Education Department proposes accreditation rules that would bar AVMA from COE oversight86% of surveyed pet owners say they'd return to a vet who speaks directly to their petBrakke Consulting released a 1,200-pet-owner study on home delivery of pet medicationsNC State guarantees vet school seats to undergrads who shadow equine practitioners for 10 weeksMinnesota Urolith Center analyzed its 2 millionth stone sample after 45 years of Hill's fundingMissouri vet school offers clinical pathology residents a concurrent Master of Education degreeAAHA survey finds 86% of DVMs adjust treatment plans weekly over client cost concernsVet Intel acquires Antelligence, consolidating veterinary benchmarking data providersEducation Department proposes accreditation rules that would bar AVMA from COE oversight86% of surveyed pet owners say they'd return to a vet who speaks directly to their petBrakke Consulting released a 1,200-pet-owner study on home delivery of pet medicationsNC State guarantees vet school seats to undergrads who shadow equine practitioners for 10 weeksMinnesota Urolith Center analyzed its 2 millionth stone sample after 45 years of Hill's fundingMissouri vet school offers clinical pathology residents a concurrent Master of Education degreeAAHA survey finds 86% of DVMs adjust treatment plans weekly over client cost concernsVet Intel acquires Antelligence, consolidating veterinary benchmarking data providers
The Exam RoomBy The VeterinaryPracticeNow Desk3 min readSeptember 14, 2026
86% of surveyed pet owners say they'd return to a vet who speaks directly to their pet
A Vet Record study of 400 pet owners found that when veterinarians speak directly to the animal during the exam, 86% of clients reported being more likely to return.
A Vet Record study found that when veterinarians speak directly to the pet during an exam, clients report being more likely to return. Of 400 surveyed pet owners, 86% reported being more likely to choose to see that veterinarian again when the pet was included in the consultation. Clients made judgments about their veterinarian based on the interaction with the pet across a range of factors, from clinical abilities to how the veterinarian felt about their job.
What the study found
The study measured client perceptions of pet-directed speech, defined as a person speaking directly to an animal, distinguished by higher pitch and pitch variation. When the pet was included in the consultation, 86% of respondents reported being more likely to choose to see that veterinarian again. Respondents felt that veterinarians speaking to their pet had a positive influence not only on the vet-client relationship but also on their pet, and overall was considered to be a good thing by the majority of respondents. The authors note this is, to their knowledge, the first study to look at clients' experiences with and attitudes toward pet-directed speech.
How the study was built
The study used an online survey and snowball sampling to evaluate the use of pet-directed speech. The study surveyed 400 respondents. Most respondents (87%) were non-veterinary professionals and most (76%) owned at least one dog. The design is observational, capturing client perceptions and associations, not causal relationships.
The number, and its error bars
The 86% figure comes from 400 surveyed pet owners recruited through snowball sampling. The published source does not report confidence intervals, p-values, or statistical testing. The authors state that further exploration with both clients and veterinarians will likely be necessary, but position this study as an important first step to expanding understanding of the role and importance of pet-directed speech in veterinary communication.
What the authors say it cannot tell you
The authors state that further studies are needed before concrete recommendations can be made about if and how pet-directed speech could be most effectively employed in clinical practice and communication training. They note that research with a larger sample of pet owners could help substantiate or clarify the findings. They also note that research exploring veterinarians' attitudes toward pet-directed speech could form a more complete picture of its role and value. The authors mention that various studies have used functional MRI imaging to explore how dogs process human speech, but that using the same methodology to assess how animals process pet-directed speech as typically employed in the consultation is yet to be explored.
Who paid for it
The source does not state who funded the study or what conflicts of interest, if any, were declared.
What this means for your practice
VeterinaryPracticeNow's read, not the study's. Everything in this section is our editorial interpretation for practice owners. The study does not claim any of it.
The association the study reports is between a zero-cost behavior and client retention. The study design cannot prove causation and the authors themselves call the work preliminary, but clients appear to be watching how veterinarians talk to the animal and using it to judge clinical competence and whether they come back. We're reading this as a signal worth acting on: if most clients in a preliminary sample say they're more likely to return when you speak to the pet, the downside risk of trying it is close to zero and the upside is a retention edge.
The caveat the authors emphasize: addressing the client directly remains essential for shared understanding and shared decision-making. The authors frame pet-directed speech as one aspect of effective client communication within the veterinary consultation, not a replacement for clear client-directed explanations. Our read: veterinarians need to talk to both the client and the pet, not choose between them. The Calgary-Cambridge Guide for veterinary consultations already recommends involving the animal; this study gives us a client-retention reason to take that recommendation seriously.
