text and book online with their veterinary clinic?", "figure": "78%", "unit": "of pet owners rate any-time, any-device booking as important", "figures": [ { "value": "78%", "label": "rate any-time, any-device booking important" }, { "value": "77%", "label": "want text or chat with the clinic" }, { "value": "57%", "label": "reported difficulty booking an appointment" }, { "value": "31%", "label": "say they are likely to switch clinics over it (40% among younger owners)" } ], "construct": "What surveyed pet owners say they want from clinic communication channels, and the switching risk when they don't get it.", "source": { "publisher": "PetDesk with London Research", "title": "2025 Pet Parent Research Report", "date": "2025-03", "url": "https://petdesk.com/pet-parent-research-report" }, "sample": "n=1,000 North American pet owners; full report gated", "method": "Vendor-commissioned consumer survey, third-party research partner", "strength": "vendor-disclosed", "cannot_support": "Mixing these figures with the variant cut shown on PetDesk's own landing page — the two sets differ; cite one, labeled.", "scope": [], "verified_on": "2026-08-31", "added_on": "2026-08-31", "citation": "78% of pet owners rate any-time, any-device booking as important (PetDesk with London Research, 2025-03; via PupPilot Verified Veterinary Statistics) https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#petdesk-anytime-booking", "anchorUrl": "https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#petdesk-anytime-booking" }, { "slug": "cma-phone-research", "status": "verified", "category": "client-expectations", "question": "Do prospective clients still use the phone to shop for veterinary care?", "figure": "27–31%", "unit": "of prospective clients used the phone to research prices", "figures": [ { "value": "27–31%", "label": "used the phone to research prices" }, { "value": "29%", "label": "used the phone to research service information" } ], "construct": "UK government-commissioned survey of how veterinary clients research providers before choosing one.", "source": { "publisher": "Accent Marketing & Research for the UK Competition & Markets Authority", "title": "Vet Users Survey", "date": "2025-01", "url": "https://www.gov.uk/cma-cases/veterinary-services-market-for-pets-review" }, "sample": "n=2,376 UK veterinary users; push-to-web with telephone (CATI) follow-up", "method": "Government-commissioned market survey", "strength": "government", "cannot_support": "US claims — this is UK data from the CMA's veterinary market review.", "scope": [ "non-us" ], "verified_on": "2026-08-31", "added_on": "2026-08-31", "citation": "27–31% of prospective clients used the phone to research prices (Accent Marketing & Research for the UK Competition & Markets Authority, 2025-01; via PupPilot Verified Veterinary Statistics) https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#cma-phone-research", "anchorUrl": "https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#cma-phone-research" }, { "slug": "ipsos-portal-nonusers", "status": "verified", "category": "client-expectations", "question": "Why do some clients never use online portals?", "figure": "36%", "unit": "of healthcare-portal non-users would rather talk to a human", "figures": [ { "value": "17%", "label": "were unaware they had a portal" }, { "value": "13%", "label": "didn't know how to access it" }, { "value": "36%", "label": "would rather talk to a human" } ], "construct": "Among US adults who do not use their (human) healthcare portal, the stated reasons — while 81% of US adults do use one.", "source": { "publisher": "Ipsos", "title": "Healthcare portals are gaining traction", "date": "2025", "url": "https://www.ipsos.com/en-us" }, "sample": "n=3,010 US adults, fielded March 17–20, 2025, ±2.0pp", "method": "Named-firm omnibus survey", "strength": "named-firm", "cannot_support": "Portal-rejection rates for the whole population — the percentages describe the non-user minority only, and this is human healthcare, not veterinary.", "scope": [ "non-veterinary" ], "verified_on": "2026-08-31", "added_on": "2026-08-31", "citation": "36% of healthcare-portal non-users would rather talk to a human (Ipsos, 2025; via PupPilot Verified Veterinary Statistics) https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#ipsos-portal-nonusers", "anchorUrl": "https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#ipsos-portal-nonusers" }, { "slug": "dr-google-consultation", "status": "verified", "category": "client-expectations", "question": "Do clients Google symptoms before calling the vet?", "figure": "~68%", "unit": "of dog and cat owners consult online sources at least occasionally before a veterinary visit", "figures": [ { "value": "~68%", "label": "consult online sources at least occasionally before a visit" }, { "value": "12.1%", "label": "ever disagreed with their veterinarian because of it" } ], "construct": "European survey of pet owners' use of internet health information — near-universal consultation, rare downstream conflict.", "source": { "publisher": "Frontiers in Veterinary Science", "title": "Does “Dr. Google” improve discussion and decisions in small animal practice? (Springer et al.)", "date": "2024", "doi": "10.3389/fvets.2024.1417927", "url": "https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/veterinary-science/articles/10.3389/fvets.2024.1417927/full" }, "sample": "n=2,117 dog and cat owners in Austria, Denmark, and the UK; fielded March 2022", "method": "Peer-reviewed online questionnaire", "strength": "peer-reviewed", "cannot_support": "US rates, or claims that online research routinely damages the clinical relationship — 12.1% ever disagreeing is the finding pointing the other way.", "scope": [ "non-us" ], "verified_on": "2026-08-31", "added_on": "2026-08-31", "citation": "~68% of dog and cat owners consult online sources at least occasionally before a veterinary visit (Frontiers in Veterinary Science, 2024; via PupPilot Verified Veterinary Statistics) https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#dr-google-consultation", "anchorUrl": "https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#dr-google-consultation" }, { "slug": "avma-vetsource-revenue-per-patient", "status": "verified", "category": "practice-economics", "question": "What is a veterinary patient worth per year?", "figure": "$622", "unit": "average annual revenue per patient ($499 services + $203 products)", "construct": "Average yearly revenue per active patient across a large practice panel — the defensible per-patient value figure.", "source": { "publisher": "Vetsource / VetSuccess via AVMA", "title": "Veterinary industry revenue-per-patient analysis", "date": "2024", "url": "https://www.avma.org/news" }, "sample": "~6,000 US practices, August 2023 – August 2024", "method": "Practice-management-system transaction data via data provider", "strength": "association", "cannot_support": "New-client first-year value or lifetime value — this is an annual average across active patients of network practices.", "scope": [], "verified_on": "2026-08-31", "added_on": "2026-08-31", "citation": "$622 average annual revenue per patient ($499 services + $203 products) (Vetsource / VetSuccess via AVMA, 2024; via PupPilot Verified Veterinary Statistics) https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#avma-vetsource-revenue-per-patient", "anchorUrl": "https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#avma-vetsource-revenue-per-patient" }, { "slug": "avma-revenue-per-dvm", "status": "verified", "category": "practice-economics", "question": "How much revenue does a veterinarian generate?", "figure": "$616,667", "unit": "median gross revenue per FTE veterinarian, companion-exclusive practices (2023)", "figures": [ { "value": "$616,667", "label": "median gross revenue per FTE veterinarian, companion-exclusive practices (2023)" }, { "value": "$554,982", "label": "all-practice average (2024)" }, { "value": "~$288", "label": "revenue per DVM-hour" } ], "construct": "Practice revenue per full-time-equivalent veterinarian, median and average, with the per-hour equivalent.", "source": { "publisher": "AVMA", "title": "2025 Report on the Economic State of the Veterinary Profession + AVMA benchmarking (Oct 2025)", "date": "2025", "url": "https://www.avma.org/resources-tools/reports-statistics/economic-state-veterinary-profession" }, "sample": "n=524 practices (93.9% independent), 8.8% response rate; free PDF", "method": "Association practice survey", "strength": "association", "cannot_support": "Treating the median (2023, companion-exclusive) and the average (2024, all practices) as one trend — they are different constructs from different cuts.", "scope": [], "verified_on": "2026-08-31", "added_on": "2026-08-31", "citation": "$616,667 median gross revenue per FTE veterinarian, companion-exclusive practices (2023) (AVMA, 2025; via PupPilot Verified Veterinary Statistics) https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#avma-revenue-per-dvm", "anchorUrl": "https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#avma-revenue-per-dvm" }, { "slug": "avma-staffing-ratio", "status": "verified", "category": "practice-economics", "question": "How many support staff should a practice have per veterinarian?", "figure": "2.21 vs 2.7", "unit": "medical staff (techs + assistants) per DVM: 2024 actual vs the most efficient hospitals", "figures": [ { "value": "2.21", "label": "medical staff (techs + assistants) per DVM, 2024 actual" }, { "value": "2.7", "label": "medical staff per DVM at the most efficient hospitals" }, { "value": "4–5", "label": "optimal all-staff per FTE DVM (VEBF 2024)" } ], "construct": "AVMA benchmarking of actual versus most-efficient staffing ratios.", "source": { "publisher": "AVMA", "title": "AVMA practice benchmarking", "date": "2025-10", "url": "https://www.avma.org/news" }, "sample": "AVMA benchmarking analysis, October 2025", "method": "Association benchmarking analysis", "strength": "association", "cannot_support": "Any staffing ratio attributed to AAHA — AAHA does not publish staffing benchmarks.", "scope": [], "verified_on": "2026-08-31", "added_on": "2026-08-31", "citation": "2.21 vs 2.7 medical staff (techs + assistants) per DVM: 2024 actual vs the most efficient hospitals (AVMA, 2025-10; via PupPilot Verified Veterinary Statistics) https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#avma-staffing-ratio", "anchorUrl": "https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#avma-staffing-ratio" }, { "slug": "avma-appointment-slots", "status": "verified", "category": "practice-economics", "question": "How many appointments does a veterinarian see per day?", "figure": "13–14", "unit": "appointment slots per FTE veterinarian per weekday (companion/mixed practice)", "construct": "Scheduled appointment capacity per full-time veterinarian in companion and mixed practices.", "source": { "publisher": "AVMA", "title": "2025 Report on the Economic State of the Veterinary Profession", "date": "2025", "url": "https://www.avma.org/resources-tools/reports-statistics/economic-state-veterinary-profession" }, "sample": "n=524 practices, 8.8% response rate", "method": "Association practice survey", "strength": "association", "cannot_support": "Specialty or emergency scheduling claims — this is general companion/mixed practice.", "scope": [], "verified_on": "2026-08-31", "added_on": "2026-08-31", "citation": "13–14 appointment slots per FTE veterinarian per weekday (companion/mixed practice) (AVMA, 2025; via PupPilot Verified Veterinary Statistics) https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#avma-appointment-slots", "anchorUrl": "https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#avma-appointment-slots" }, { "slug": "vetsource-industry-tracker", "status": "verified", "category": "practice-economics", "question": "Are veterinary revenue and visits growing or shrinking?", "figure": "+3.4%", "unit": "revenue, trailing 12 months year-over-year (as of August 25, 2026)", "figures": [ { "value": "+3.4%", "label": "revenue, trailing 12-month year-over-year" }, { "value": "−2.0%", "label": "visits, trailing 12-month year-over-year" } ], "construct": "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": { "publisher": "Vetsource / AVMA", "title": "Veterinary Industry Tracker weekly summary", "date": "2026-08-25", "url": "https://vetsource.com/products/data-services/veterinary-industry-tracker/" }, "sample": "6,488 US practices; panel skews larger than the median practice", "method": "PIMS transaction telemetry, updated weekly", "strength": "vendor-disclosed", "cannot_support": "A fixed industry statistic — the tracker updates weekly and this snapshot is dated August 25, 2026; re-pull before quoting.", "scope": [], "verified_on": "2026-08-31", "added_on": "2026-08-31", "citation": "+3.4% revenue, trailing 12 months year-over-year (as of August 25, 2026) (Vetsource / AVMA, 2026-08-25; via PupPilot Verified Veterinary Statistics) https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#vetsource-industry-tracker", "anchorUrl": "https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#vetsource-industry-tracker" }, { "slug": "vetsource-2025-visits", "status": "verified", "category": "practice-economics", "question": "Did veterinary visits decline in 2025?", "figure": "−3.1%", "unit": "total veterinary visits, 2025 vs 2024", "figures": [ { "value": "−3.1%", "label": "total visits, 2025 vs 2024" }, { "value": "−3.8%", "label": "wellness visits, 2025 vs 2024" } ], "construct": "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": { "publisher": "Vetsource", "title": "2025 full-year white paper", "date": "2026-01-15", "url": "https://vetsource.com/resources/" }, "sample": "~6,500 US practices in the Vetsource panel", "method": "PIMS transaction telemetry", "strength": "vendor-disclosed", "cannot_support": "Industry totals — panel practices skew larger than the median practice.", "scope": [], "verified_on": "2026-08-31", "added_on": "2026-08-31", "citation": "−3.1% total veterinary visits, 2025 vs 2024 (Vetsource, 2026-01-15; via PupPilot Verified Veterinary Statistics) https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#vetsource-2025-visits", "anchorUrl": "https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#vetsource-2025-visits" }, { "slug": "vetsource-visits-per-patient", "status": "verified", "category": "practice-economics", "question": "How often does the average patient visit?", "figure": "2.39", "unit": "visits per active patient per year across Vetsource-tracked practices", "construct": "Average annual visits per active patient in a large practice network (network visits fell 2.7% between August 2021 and August 2023).", "source": { "publisher": "AVMA (citing VetSource network data)", "title": "AVMA news analysis of VetSource data", "date": "2023-11", "url": "https://www.avma.org/news" }, "sample": "Vetsource-tracked US practices; network data, not a population sample", "method": "PIMS transaction telemetry via association reporting", "strength": "vendor-disclosed", "cannot_support": "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.", "scope": [], "verified_on": "2026-08-31", "added_on": "2026-08-31", "citation": "2.39 visits per active patient per year across Vetsource-tracked practices (AVMA (citing VetSource network data), 2023-11; via PupPilot Verified Veterinary Statistics) https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#vetsource-visits-per-patient", "anchorUrl": "https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#vetsource-visits-per-patient" }, { "slug": "vetsource-lapsed-stock", "status": "verified", "category": "practice-economics", "question": "How many patients quietly lapse?", "figure": "≈20%", "unit": "of the average practice's active patient count has no transaction in over 18 months", "construct": "Lapsed patients as a share of the active patient base — a stock at a point in time, not an annual churn rate.", "source": { "publisher": "Vetsource", "title": "Practice Overview data", "date": "2024", "url": "https://vetsource.com/resources/" }, "sample": "Vetsource practice panel; methodology undisclosed", "method": "Vendor analysis of PIMS data", "strength": "vendor-undisclosed", "cannot_support": "An annual churn rate — this is a stock measure at a point in time.", "scope": [], "verified_on": "2026-08-31", "added_on": "2026-08-31", "citation": "≈20% of the average practice's active patient count has no transaction in over 18 months (Vetsource, 2024; via PupPilot Verified Veterinary Statistics) https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#vetsource-lapsed-stock", "anchorUrl": "https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#vetsource-lapsed-stock" }, { "slug": "aaha-compliance-2003", "status": "verified", "category": "practice-economics", "question": "How compliant are veterinary clients with recommendations?", "figure": "48%", "unit": "compliance with heartworm-preventive recommendations (2003)", "figures": [ { "value": "48%", "label": "heartworm-preventive recommendations" }, { "value": "35%", "label": "dental treatment (grade 2+ disease)" }, { "value": "87%", "label": "core vaccines" }, { "value": "64% → 73%", "label": "overall compliance, 2003 to the 2009 follow-up" } ], "construct": "The canonical AAHA compliance measurements. Key insight: much “noncompliance” is a recommendation never made.", "source": { "publisher": "AAHA", "title": "The Path to High-Quality Care (2003) and Compliance: Taking Quality Care to the Next Level (2009)", "date": "2003/2009", "url": "https://www.aaha.org" }, "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)", "strength": "association", "cannot_support": "Current compliance rates — this is 2003/2009 canonical data, still the only benchmark that exists. Label the vintage whenever quoted.", "scope": [ "archival" ], "verified_on": "2026-08-31", "added_on": "2026-08-31", "citation": "48% compliance with heartworm-preventive recommendations (2003) (AAHA, 2003/2009; via PupPilot Verified Veterinary Statistics) https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#aaha-compliance-2003", "anchorUrl": "https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#aaha-compliance-2003" }, { "slug": "no-show-verified-absence", "status": "verified", "category": "practice-economics", "question": "What is the veterinary no-show rate?", "figure": "0 studies", "unit": "peer-reviewed US veterinary no-show rate measurements in the published literature", "construct": "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": { "publisher": "PupPilot verification pass", "title": "Verified absence: veterinary no-show rate", "date": "2026-08-31", "url": "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/" }, "sample": "PubMed search across veterinary no-show / missed-appointment terms, August 2026", "method": "Literature search — publishing the absence as the finding", "strength": "verified-absence", "cannot_support": "An industry no-show benchmark — none has been published. A practice's own PIMS is the reliable source for its rate.", "scope": [], "verified_on": "2026-08-31", "added_on": "2026-08-31", "citation": "0 studies peer-reviewed US veterinary no-show rate measurements in the published literature (PupPilot verification pass, 2026-08-31; via PupPilot Verified Veterinary Statistics) https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#no-show-verified-absence", "anchorUrl": "https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#no-show-verified-absence" }, { "slug": "brakke-price-sensitivity", "status": "verified", "category": "practice-economics", "question": "Are veterinary clients becoming more price-sensitive?", "figure": "81%", "unit": "of veterinarians report clients have become more price-sensitive (2025, up from 72%)", "construct": "Practitioner perception of client price sensitivity, tracked year over year.", "source": { "publisher": "Brakke Consulting via AVMA", "title": "Brakke practitioner survey, reported by AVMA news", "date": "2026-02", "url": "https://www.avma.org/news/survey-results-highlight-pet-owner-price-sensitivity-veterinary-services" }, "sample": "~350 practitioner respondents", "method": "Named-firm practitioner survey", "strength": "named-firm", "cannot_support": "Client behavior — this measures what veterinarians perceive, not what clients do.", "scope": [], "verified_on": "2026-08-31", "added_on": "2026-08-31", "citation": "81% of veterinarians report clients have become more price-sensitive (2025, up from 72%) (Brakke Consulting via AVMA, 2026-02; via PupPilot Verified Veterinary Statistics) https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#brakke-price-sensitivity", "anchorUrl": "https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#brakke-price-sensitivity" }, { "slug": "bls-veterinary-cpi", "status": "verified", "category": "practice-economics", "question": "How fast are veterinary prices rising?", "figure": "+4.7% vs +3.4%", "unit": "veterinary-services CPI vs all-items CPI, year over year, July 2026", "figures": [ { "value": "+4.7%", "label": "veterinary-services CPI, year-over-year, July 2026" }, { "value": "+3.4%", "label": "all-items CPI, year-over-year, July 2026" } ], "construct": "Consumer-price inflation for veterinary services against the all-items index, computed from BLS series CUUR0000SS62054.", "source": { "publisher": "US Bureau of Labor Statistics", "title": "Consumer Price Index, series CUUR0000SS62054 (veterinary services)", "date": "2026-07", "url": "https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CUUR0000SS62054" }, "sample": "National CPI series", "method": "Government price index (computation from published index values)", "strength": "government", "cannot_support": "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.)", "scope": [], "verified_on": "2026-08-31", "added_on": "2026-08-31", "citation": "+4.7% vs +3.4% veterinary-services CPI vs all-items CPI, year over year, July 2026 (US Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2026-07; via PupPilot Verified Veterinary Statistics) https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#bls-veterinary-cpi", "anchorUrl": "https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#bls-veterinary-cpi" }, { "slug": "brakke-consolidation", "status": "verified", "category": "practice-economics", "question": "How much of veterinary medicine is corporate-owned?", "figure": "~25%", "unit": "of general practices are consolidator-owned", "figures": [ { "value": "~25%", "label": "of general practices" }, { "value": "~75%", "label": "of specialty and emergency practices" }, { "value": "~50%", "label": "of revenue" } ], "construct": "Brakke's consolidation estimates — the practice-count share and the revenue share are different denominators.", "source": { "publisher": "Brakke Consulting via AVMA and AAHA Trends", "title": "Brakke consolidation estimates", "date": "2021–22", "url": "https://www.avma.org/news" }, "sample": "Analyst estimates, 2021–22; no primary publication with disclosed method", "method": "Named-firm market estimates", "strength": "named-firm", "cannot_support": "“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.", "scope": [ "archival" ], "verified_on": "2026-08-31", "added_on": "2026-08-31", "citation": "~25% of general practices are consolidator-owned (Brakke Consulting via AVMA and AAHA Trends, 2021–22; via PupPilot Verified Veterinary Statistics) https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#brakke-consolidation", "anchorUrl": "https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#brakke-consolidation" }, { "slug": "ibisworld-industry-revenue", "status": "verified", "category": "practice-economics", "question": "How big is the US veterinary services industry?", "figure": "$72.6B", "unit": "US veterinary-services industry revenue, 2026 estimate (+1.4%)", "construct": "IBISWorld's market-size estimate for US veterinary services.", "source": { "publisher": "IBISWorld", "title": "Veterinary Services in the US — industry report (free-facing market size page)", "date": "2026", "url": "https://www.ibisworld.com/united-states/industry/veterinary-services/1447/" }, "sample": "Model-based market estimate; methodology undisclosed", "method": "Named-firm industry model", "strength": "vendor-undisclosed", "cannot_support": "Precision beyond “IBISWorld estimates” — the model is not disclosed; treat as an order-of-magnitude figure.", "scope": [], "verified_on": "2026-08-31", "added_on": "2026-08-31", "citation": "$72.6B US veterinary-services industry revenue, 2026 estimate (+1.4%) (IBISWorld, 2026; via PupPilot Verified Veterinary Statistics) https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#ibisworld-industry-revenue", "anchorUrl": "https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#ibisworld-industry-revenue" }, { "slug": "avma-online-scheduling", "status": "verified", "category": "technology-ai", "question": "How many veterinary practices offer online booking?", "figure": "33.4%", "unit": "of practices had online appointment scheduling (2024)", "construct": "The share of practices offering online scheduling — the cleanest published basis for the fact that most veterinary appointments still route through the phone.", "source": { "publisher": "AVMA", "title": "2025 Report on the Economic State of the Veterinary Profession", "date": "2025", "url": "https://www.avma.org/resources-tools/reports-statistics/economic-state-veterinary-profession" }, "sample": "n=524 US practices, 8.8% response rate; 2024 fieldwork", "method": "Association practice survey", "strength": "association", "cannot_support": "A call-volume-reduction effect — this measures adoption only.", "scope": [], "verified_on": "2026-08-31", "added_on": "2026-08-31", "citation": "33.4% of practices had online appointment scheduling (2024) (AVMA, 2025; via PupPilot Verified Veterinary Statistics) https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#avma-online-scheduling", "anchorUrl": "https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#avma-online-scheduling" }, { "slug": "avma-tech-adoption-suite", "status": "verified", "category": "technology-ai", "question": "What technology do veterinary practices actually use?", "figure": "76.5%", "unit": "of practices use a practice management system — the most-adopted of seven technologies surveyed (2024)", "figures": [ { "value": "76.5%", "label": "practice management system (PIMS)" }, { "value": "66.8%", "label": "electronic medical records" }, { "value": "64.1%", "label": "online pharmacy" }, { "value": "59.9%", "label": "client-communication software integrated with the PIMS" }, { "value": "33.4%", "label": "online appointment scheduling" }, { "value": "29.2%", "label": "telehealth — the least-utilized of the seven" } ], "construct": "Practice-level adoption across the seven technologies AVMA surveyed. 75.1% of owners describe their practice's digital pace as “about right.”", "source": { "publisher": "AVMA", "title": "2025 Report on the Economic State of the Veterinary Profession (pp. 51–52)", "date": "2025", "url": "https://www.avma.org/resources-tools/reports-statistics/economic-state-veterinary-profession" }, "sample": "n=524 US practices, 94% independent", "method": "Association practice survey", "strength": "association", "cannot_support": "Individual-professional usage — these are practice-level adoption rates.", "scope": [], "verified_on": "2026-08-31", "added_on": "2026-08-31", "citation": "76.5% of practices use a practice management system — the most-adopted of seven technologies surveyed (2024) (AVMA, 2025; via PupPilot Verified Veterinary Statistics) https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#avma-tech-adoption-suite", "anchorUrl": "https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#avma-tech-adoption-suite" }, { "slug": "instinct-tech-adoption", "status": "verified", "category": "technology-ai", "question": "Are veterinary practices adopting AI?", "figure": "48%", "unit": "of general practices use AI in some capacity", "figures": [ { "value": "91%", "label": "adopted or changed at least one technology in the past year" }, { "value": "48%", "label": "use AI in some capacity — led by records/SOAP notes (63%) and diagnostic assistance (38%)" } ], "construct": "Practice-level technology and AI adoption in a vendor-funded, third-party-fielded survey.", "source": { "publisher": "Instinct Science", "title": "The State of General Practice Veterinary Care, 2026 Edition", "date": "2026-03-03", "url": "https://instinct.vet/blog/2026-state-of-general-practice-veterinary-care-overview/" }, "sample": "n=763 veterinary professionals; fielded by UserEvidence", "method": "Vendor-funded survey, third-party fielded", "strength": "vendor-disclosed", "cannot_support": "Attribution to aggregators — the survey was conducted by Instinct Science and fielded by UserEvidence.", "scope": [], "verified_on": "2026-08-31", "added_on": "2026-08-31", "citation": "48% of general practices use AI in some capacity (Instinct Science, 2026-03-03; via PupPilot Verified Veterinary Statistics) https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#instinct-tech-adoption", "anchorUrl": "https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#instinct-tech-adoption" }, { "slug": "ajvr-ai-use", "status": "verified", "category": "technology-ai", "question": "How many veterinary professionals use AI at work?", "figure": "39.2%", "unit": "of veterinary professionals use AI at work", "figures": [ { "value": "39.2%", "label": "use AI at work (69.5% of users daily or weekly)" }, { "value": "83.8%", "label": "are familiar with AI" }, { "value": "43.1% / 36.9%", "label": "optimistic / skeptical about AI" } ], "construct": "Individual-level AI use, familiarity, and sentiment among veterinary professionals.", "source": { "publisher": "AJVR", "title": "Veterinary professionals' attitudes toward artificial intelligence (Gabor, Danylenko & Voegeli)", "date": "2025", "doi": "10.2460/ajvr.24.10.0293", "url": "https://doi.org/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", "strength": "peer-reviewed", "cannot_support": "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.", "scope": [], "verified_on": "2026-08-31", "added_on": "2026-08-31", "citation": "39.2% of veterinary professionals use AI at work (AJVR, 2025; via PupPilot Verified Veterinary Statistics) https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#ajvr-ai-use", "anchorUrl": "https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#ajvr-ai-use" }, { "slug": "plos-owner-urgency", "status": "verified", "category": "triage-clinical", "question": "Can pet owners judge how urgent a condition is?", "figure": "28.4%", "unit": "of vignette responses judged a condition less urgent than veterinary consensus", "construct": "UK dog owners assessed hypothetical condition vignettes against a veterinary consensus benchmark; underestimation ranged from 2.2% (cataracts) to 56.5% (otitis externa).", "source": { "publisher": "PLOS One", "title": "To see or not to see the vet: decision-making by UK dog owners for commonly presenting conditions (Farrow, O'Neill & Packer)", "date": "2026-01-16", "doi": "10.1371/journal.pone.0339723", "url": "https://doi.org/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", "strength": "peer-reviewed", "cannot_support": "Real-world triage error rates — vignettes measure judgment on hypotheticals, and this is UK data.", "scope": [ "non-us" ], "verified_on": "2026-08-31", "added_on": "2026-08-31", "citation": "28.4% of vignette responses judged a condition less urgent than veterinary consensus (PLOS One, 2026-01-16; via PupPilot Verified Veterinary Statistics) https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#plos-owner-urgency", "anchorUrl": "https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#plos-owner-urgency" }, { "slug": "cureus-frontdesk-triage", "status": "verified", "category": "triage-clinical", "question": "How well do untrained front desks triage urgent calls?", "figure": "21.5%", "unit": "of emergent scenarios were correctly triaged by front-desk staff", "construct": "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": { "publisher": "Cureus", "title": "Mystery-caller assessment of telephone triage in OB/GYN offices (Mandell et al.), 2025;17(9):e92541", "date": "2025", "doi": "10.7759/cureus.92541", "url": "https://doi.org/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", "strength": "peer-reviewed", "cannot_support": "Veterinary triage rates — this is human medicine; it is here as the best measurement of what untrained telephone triage looks like anywhere.", "scope": [ "non-veterinary" ], "verified_on": "2026-08-31", "added_on": "2026-08-31", "citation": "21.5% of emergent scenarios were correctly triaged by front-desk staff (Cureus, 2025; via PupPilot Verified Veterinary Statistics) https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#cureus-frontdesk-triage", "anchorUrl": "https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#cureus-frontdesk-triage" }, { "slug": "teletriage-er-referral", "status": "verified", "category": "triage-clinical", "question": "How many teletriage calls actually need the ER?", "figure": "23%", "unit": "of vet-led video teletriage consults for canine GI signs ended in an ER-referral recommendation", "construct": "In 1,575 veterinarian-led video teletriage consultations for canine gastrointestinal signs, 77% were not referred to emergency care.", "source": { "publisher": "Open Veterinary Journal", "title": "Video teletriage outcomes for canine gastrointestinal presentations (Ireifej, Morello & Lesser)", "date": "2026-01", "doi": "10.5455/OVJ.2026.v16.i1.33", "url": "https://doi.org/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", "strength": "peer-reviewed", "cannot_support": "Outcome claims — these are referral recommendations, not outcomes, and gastrointestinal presentations only.", "scope": [], "verified_on": "2026-08-31", "added_on": "2026-08-31", "citation": "23% of vet-led video teletriage consults for canine GI signs ended in an ER-referral recommendation (Open Veterinary Journal, 2026-01; via PupPilot Verified Veterinary Statistics) https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#teletriage-er-referral", "anchorUrl": "https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#teletriage-er-referral" }, { "slug": "joii-video-consults", "status": "verified", "category": "triage-clinical", "question": "What share of video vet consults turn out to be emergencies?", "figure": "~5.5%", "unit": "of UK non-prescription video consults ended with an emergency in-person recommendation", "construct": "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": { "publisher": "Veterinary Evidence (RCVS Knowledge)", "title": "Clinical audit of remote consultations via a veterinary video telemedicine smartphone application (Smith et al.), Vol 7 No 2", "date": "2022", "url": "https://veterinaryevidence.org/index.php/ve/article/view/553" }, "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", "strength": "peer-reviewed", "cannot_support": "Current or US rates — COVID-era UK data with vendor-affiliated authors; all three caveats travel with the figure.", "scope": [ "non-us", "archival" ], "verified_on": "2026-08-31", "added_on": "2026-08-31", "citation": "~5.5% of UK non-prescription video consults ended with an emergency in-person recommendation (Veterinary Evidence (RCVS Knowledge), 2022; via PupPilot Verified Veterinary Statistics) https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#joii-video-consults", "anchorUrl": "https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#joii-video-consults" }, { "slug": "digital-rehab-adherence", "status": "verified", "category": "triage-clinical", "question": "Do digital follow-ups improve home-care compliance?", "figure": "7 of 10", "unit": "RCTs found adding a digital component to home exercise rehab significantly improved adherence", "construct": "Systematic review of randomized trials of digitally supported home rehabilitation in human physiotherapy.", "source": { "publisher": "Archives of Physiotherapy", "title": "Digital support for home exercise programmes: systematic review (Lang, McLelland, MacDonald & Hamilton), 2022;12(1)", "date": "2022", "doi": "10.1186/s40945-022-00148-z", "url": "https://doi.org/10.1186/s40945-022-00148-z" }, "sample": "10 randomized controlled trials, n=1,117 (human rehabilitation)", "method": "Peer-reviewed systematic review", "strength": "peer-reviewed", "cannot_support": "Veterinary or long-term effects — human rehab, and the authors hedge the effect as short-term.", "scope": [ "non-veterinary" ], "verified_on": "2026-08-31", "added_on": "2026-08-31", "citation": "7 of 10 RCTs found adding a digital component to home exercise rehab significantly improved adherence (Archives of Physiotherapy, 2022; via PupPilot Verified Veterinary Statistics) https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#digital-rehab-adherence", "anchorUrl": "https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#digital-rehab-adherence" }, { "slug": "appa-pet-spending", "status": "verified", "category": "pet-owners", "question": "How much do Americans spend on pets?", "figure": "$158B", "unit": "total US pet spending, 2025 actual (+3.7%)", "figures": [ { "value": "$158B", "label": "total US pet spending, 2025 actual (+3.7%)" }, { "value": "$41.0B", "label": "veterinary care and product sales segment" }, { "value": "$165B", "label": "projected for 2026" } ], "construct": "APPA's industry spending totals.", "source": { "publisher": "APPA", "title": "State of the Industry (March 2026 release + public statistics page)", "date": "2026-03", "url": "https://americanpetproducts.org/industry-trends-and-stats" }, "sample": "Industry aggregate; methodology undisclosed. 2025 actuals as published; the 2026 figure is APPA's projection", "method": "Association industry estimate", "strength": "association", "cannot_support": "“Veterinary spending was $41B” — the segment includes veterinary product sales, not just services.", "scope": [], "verified_on": "2026-08-31", "added_on": "2026-08-31", "citation": "$158B total US pet spending, 2025 actual (+3.7%) (APPA, 2026-03; via PupPilot Verified Veterinary Statistics) https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#appa-pet-spending", "anchorUrl": "https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#appa-pet-spending" }, { "slug": "appa-pet-households", "status": "verified", "category": "pet-owners", "question": "How many US households own a pet?", "figure": "95M", "unit": "US households owning a pet (2025 National Pet Owners Survey)", "construct": "APPA's household ownership count. Publish the count, not a percentage — no overall ownership percentage appears on any live APPA page.", "source": { "publisher": "APPA", "title": "2025 National Pet Owners Survey", "date": "2025", "url": "https://americanpetproducts.org/industry-trends-and-stats" }, "sample": "APPA National Pet Owners Survey panel", "method": "Association consumer survey", "strength": "association", "cannot_support": "An ownership percentage — no current percentage appears on APPA's published pages; the household count is the stated figure.", "scope": [], "verified_on": "2026-08-31", "added_on": "2026-08-31", "citation": "95M US households owning a pet (2025 National Pet Owners Survey) (APPA, 2025; via PupPilot Verified Veterinary Statistics) https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#appa-pet-households", "anchorUrl": "https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#appa-pet-households" }, { "slug": "avma-ownership-rates", "status": "verified", "category": "pet-owners", "question": "What share of US households have a dog or cat, and what do they spend at the vet?", "figure": "42.6%", "unit": "of US households own a dog", "figures": [ { "value": "42.6%", "label": "of households own dogs (56.3M households; 87.3M dogs)" }, { "value": "32.6%", "label": "of households own cats (43.1M households; 76.3M cats)" }, { "value": "$598", "label": "mean annual veterinary spend per dog-owning household" }, { "value": "$529", "label": "mean annual veterinary spend per cat-owning household" } ], "construct": "AVMA's household ownership rates, pet populations, and mean annual veterinary spend per owning household.", "source": { "publisher": "AVMA", "title": "2025 Pet Ownership & Demographics Sourcebook (public summary)", "date": "2025", "url": "https://www.avma.org/resources-tools/reports-statistics/us-pet-ownership-statistics" }, "sample": "n=7,519, weighted opt-in panel, fielded spring 2025", "method": "Association household survey", "strength": "association", "cannot_support": "Blending with APPA's household figures — the methodologies differ materially, and the two sets should never be mixed in one sentence.", "scope": [], "verified_on": "2026-08-31", "added_on": "2026-08-31", "citation": "42.6% of US households own a dog (AVMA, 2025; via PupPilot Verified Veterinary Statistics) https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#avma-ownership-rates", "anchorUrl": "https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#avma-ownership-rates" }, { "slug": "bls-pet-spending", "status": "verified", "category": "pet-owners", "question": "What does the average US household spend on pets?", "figure": "$880", "unit": "mean annual “Pets” spend per US consumer unit, 2024 — across ALL households, pet-owning or not", "construct": "BLS Consumer Expenditure Survey mean for the Pets category, averaged over every consumer unit.", "source": { "publisher": "US Bureau of Labor Statistics", "title": "Consumer Expenditure Survey, series CXUPETSLB0101M", "date": "2024", "url": "https://www.bls.gov/cex/" }, "sample": "National CE survey; 2025 data lands ~September 2026", "method": "Government expenditure survey", "strength": "government", "cannot_support": "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.)", "scope": [], "verified_on": "2026-08-31", "added_on": "2026-08-31", "citation": "$880 mean annual “Pets” spend per US consumer unit, 2024 — across ALL households, pet-owning or not (US Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2024; via PupPilot Verified Veterinary Statistics) https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#bls-pet-spending", "anchorUrl": "https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#bls-pet-spending" }, { "slug": "naphia-pet-insurance", "status": "verified", "category": "pet-owners", "question": "How many pets are insured, and what does pet insurance cost?", "figure": "4.27%", "unit": "of US pets are insured (year-end 2025)", "figures": [ { "value": "7.6M", "label": "insured pets in North America, year-end 2025 (up 8.5% from 7.03M)" }, { "value": "+9.0%", "label": "US insured-pet growth, 2024 to 2025" }, { "value": "4.27%", "label": "US penetration rate (dogs 5.99%, cats 2.29%)" }, { "value": "$836", "label": "average US accident & illness premium, dogs" }, { "value": "$435", "label": "average US accident & illness premium, cats" }, { "value": "$5.7B", "label": "US gross written premium (+19.7%)" } ], "construct": "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": { "publisher": "NAPHIA", "title": "State of the Industry Report 2026 (compiled by Willis Towers Watson from carriers representing ~99% of premium)", "date": "2026-06-21", "url": "https://naphia.org/industry-data/" }, "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", "strength": "association", "cannot_support": "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.", "scope": [], "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_on": "2026-08-31", "added_on": "2026-08-31", "citation": "4.27% of US pets are insured (year-end 2025) (NAPHIA, 2026-06-21; via PupPilot Verified Veterinary Statistics) https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#naphia-pet-insurance", "anchorUrl": "https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#naphia-pet-insurance" }, { "slug": "synchrony-lifetime-cost", "status": "verified", "category": "pet-owners", "question": "What does a dog cost over its lifetime?", "figure": "$22,125–$60,602", "unit": "modeled 15-year lifetime cost of dog care", "figures": [ { "value": "$22,125–$60,602", "label": "modeled 15-year cost of dog care" }, { "value": "$20,073–$47,106", "label": "modeled 15-year cost of cat care" }, { "value": "~8 in 10", "label": "owners underestimate lifetime costs" }, { "value": "31%", "label": "could comfortably absorb a major unexpected expense" }, { "value": "58%", "label": "have used a credit card for pet care" } ], "construct": "Synchrony's modeled lifetime cost ranges and owner-finance findings.", "source": { "publisher": "Synchrony", "title": "Pet Lifetime of Care Study 2025", "date": "2025", "url": "https://www.synchrony.com/" }, "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", "strength": "vendor-disclosed", "cannot_support": "“The average lifetime cost of a dog” — these are modeled ranges that include non-veterinary spending, and the modeling assumptions are unpublished.", "scope": [], "verified_on": "2026-08-31", "added_on": "2026-08-31", "citation": "$22,125–$60,602 modeled 15-year lifetime cost of dog care (Synchrony, 2025; via PupPilot Verified Veterinary Statistics) https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#synchrony-lifetime-cost", "anchorUrl": "https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#synchrony-lifetime-cost" }, { "slug": "gallup-skipped-care", "status": "verified", "category": "pet-owners", "question": "How many pet owners skip veterinary care over cost?", "figure": "52%", "unit": "of US dog and cat owners have skipped or declined needed veterinary care", "figures": [ { "value": "52%", "label": "skipped or declined needed veterinary care" }, { "value": "71%", "label": "of those cite cost as the key factor" }, { "value": "64%", "label": "could at least double lifesaving-care spending with an interest-free 12-month plan" }, { "value": "23%", "label": "say they have ever been offered such a plan" }, { "value": "41%", "label": "of veterinarians say they often or always offer financing (companion wave)" } ], "construct": "Probability-panel measurement of skipped care and financing — note the gap between the 41% practitioner perception and the 23% client report.", "source": { "publisher": "Gallup with PetSmart Charities", "title": "State of Pet Care study", "date": "2025", "url": "https://news.gallup.com/poll/659057/pet-owners-skipped-declined-veterinary-care.aspx" }, "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", "strength": "named-firm", "cannot_support": "Clinical-outcome claims — this measures reported skipping and reported financing offers; the 41%-vs-23% gap contrasts practitioner perception with client reports.", "scope": [], "verified_on": "2026-08-31", "added_on": "2026-08-31", "citation": "52% of US dog and cat owners have skipped or declined needed veterinary care (Gallup with PetSmart Charities, 2025; via PupPilot Verified Veterinary Statistics) https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#gallup-skipped-care", "anchorUrl": "https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#gallup-skipped-care" }, { "slug": "avcc-care-barriers", "status": "verified", "category": "pet-owners", "question": "How many pet owners face barriers to veterinary care?", "figure": "~28%", "unit": "of pet-owning households experienced a barrier to veterinary care (2017–18)", "construct": "The foundational access-to-care measurement; financial reasons were behind 80% of unobtained preventive care.", "source": { "publisher": "Access to Veterinary Care Coalition / University of Tennessee", "title": "Access to Veterinary Care: Barriers, Current Practices, and Public Policy", "date": "2018-12", "url": "https://news.utk.edu/" }, "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", "strength": "association", "cannot_support": "Current rates — the fieldwork is 2017–18; Gallup/PetSmart (2025) is the modern successor. Label the vintage.", "scope": [ "archival" ], "verified_on": "2026-08-31", "added_on": "2026-08-31", "citation": "~28% of pet-owning households experienced a barrier to veterinary care (2017–18) (Access to Veterinary Care Coalition / University of Tennessee, 2018-12; via PupPilot Verified Veterinary Statistics) https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#avcc-care-barriers", "anchorUrl": "https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#avcc-care-barriers" }, { "slug": "habri-bond", "status": "verified", "category": "pet-owners", "question": "Does the human-animal bond drive veterinary visits?", "figure": "95%", "unit": "of owners call their pet family (2021 8-country wave)", "figures": [ { "value": "95%", "label": "call their pet family" }, { "value": "71%", "label": "visit the vet 2+ times a year among high-bond owners" }, { "value": "62%", "label": "among mid-bond owners" }, { "value": "45%", "label": "among low-bond owners" } ], "construct": "International bond survey linking self-reported bond strength to visit frequency.", "source": { "publisher": "HABRI / Zoetis", "title": "International survey of pet owners and veterinarians (CM Research)", "date": "2021", "url": "https://habri.org/" }, "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", "strength": "vendor-disclosed", "cannot_support": "Causality, or US-only claims — international survey data showing association between bond and visits.", "scope": [ "non-us" ], "verified_on": "2026-08-31", "added_on": "2026-08-31", "citation": "95% of owners call their pet family (2021 8-country wave) (HABRI / Zoetis, 2021; via PupPilot Verified Veterinary Statistics) https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#habri-bond", "anchorUrl": "https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#habri-bond" }, { "slug": "avma-visit-gap", "status": "verified", "category": "pet-owners", "question": "How many pet owners actually visit the vet each year?", "figure": "74.2%", "unit": "of dog-owning households had at least one veterinary visit in the past year (2024)", "figures": [ { "value": "74.2%", "label": "dog owners with at least one veterinary visit in the past year" }, { "value": "57.3%", "label": "cat owners with at least one visit" }, { "value": "86.8%", "label": "dog owners who report having a regular veterinarian" }, { "value": "77.1%", "label": "cat owners who report having a regular veterinarian" } ], "construct": "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": { "publisher": "AVMA", "title": "AVMA news and chart of the month (2024 Sourcebook data)", "date": "2024", "url": "https://www.avma.org/news" }, "sample": "n=7,539, weighted household panel", "method": "Association household survey", "strength": "association", "cannot_support": "The share of PETS seen annually — these are household rates, and multi-pet households complicate per-pet inference.", "scope": [], "verified_on": "2026-08-31", "added_on": "2026-08-31", "citation": "74.2% of dog-owning households had at least one veterinary visit in the past year (2024) (AVMA, 2024; via PupPilot Verified Veterinary Statistics) https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#avma-visit-gap", "anchorUrl": "https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#avma-visit-gap" }, { "slug": "shortage-model-mars-lloyd", "status": "verified", "category": "workforce-shortage", "question": "Is there a veterinarian shortage?", "figure": "14,000–24,000", "unit": "projected shortage of companion-animal veterinarians by 2030 (Mars / Lloyd model)", "construct": "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": { "publisher": "Mars Veterinary Health", "title": "Pet Healthcare in the US: Another Look at the Veterinarian Workforce (James Lloyd, Animal Health Economics)", "date": "2023-08", "url": "https://www.marsveterinary.com/media/uploads/2023/08/Characterizing-the-Need.pdf" }, "sample": "Economic demand model; methodology PDF public on marsveterinary.com", "method": "Commissioned economic model", "strength": "vendor-disclosed", "cannot_support": "Profession-wide claims — companion-animal only; and never “a 55,000 shortage,” which misreads total need as shortfall.", "scope": [], "verified_on": "2026-08-31", "added_on": "2026-08-31", "citation": "14,000–24,000 projected shortage of companion-animal veterinarians by 2030 (Mars / Lloyd model) (Mars Veterinary Health, 2023-08; via PupPilot Verified Veterinary Statistics) https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#shortage-model-mars-lloyd", "anchorUrl": "https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#shortage-model-mars-lloyd" }, { "slug": "shortage-model-avma-brakke", "status": "verified", "category": "workforce-shortage", "question": "Is there a veterinarian shortage?", "figure": "“Remote”", "unit": "likelihood of longer-term shortages — capacity adequate through ~2035 (AVMA / Brakke model)", "construct": "The AVMA-commissioned forecast concluding national capacity is adequate, noting 13 proposed new veterinary schools (~40% capacity growth).", "source": { "publisher": "AVMA / Brakke Consulting", "title": "Veterinary workforce forecast, presented October 2024, published in JAVMA", "date": "2024", "doi": "10.2460/javma.24.09.0624", "url": "https://doi.org/10.2460/javma.24.09.0624" }, "sample": "National workforce forecast model", "method": "Peer-reviewed commissioned forecast", "strength": "peer-reviewed", "cannot_support": "“No shortage anywhere” — rural and food-animal gaps are excluded from the adequacy claim.", "scope": [], "verified_on": "2026-08-31", "added_on": "2026-08-31", "citation": "“Remote” likelihood of longer-term shortages — capacity adequate through ~2035 (AVMA / Brakke model) (AVMA / Brakke Consulting, 2024; via PupPilot Verified Veterinary Statistics) https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#shortage-model-avma-brakke", "anchorUrl": "https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#shortage-model-avma-brakke" }, { "slug": "shortage-model-aavmc", "status": "verified", "category": "workforce-shortage", "question": "Is there a veterinarian shortage?", "figure": "~76% of need", "unit": "projected graduates cover about 76% of projected demand through 2032 (AAVMC / Gitter & LaFayette model)", "construct": "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": { "publisher": "AAVMC", "title": "Demand for and Supply of Veterinarians in the U.S. to 2032 (Gitter & LaFayette)", "date": "2024-06", "url": "https://aavmc.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/Demand-for-and-Supply-of-Veterinarians-in-the-U.S.-to-2032-New.pdf" }, "sample": "National demand/supply projection by independent economists, AAVMC-hosted", "method": "Association-commissioned economic projection", "strength": "association", "cannot_support": "“17,166 unfilled jobs” — most of projected need is replacement demand, not vacancies. The three credible shortage models disagree; they are best quoted together.", "scope": [], "verified_on": "2026-08-31", "added_on": "2026-08-31", "citation": "~76% of need projected graduates cover about 76% of projected demand through 2032 (AAVMC / Gitter & LaFayette model) (AAVMC, 2024-06; via PupPilot Verified Veterinary Statistics) https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#shortage-model-aavmc", "anchorUrl": "https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#shortage-model-aavmc" }, { "slug": "navta-tech-survey", "status": "verified", "category": "workforce-shortage", "question": "What do vet techs earn, and how satisfied are they?", "figure": "$32.89/hr", "unit": "average credentialed veterinary technician wage (NAVTA members)", "figures": [ { "value": "$32.89/hr", "label": "average credentialed-tech wage (up from $26.50 in 2022)" }, { "value": "8%", "label": "describe themselves as “extremely satisfied” (down from 25%)" }, { "value": "57%", "label": "would choose the career again" } ], "construct": "NAVTA's member survey of wages and career satisfaction.", "source": { "publisher": "NAVTA", "title": "2024 Demographic Survey", "date": "2024", "url": "https://navta.net/" }, "sample": "n=1,404 NAVTA members, 83% credentialed", "method": "Association member survey", "strength": "association", "cannot_support": "National tech pay — the member sample skews credentialed; BLS's all-worker median is $47,380.", "scope": [], "verified_on": "2026-08-31", "added_on": "2026-08-31", "citation": "$32.89/hr average credentialed veterinary technician wage (NAVTA members) (NAVTA, 2024; via PupPilot Verified Veterinary Statistics) https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#navta-tech-survey", "anchorUrl": "https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#navta-tech-survey" }, { "slug": "aaha-intent-to-leave", "status": "verified", "category": "workforce-shortage", "question": "How many veterinary staff are planning to leave?", "figure": "30%", "unit": "of practice team members plan to leave their current role", "construct": "AAHA's retention study measurement of intent to leave; about half of those planning to leave intend to exit clinical practice entirely.", "source": { "publisher": "AAHA", "title": "Stay, Please retention study", "date": "2023", "url": "https://www.aaha.org/resources/stay-please-phase-2/" }, "sample": "~15,000 veterinary professionals; per-role turnover tables sit inside registration-gated white papers", "method": "Association workforce survey", "strength": "association", "cannot_support": "Realized turnover, or any per-role “turnover rate per AAHA” — only intent-to-leave is publicly verifiable until the gated white papers are opened.", "scope": [], "verified_on": "2026-08-31", "added_on": "2026-08-31", "citation": "30% of practice team members plan to leave their current role (AAHA, 2023; via PupPilot Verified Veterinary Statistics) https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#aaha-intent-to-leave", "anchorUrl": "https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#aaha-intent-to-leave" }, { "slug": "norwegian-gp-answer-rate", "status": "verified", "category": "adjacent-benchmarks", "question": "What answer rate can a small practice actually achieve?", "figure": "66%", "unit": "of calls to (human) general practices were answered; mean wait 25 seconds", "construct": "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": { "publisher": "Tidsskrift for Den norske legeforening", "title": "Telephone accessibility of Norwegian general practices (Sandvik & Hunskår), 2005;125(2):182–185", "date": "2005", "url": "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15665894/" }, "sample": "100 Norwegian general (human) practices; every inbound call for one week, recorded by the carrier", "method": "Peer-reviewed carrier-level call measurement", "strength": "peer-reviewed", "cannot_support": "Veterinary or US claims — Norwegian human general practice, 2005. It is here because nothing this rigorous exists for veterinary phones.", "scope": [ "non-veterinary", "non-us", "archival" ], "verified_on": "2026-08-31", "added_on": "2026-08-31", "citation": "66% of calls to (human) general practices were answered; mean wait 25 seconds (Tidsskrift for Den norske legeforening, 2005; via PupPilot Verified Veterinary Statistics) https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#norwegian-gp-answer-rate", "anchorUrl": "https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#norwegian-gp-answer-rate" }, { "slug": "va-call-abandonment", "status": "verified", "category": "adjacent-benchmarks", "question": "What does it take to improve call abandonment at scale?", "figure": "12.0% → 8.3%", "unit": "call abandonment across VA medical facilities, 2014–2016; average speed of answer 87s → 69s", "construct": "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": { "publisher": "American Journal of Managed Care", "title": "Call center performance in the Veterans Health Administration (Griffith et al.), 2019;25(9):e282–7", "date": "2019", "url": "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31518100/" }, "sample": "285 VA medical facilities, 2014–2016; free full text", "method": "Peer-reviewed administrative-data analysis", "strength": "peer-reviewed", "cannot_support": "Reputation or satisfaction effects — the paper found abandonment was not associated with satisfaction outcomes.", "scope": [ "non-veterinary" ], "verified_on": "2026-08-31", "added_on": "2026-08-31", "citation": "12.0% → 8.3% call abandonment across VA medical facilities, 2014–2016; average speed of answer 87s → 69s (American Journal of Managed Care, 2019; via PupPilot Verified Veterinary Statistics) https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#va-call-abandonment", "anchorUrl": "https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#va-call-abandonment" }, { "slug": "patient-prism-dental-hangups", "status": "verified", "category": "adjacent-benchmarks", "question": "How do dental practices compare on missed calls?", "figure": "31 in 100", "unit": "dental callers hung up before reaching an agent", "construct": "The dental sibling of the veterinary access report — and the source pool from which “dental” numbers get relabeled as veterinary.", "source": { "publisher": "Patient Prism", "title": "Dental Patient Access Report", "date": "2026-07-02", "url": "https://www.patientprism.com/" }, "sample": "11,552,668 calls across 8,280 dental locations, calendar year 2025; vendor cohort, DSO-weighted", "method": "Vendor call-tracking telemetry", "strength": "vendor-disclosed", "cannot_support": "Veterinary claims — this is dental call-tracking data.", "scope": [ "non-veterinary" ], "verified_on": "2026-08-31", "added_on": "2026-08-31", "citation": "31 in 100 dental callers hung up before reaching an agent (Patient Prism, 2026-07-02; via PupPilot Verified Veterinary Statistics) https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#patient-prism-dental-hangups", "anchorUrl": "https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#patient-prism-dental-hangups" }, { "slug": "vonage-ivr-2019", "status": "verified", "category": "adjacent-benchmarks", "question": "How much do people hate phone menus?", "figure": "85%", "unit": "of consumers had hung up on an automated phone menu in the past year", "figures": [ { "value": "85%", "label": "had hung up on an automated phone menu in the past year" }, { "value": "51%", "label": "had abandoned a business entirely after a bad automated-phone experience" } ], "construct": "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": { "publisher": "Vonage", "title": "IVR consumer survey (conducted by Opinion Matters)", "date": "2019-09-26", "url": "https://www.vonage.com/about-us/vonage-stories/" }, "sample": "n=2,010 US adults, September 2019", "method": "Vendor-commissioned consumer survey", "strength": "vendor-disclosed", "cannot_support": "Veterinary-specific rates or anything about voicemail — this measured automated phone menus, in 2019.", "scope": [ "non-veterinary", "archival" ], "verified_on": "2026-08-31", "added_on": "2026-08-31", "citation": "85% of consumers had hung up on an automated phone menu in the past year (Vonage, 2019-09-26; via PupPilot Verified Veterinary Statistics) https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#vonage-ivr-2019", "anchorUrl": "https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#vonage-ivr-2019" }, { "slug": "vonage-ai-2024", "status": "verified", "category": "adjacent-benchmarks", "question": "Are consumers comfortable talking to AI on the phone?", "figure": "33%", "unit": "of surveyed consumers are comfortable with AI on voice calls", "figures": [ { "value": "33%", "label": "comfortable with AI on voice calls" }, { "value": "85%", "label": "say easy access to a live human remains very important" } ], "construct": "Consumer attitudes toward AI in customer service among recent users of AI customer support.", "source": { "publisher": "Vonage", "title": "AI in customer experience survey (conducted by Pollfish)", "date": "2024-11-21", "url": "https://www.vonage.com/about-us/vonage-stories/" }, "sample": "n=1,000 US adults, September 2024, pre-screened as recent users of AI customer support", "method": "Vendor-commissioned consumer survey", "strength": "vendor-disclosed", "cannot_support": "General-population comfort levels — the sample was screened to recent users of AI customer support, which travels with the figure.", "scope": [ "non-veterinary" ], "verified_on": "2026-08-31", "added_on": "2026-08-31", "citation": "33% of surveyed consumers are comfortable with AI on voice calls (Vonage, 2024-11-21; via PupPilot Verified Veterinary Statistics) https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#vonage-ai-2024", "anchorUrl": "https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#vonage-ai-2024" }, { "slug": "icmi-abandonment-guidance", "status": "verified", "category": "adjacent-benchmarks", "question": "What is a good call abandonment rate?", "figure": "Not a standalone KPI", "unit": "ICMI: abandonment “is not a concrete measure of call center performance, because it is driven by caller behavior which the center cannot directly control”", "construct": "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": { "publisher": "ICMI", "title": "Call Center Metrics: Key Performance Indicators (free PDF)", "date": "2020", "url": "https://www.icmi.com/" }, "sample": "Standards-body guidance document", "method": "Industry standards guidance", "strength": "association", "cannot_support": "A specific veterinary abandonment threshold — published thresholds vary between sources, so the direction is the durable guidance.", "scope": [ "non-veterinary" ], "verified_on": "2026-08-31", "added_on": "2026-08-31", "citation": "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” (ICMI, 2020; via PupPilot Verified Veterinary Statistics) https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#icmi-abandonment-guidance", "anchorUrl": "https://www.puppilot.co/resources/statistics#icmi-abandonment-guidance" } ] }