Report highlights cost barriers shaping veterinary care decisions

Version 2 — Full analysis

A new report featured by Veterinary Practice News underscores how deeply financial strain is shaping veterinary care decisions, both before and during the clinic visit. Fresh data from the PetSmart Charities-Gallup State of Pet Care study found that 94% of veterinarians say clients’ financial considerations sometimes or often limit their ability to provide recommended care. The findings land as practices across the U.S. continue to navigate an environment where affordability concerns, delayed care, online self-triage, and shifting buying habits are increasingly intertwined. (petsmartcharities.org)

The backdrop has been building for some time. In Gallup’s April 2025 survey of 2,498 U.S. dog and cat pet parents, 52% said they had skipped or declined needed veterinary care in the prior year. Among those who turned down care, 71% cited cost as the key factor. Gallup also noted that veterinary care costs in the U.S. had risen more than 60% since 2014, helping explain why affordability concerns are now reaching well beyond low-income households. Other recent reporting adds context to that strain: MetLife found nearly 40% of pet owners had taken on debt for pet medical expenses, with emergency visits the leading cause, and 22% carried more than $2,000 in pet-related debt. (news.gallup.com)

What’s new in the veterinarian-focused research is the view from inside the exam room, and the mismatch between clinician intent and client experience. According to the January 2026 PetSmart Charities-Gallup release, 81% of veterinarians said they often or always recommend an alternative treatment plan when care is declined because of cost. Yet Gallup’s pet parent data found that 73% of those who declined care due to affordability said they were not offered a more financially accessible option. A similar gap showed up around payment plans: 41% of veterinarians said they often or always provide financing or payment-plan options, while just 23% of pet parents said they had ever been offered one. (petsmartcharities.org)

The report also points to a profession carrying significant emotional strain. Nearly three-quarters of veterinarians said it’s difficult to watch clients struggle with costs, and 74% said euthanasia for financial reasons is among the hardest parts of the job. Forty-one percent said euthanasia due to unaffordable treatment occurs at least sometimes in their practice. At the same time, many clinicians may not feel equipped for these conversations: 48% said their education did not prepare them at all to discuss financial barriers, and another 32% said they were only minimally prepared. (petsmartcharities.org)

Other industry data suggests this is not an isolated signal. AAHA and Pawlicy Advisor’s 2025 state-of-the-industry survey of 557 veterinary professionals found that 84.4% adjust recommended treatment plans weekly because of client cost concerns, and eight in 10 have difficult financial conversations every week. At the same time, consumer spending data presented at the 2026 AVMA Veterinary Business and Economic Forum suggests veterinary care still holds a relatively protected place in household budgets, at least compared with other discretionary categories. In a December 2025 survey of 1,063 CareCredit cardholders, 79% said they would cut cosmetic procedures and 58% elective medical treatments before cutting routine veterinary care; just 19% said they would cut routine veterinary care and 13% necessary veterinary treatments first. But that loyalty has limits: 55% said the economy had changed their pet-related spending in the past year, 18% leaned more on financing or payment plans, 15% delayed or skipped preventive care or routine checkups, and 14% bought pet medications from cheaper sources.

That last point matters because affordability and information-seeking are starting to overlap. Lovet’s 2026 Checkup Report found 25% of pet owners had delayed or avoided a visit after relying first on online or AI-generated information. Today’s Veterinary Business reported in September 2026 that pet parents want digital and AI tools that help them understand records and lab results, but they still want those tools connected to their veterinary team. In that survey, 72% said they would trust AI-generated health information if it were validated by veterinary professionals, and two-thirds said they’d be more likely to use a platform if their veterinarian had access to the same insights. Younger owners appear to be accelerating that shift: Gen Z pet ownership grew nearly 44% from 2023 to 2024, and younger pet owners reportedly use an average of 3.6 digital health tools, including social media, symptom checkers, AI chat tools, telehealth, digital records, and online consultations. That suggests pet parents aren’t necessarily looking to bypass clinics, but they are trying to reduce uncertainty, and sometimes cost anxiety, before they commit to a visit or a treatment plan. (todaysveterinarybusiness.com)

Affordability pressures are also reshaping how clients buy products and stay connected to practices between visits. According to the 2026 PETMETRIX Pet Medicine Home Delivery Report, the share of dog owners purchasing prescriptions through veterinarians fell to 47.5% in 2024, down 6.1 percentage points from 2023. The report comes as Vetsource Veterinary Analytics data from 6,574 U.S. practices showed visits fell 3.1% in 2025, the fourth consecutive annual decline, including a 3.8% drop in wellness visits and a 6.2% drop in product-only visits. With 74% of pet owners in a February 2026 Packaged Facts survey saying prescription medications were too expensive and 57% worried about affording their pet’s care, convenience and price are likely helping push medication purchases toward online pharmacies and home delivery. For practices, that is not just a pharmacy-revenue issue; it can also mean fewer touchpoints to reinforce treatment plans and maintain client relationships.

The pressure is not limited to the exam room. Broader reporting has linked rising pet care costs to harder ownership decisions and growing strain on shelters. Animal welfare organizations and local shelters have reported overcrowding as some owners struggle to keep or rehome pets, while MetLife’s pet poverty survey found 55% of owners had avoided adopting another pet, 9% had considered rehoming a pet, and 5% had actually done so. Internationally, a UK study of relatively affluent owners of “pandemic puppies” found 12.4% had already made cost-of-living-driven negative changes to their dogs’ care, including reducing insurance coverage and delaying veterinary attention, suggesting the affordability problem is not unique to the U.S.

Why it matters: For veterinary professionals, the bigger issue may be less about whether cost is a barrier and more about how consistently practices respond to it. The Gallup and PetSmart Charities findings suggest many teams believe they are offering alternatives, but those options may not be landing clearly with pet parents, or may be introduced too late in the conversation. The study found only 17% of veterinarians said they proactively try to understand a client’s financial concerns before making recommendations, while 49% do so afterward and 34% wait until the client raises the issue. Taken together with the AVMA forum discussion, the message is similar: spectrum of care, upfront pricing, and earlier financial conversations are becoming operational necessities, not just communication preferences. That has practical implications for treatment compliance, client retention, pharmacy capture, team moral distress, and access to care. (news.gallup.com)

What to watch: The next phase is likely to center on operational responses, including earlier cost conversations, clearer presentation of tiers of care, broader use of financing and insurance education, and better integration of digital triage or education tools into the clinic relationship. Practices may also need to compete more intentionally on convenience through home delivery, online pharmacy options, refill reminders, and streamlined authorization processes. PetSmart Charities framed the issue as a shared strain on pet parents and veterinary teams, and the wider data suggests practices that make affordability discussions more proactive, more visible, and easier to act on may be best positioned to protect both access to care and trust. (petsmartcharities.org)