Contents of Today's Veterinary Practice - JAN-FEB 2012

Today's Veterinary Practice provides comprehensive information to keep every small animal practitioner up to date on companion animal medicine and surgery as well as practice building and management.

Page 57 of 83

| PRACTICE BUILDING
VETERINARIANS RESPOND The veterinarian portion of the Bayer study was conducted in May 2011. Practice owners were asked about the impact of the recession on their local
economy: t 33% of respondents said the recession had a significant adverse impact on their local economy.
t 51% indicated a moderate negative impact.
t 15% said the impact on their local economy had been little to none. In spite of the lingering impacts of the
recession, not all practices saw a decline in visits over the past 2 years (since the recession ended). Practice owners were asked if pet visits to their practice had increased, decreased, or stayed the
same over the past 2 years: t 34% of respondents indicated that visits had increased during this time period.
t 51% indicated that visits had declined. t 14% said visits were flat.
A very significant finding was that 68%
of the practices that had an increase in visits from about May 2009 to May 2011 were in areas that had been moderately to significantly impacted by the recession. This clearly indicates that while the recession made it more difficult for practices to grow, there were many practices that continued to do so in spite of the difficult economic times. What did these practices do that was different from other, less successful practices?
IDENTIFYING VARIABLES AMONG PRACTICES One part of the Bayer study analysis identified attributes associated with increases in patient visits to veterinary hospitals. There were 4 attributes shared among practices that had seen an increase in visits over the last several years: 1. Have the client see the same veterinarian every visit. Pet owners are more likely to accept recommendations from veterinarians they trust and with whom they have built a relationship. Owners who have this bond with their veterinarians are also more likely to refer the practice to their friends and colleagues or recommend the practice online.
56 Today's Veterinary Practice January/February 2012 INSIDE THE BAYER VETERINARY CARE
USAGE STUDY A downward trend in veterinary visits at a time when pet ownership is rising clearly raises concerns about the economic health of the veterinary profession and, even more important, about the care that pets are getting. The Bayer Veterinary Care Usage Study was conducted to identify reasons for the decline in visits as well as specific actions veterinarians and their teams could take to bring clients and patients back in to the practice. The study was conducted by Brakke Consulting,
Inc, in cooperation with the National Commission on Veterinary Economic Issues (NCVEI) and sponsored by the Animal Health Division of Bayer Healthcare; Ipsos-Forward Research conducted the fieldwork. In designing the study, Bayer, Brakke, and NCVEI consulted with several business management experts with research experience in the veterinary field. These included John W. Slocum, PhD, Professor Emeritus of the Cox School of Business, Southern Methodist University; William Cron, Associate Dean, M.J. Neeley School of Business, Texas Christian University; and a team of professors from Kansas State University—David M. Andrus, PhD; Kevin Gwinner, PhD; and J. Bruce Prince, PhD.
Stages of the research included: r Extensive review of literature on practice trends r Series of in-depth interviews with companion animal practice owners across the U.S.
r Qualitative interviews with pet owners r National online quantitative survey of 2188 U.S. dog and cat owners
r Online survey of 401 veterinarians utilizing an Ipsos proprietary panel of U.S. companion ani- mal veterinary practice owners.
Statistical margin of error for the entire pet–owner
sample at the 95% confidence level was ± 2.1%; margin of error at the species (dog or cat) level was ± 3%. Statistical margin of error at the 95% confidence level for the veterinarian sample was ± 4.9%.