Questions to ask when choosing a veterinary PIMS

Instinct Science is using a March 25 blog post to shape how veterinary teams think about choosing a practice information management system, or PIMS, arguing that practices should focus less on feature lists and more on whether workflows actually connect from scheduling through charting, billing, inventory, and client communication. In “5 Red Flags When Evaluating Veterinary PIMS (& What to Look For Instead),” authors Leonie Carter, DVM, and Taylor Worsham outline five warning signs: disconnected workflows, slow or unstructured charting, missed charges being treated as routine, weak integrations, and vague support, security, or data-access terms. The piece is clearly vendor-authored, but it lands as more practices reassess software fit amid growing pressure for cloud access, integrations, and cleaner clinical workflows. (instinct.vet)

Why it matters: For veterinary professionals, the article is a useful reminder that PIMS selection is now an operational and clinical decision, not just an IT purchase. AAHA recently highlighted many of the same evaluation criteria, including ease of use, customization, integrations, mobile accessibility, customer support, and pricing. That overlap suggests a broader industry shift: practices are being pushed to ask harder questions about workflow design, training burden, audit trails, data portability, and revenue leakage before signing a contract. Missed charges remain a meaningful concern in the field, with industry sources commonly estimating 5% to 10% of revenue can slip through when billing depends on memory or disconnected systems. (aaha.org)

What to watch: Expect more vendor content, side-by-side comparisons, and practice-level due diligence in 2026 as hospitals weigh whether older billing-centered systems can keep up with integrated, cloud-based clinical workflows. (aaha.org)