Having spent my working life in veterinary practice, a lot of it as a practice owner, I am well used to comments about how much veterinary services cost, some in jest, some in shock and occasionally some in anger. Is this fare criticism though? Let’s take a closer look.Often the comments are in jest. I have been introduced a few times as “this is Bryan Gregor, my vet, the richest man in Timaru”. I don’t think so. There is this perception that veterinarians have a license to print money. Another comment I sometimes hear is “it costs me less to see my doctor”. I will put this comment to bed straight away. At least in New Zealand, human medical expenses receive a government subsidy. The doctors fee, blood tests, xrays and medicines all have a large proportion of the expense covered by the government. Although this may not occur in every country, I am led to believe that it is common enough, so as the saying goes, you are not comparing apples with apples when you put the cost of veterinary treatment beside human treatment, and to reinforce this further, an ovariohysterectomy or spey of a female dog may put you back something like $350 dollars in New Zealand. Compare that with the human hysterectomy surgery which is pretty much the same surgery. I have seen a cost of $13 000 -$15 000 mentioned. So, lets pare back the veterinary fee and see where it goes. The kind of figures bandied around are approximately as follows. In New Zealand 15% of the fee is GST which is the equivalent of the VAT in England. About 20% pays the veterinary nurses, receptionists, and other support staff. About 20% pays for drugs and other items used in treatments, 20%ish pays for clinic overheads like the lease, insurance and management leaving about 20% as the vets income. To follow this through, if the vet didn’t actually charge for their time, the veterinary fee would only decrease by 20% so a $500 charge would only drop to $400. I do agree that sometimes vet bills may appear more expensive than they used to so lets look at what may have happened. When I qualified as a veterinarian, and bear in mind that this is almost 40 years ago, veterinary medicine was relatively rudimentary. Our companion animal pharmacy only really consisted of a few antibiotics, cortisone, eye and ear drops and an old anti-inflammatory called phenylbutazone. I am probably oversimplifying this but you get the point. Although blood tests were available from the commercial lab, it would take up to a week to get the results by the time the samples were put on the bus that only left the small town I first worked in twice a week. The tests were run at the lab and the results mailed out so it took upward of a week. The animal would be better or dead by the time we got the results so normally we didn’t bother. Anaesthetics were fairly crude, often just using intravenous barbiturates. Qualified veterinary nurses or techs were not a thing, and anesthetic monitoring was the exception rather than the rule.You get the picture.So these days the scope of what is available as far as veterinary treatment goes has advanced by light years. Drugs are unrecognizably advanced, but unfortunately, they come at a cost. The drug companies are always going to want to recoup their R & D spend.It has now become the expectation that clinics will have their own in house blood analysers, ultrasound machines, x-ray – both general and dental and more practices are now investing in CT scanners. These devices have gone from being a nice to have to a must have. I probably don’t need to say but a lot of them are quite expensive with clinics often having hundreds of thousand of dollars of gear. Unfortunately, they have to be paid for.Added to the client expectation, government and professional expectation is that practices utilize these ancillary tests. A simple example of this could be an unfortunate aneasthetic death. If a complaint is made and investigated by the regulatory authority one of the first couple of questions would most likely be “was there pre-anaesthetic blood testing done” and what monitoring was undertaken during the anaesthetic” which these days should include heart and breathing monitors, possibly an ecg, respiratory rate and the like. All requiring monitoring equipment and trained staff to operate them. There is a term that is used by most medical professions. Defensive Medicine. That equates to covering your backside. If something goes wrong or if a client doesn’t like what you have done have you done everything you could have done to prevent the event, and have you recorded it. Now the cynic in me says that defensive medicine can lead to over diagnosis and without a doubt, an increase in cost to the client. There is no doubt that the increase in knowledge, diagnostics and available treatment comes at a cost but…. There is also a great benefit as far as results. If you know what you are treating and have the drugs or surgical techniques...
