Measuring AI’s Return in Veterinary Practices Starts With Team Adoption

AI’s value in a veterinary practice depends less on the tool’s feature list than on whether staff use it and whether the practice measures the results. Documentation, clinical decision support and client communication can all benefit, but an invoice alone won’t show whether a tool is improving care or easing the workload.

A 2024 survey of 3,968 veterinary professionals, conducted by Digitail with the American Animal Hospital Association (AAHA), found that 39.2 percent were already using AI tools or software at work. Among those who had tried AI, nearly 70 percent said they used it daily or weekly. Another 38.7 percent were interested in adopting it soon.¹ Those figures point to growing use, but they don’t establish a return for any individual clinic. That requires a clear purpose, a starting point and a team willing to build the tool into daily routines.

Three areas where practices see value

Clinical documentation

Ambient documentation tools listen during appointments and draft medical records. That can shift charting into the visit, reducing the need for veterinarians to type while speaking with clients or finish notes after hours. Potential benefits include more same-day records, less after-hours work and clearer handoffs among veterinarians, technicians and front-desk staff.

To assess the effect, practices can compare average record completion time and the share of notes finished on the same day before and after adoption. After-hours charting hours per doctor provide another useful measure. These figures connect the tool to a specific change in workload and record keeping.

Decision support

Some tools use a patient’s history and presenting signs to surface relevant considerations for a clinician. Their role is to help a veterinarian check that important details haven’t been overlooked, not to make the clinical decision. This distinction matters in busy practices, where prompts may help reduce cognitive load, but where clinicians remain responsible for assessing whether suggestions fit the patient.

For complex or chronic cases, accuracy deserves more weight than speed. A tool that earns trust presents useful context without overstating what it can do. The benefit may be difficult to express as a dollar amount, so practices can monitor related measures such as record completeness or missed charges while keeping clinical judgment with the veterinarian.

Client communication

Reminders, appointment confirmations, follow-ups and discharge summaries can take substantial front-desk time when staff prepare each one manually. Tools that draft client-ready information or help manage routine outreach may reduce calls and leave staff more time for other work. Clear discharge information can also support owners as they continue care at home.

Practices can track no-show rates, reminder response rates and staff time spent on outbound calls. These measures help show whether a communication tool is changing the work it was meant to improve.

Tom Walsh, DVM, owner of PrimePet Rehabilitation Therapy in Myrtle Beach, South Carolina, says documentation was his practice’s first clear benefit. Before adopting an ambient tool, he spent time after clinic reconstructing detailed mobility and therapy notes. With the tool drafting notes during visits, the team had cleaner handoffs and fewer details missed during busy physical therapy days. For Walsh, the immediate gains were less time spent catching up and better records.

Set a baseline before rollout

ROI is a comparison, so a practice needs to know its starting point. Without baseline figures for charting time, no-shows, reminder responses or phone workload, it’s difficult to tell whether a change came from the software or simply feels smoother. A short period of measurement before rollout gives teams something concrete to compare against.

Two to four weeks of tracking can provide a useful starting picture. Choose measures that match the problem the practice wants to solve:

• For documentation: Average time to complete a record, the percentage of records finished the same day, and after-hours charting hours per doctor.
• For communication: No-show rate, reminder response rate, and the volume or duration of outbound calls.
• For decision support: Record completeness and missed-charge frequency, which can move alongside improvements in documentation.

A small set of relevant measures is more useful than a long list no one reviews. The practice should revisit the same figures after implementation and consider whether any change is large enough to matter in daily work.

Adoption depends on the people using the tool

AI investments can underperform when leaders choose a product without involving the staff expected to use it. A rushed introduction may leave a busy team with another task and little reason to change familiar routines. If the tool doesn’t fit the workflow, staff may return to the old process while the subscription remains active.

That response can reflect practical concerns rather than opposition to technology. Clinical teams protect their time and judgment, and medical records carry professional responsibility. Veterinarians need confidence in the draft and control over the final record. A tool is more likely to earn that confidence when the team sees how it addresses a problem they already agreed needs attention.

Practices with stronger uptake involve intended users in selecting and shaping the tool. A small pilot with one or two willing team members can reveal workflow problems early. Including a careful skeptic can provide a useful test of whether the tool works under real conditions. Training should explain how the tool fits into the day, and the rollout should make clear that AI supports the veterinarian’s work rather than replacing clinical judgment.

Walsh says he involved his front-desk lead and a senior rehabilitation technician before introducing client communication tools. They adapted reminders and discharge summaries to reflect home exercise plans and mobility progress. Because staff helped shape the process, Walsh reported strong adoption, improved compliance and less time spent on follow-up calls.

Track how often the tool is used

Adoption rate shows whether an AI tool has become part of routine practice. It’s the share of eligible people or encounters where staff actually use it. If two of five doctors regularly use an ambient scribe, adoption is 40 percent. The practice is paying for access across the group, but only part of the team is getting a regular benefit.

Many platforms offer usage dashboards, feature reports or login data. Reviewing those figures can help a practice spot low use while there’s time to respond. If adoption is weak after three months, the next step may be more training, a workflow adjustment or a conversation about whether the tool addresses a real team priority. Low usage is information to investigate, not by itself proof that the tool cannot help.

The AAHA survey found that nearly seven in 10 professionals who had adopted AI used it daily or weekly.¹ For a clinic, the practical question is whether its own staff have reached that point and whether use produces a measurable benefit. A tool used regularly across the team may save meaningful time; one that sits idle can become an expense without a return.

Before renewing an AI subscription, practices can review three things: the baseline measures, the team’s experience and the actual usage data. That check can show where the tool is helping, where the workflow needs adjustment and whether the purchase is earning its place in the practice.

Tom Walsh, DVM, is the owner of PrimePet Rehabilitation Therapy. He co-wrote the source article with the team at Shepherd Veterinary Solutions.