Increased efficiency could lessen the need for more staff in companion animal practice

Frederic B. Ouedraogo Veterinary Economics Division, AVMA, Schaumburg, IL

Search for other papers by Frederic B. Ouedraogo in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
 PhD
,
Peter Weinstein PAW Consulting, Irvine, CA

Search for other papers by Peter Weinstein in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
 DVM, MBA
, and
Sandra L. Lefebvre Marketing and Communications Division, AVMA, Schaumburg, IL

Search for other papers by Sandra L. Lefebvre in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
 DVM, PhD

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate technical efficiency of US companion animal practices.

SAMPLE

60 independently owned companion animal practices selected from the 2022 AVMA Veterinary Practice Owners Survey.

PROCEDURES

A ratio of the weighted sum of outputs to weighted sum of inputs was computed for each practice (ie, decision-making unit [DMU]). Inputs included labor (hours worked) and capital (fixed costs and number of exam rooms). Outputs (or production) included annual gross revenue, number of patients seen per year, and number of appointment slots per full-time–equivalent (FTE) veterinarian per year. Data envelopment analysis was used to optimize the ratio and estimate relative efficiency (RE) scores.

RESULTS

25 (42%) practices were classified as having high efficiency (RE = 1 or 100% efficient), 26 (43%) as having moderate efficiency (RE > 0.7 but < 1.0), and 9 (15%) as having low efficiency (RE ≤ 0.7). Mean RE scores for moderate- and low-efficiency practices were 0.83 and 0.66, meaning they could have reached their current production levels with 17% or 34% less resources. Per the model, if all 60 practices were 100% efficient on the RE scale, 22 fewer FTE veterinarians, 47 fewer FTE veterinary technicians and assistants, and 43 fewer FTE nonmedical staff would be needed overall.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

These preliminary findings suggested that efforts to optimize efficiency could allow companion animal practices to meet demands for their services without necessarily needing to hire more staff. Such efforts might include engaging support staff to their full potential and implementing automated processes. Additional research is needed to identify routines or workflows that distinguish high-efficiency practices from others.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate technical efficiency of US companion animal practices.

SAMPLE

60 independently owned companion animal practices selected from the 2022 AVMA Veterinary Practice Owners Survey.

PROCEDURES

A ratio of the weighted sum of outputs to weighted sum of inputs was computed for each practice (ie, decision-making unit [DMU]). Inputs included labor (hours worked) and capital (fixed costs and number of exam rooms). Outputs (or production) included annual gross revenue, number of patients seen per year, and number of appointment slots per full-time–equivalent (FTE) veterinarian per year. Data envelopment analysis was used to optimize the ratio and estimate relative efficiency (RE) scores.

RESULTS

25 (42%) practices were classified as having high efficiency (RE = 1 or 100% efficient), 26 (43%) as having moderate efficiency (RE > 0.7 but < 1.0), and 9 (15%) as having low efficiency (RE ≤ 0.7). Mean RE scores for moderate- and low-efficiency practices were 0.83 and 0.66, meaning they could have reached their current production levels with 17% or 34% less resources. Per the model, if all 60 practices were 100% efficient on the RE scale, 22 fewer FTE veterinarians, 47 fewer FTE veterinary technicians and assistants, and 43 fewer FTE nonmedical staff would be needed overall.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

These preliminary findings suggested that efforts to optimize efficiency could allow companion animal practices to meet demands for their services without necessarily needing to hire more staff. Such efforts might include engaging support staff to their full potential and implementing automated processes. Additional research is needed to identify routines or workflows that distinguish high-efficiency practices from others.

Contributor Notes

Corresponding author: Dr. Ouedraogo (fouedraogo@avma.org)
  • 1.

    Salois M, Golab G. Are we in a veterinary workforce crisis? Understanding our reality can guide us to a solution. J Am Vet Med Assoc. 2021;259(6):560-566.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 2.

    Hansen C. The market for veterinarians: examining an era for engagement. Presented at: 2022 AVMA Business and Economic Forum; October 2022.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 3.

    Bain B, Ouedraogo F, Hansen C. 2023 AVMA Report on the Economic State of the Veterinary Profession. AVMA Veterinary Economics Division; 2023.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 4.

    Neill CL, Hansen CR, Salois M. The economic cost of burnout in veterinary medicine. Front Vet Sci. 2022;9:814104. doi:10.3389/fvets.2022.814104

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 5.

    Veterinarian mental health and wellbeing and how to improve them: learnings from the Merck Animal Health Veterinarian Wellbeing Study III. Brakke Consulting. Accessed February 7, 2023. https://www.merck-animal-health-usa.com/about-us/veterinary-wellbeing-study

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 6.

    Health economics: technical efficiency. WHO. Accessed February 7, 2023. https://www.who.int/teams/health-systems-governance-and-financing/economic-analysis/costing-and-technical-efficiency/technical-efficiency

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 7.

    Cost of living index by state. World Population Review. Accessed February 7, 2023. https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/cost-of-living-index-by-state

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 8.

    Jacobs R, Smith PC, Street A. Measuring Efficiency in Health Care: Analytic Techniques and Health Policy. Cambridge University Press; 2006:91-128. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511617492.006

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 9.

    Valdmanis V, Kumanarayake L, Lertiendumrong J. Capacity in Thai public hospitals and the production of care for poor and nonpoor patients. Health Serv Res. 2004;39(6 pt 2):2117-2134. doi:10.1111/j.1475-6773.2004.00335.x

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 10.

    Osei D, d’Almeida S, George MO, Kirigia JM, Mensah AO, Kainyu LH. Technical efficiency of public district hospitals and health centres in Ghana: a pilot study. Cost Eff Resour Alloc. 2005;3(1):9. doi:10.1186/1478-7547-3-9

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 11.

    Guven-Uslu P, Linh P. Effects of Changes in Public Policy on Efficiency and Productivity of General Hospitals in Vietnam. Center for Competition Policy, University of East Anglia; 2008. doi:10.2139/ssrn.1285505

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 12.

    Rosko MD. Measuring technical efficiency in health care organizations. J Med Syst. 1990;14(5):307-322. doi:10.1007/BF00993937

  • 13.

    Fetaih S, Johnson J. Finding the Time: Empowering Veterinary Teams to Get the Most Out of Every Day. Idexx Laboratories; 2023.

  • 14.

    Catanzaro TE. In multi-tasking techniques (high density scheduling). VIN. Accessed February 10, 2023. https://www.vin.com/apputil/content/defaultadv1.aspx?id=3871698&pid=11274&

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 15.

    NAVTA 2022 demographic survey results: pay & education have increased; burnout & debt are still issues. National Association of Veterinary Technicians in America. Accessed March 3, 2023. https://drive.google.com/file/d/11pmYzIouybfL55YsduRbaZ1TtMD1i2DB/view

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 16.

    Ouedraogo FB, Lefebvre SL, Salois M. Nonveterinarian staff increase revenue and improve veterinarian productivity in mixed and companion animal veterinary practices in the United States. J Am Vet Med Assoc. 2022;260(8):916-922. doi:10.2460/javma.21.11.0482

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 17.

    Kogan LR, Wallace JE, Schoenfeld-Tacher R, Hellyer PW, Richards M. Veterinary technicians and occupational burnout. Front Vet Sci. 2020;7:328. doi:10.3389/fvets.2020.00328

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 18.

    Hayes GM, LaLonde-Paul DF, Perret JL, et al. Investigation of burnout syndrome and job-related risk factors in veterinary technicians in specialty teaching hospitals: a multicenter cross-sectional study. J Vet Emerg Crit Care (San Antonio). 2020;30(1):18-27. doi:10.1111/vec.12916

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

Advertisement