The interval between visits stretched by nearly half — that's the number the model works on

Vetsource practice data covering August 2023 to August 2024 recorded average annual revenue per patient of $622, new client counts down 8.6%, and days between visits rising from 57.6 to 85.8 — a 48% stretch over four years. Those figures are now dated and should always be cited with that window, because nothing comparable has been published since. What has been published since points the same way: 81% of veterinarians report clients were more cost-conscious in 2025, up from 72%, and visit volume fell for the fourth consecutive year. A reminder system built on a 57-day rhythm is firing at a client who now returns at 86 days.

Days between visits went from 57.6 to 85.8 across four years — a 48% stretch — while new client counts fell 8.6% and the reminder schedule stayed where it was.

1. 01

   The lapsed list is bigger than the acquisition list and costs nothing per name

   A practice with a few thousand client records has more addressable demand sitting in its own database than a $2,000 monthly search budget will generate in a quarter. The cost of reaching it is a message and an owner, against $31.50 for each new one.

2. 02

   A 48% stretch in interval redefines what 'lapsed' means

   If the reminder cadence, the lapsed threshold and the reactivation trigger were all set against a 57-day rhythm, every one of them is now mistimed. The first message arrives while the client still considers themselves current, and the reactivation campaign fires at people who were never actually late.

3. 03

   Cost-consciousness is a sequencing instruction, not a discount instruction

   The published shift makes it the live question whether a reactivation message should lead with the due date or with what the visit will cost and what payment options exist. The model tests the two against each other rather than assuming; it does not assume a discount is the answer, because a discount on a low-margin visit in a practice where only 32% report improved profitability is a bad trade.

4. 04

   Response speed still governs the inbound half, and the study behind it is old

   The canonical 2011 research found firms responding inside an hour were roughly seven times more likely to qualify a lead than those waiting an hour longer, and it should be cited with its date. In a reactivation programme the reply window matters more than usual, because the client who responds to a reminder has a narrow moment of intent.

Average time between visits stretched to **85.8 days — a 48% increase** vs three years earlier (across 6,574 US practices).

The model measures before it messages. The practice management system is queried for the actual distribution of days between visits, by species and by visit type, which almost always shows a longer interval than the reminder schedule assumes. The cadence is then rebuilt against the measured distribution: a first reminder timed just ahead of the real cluster, a second carrying the cost range and payment options rather than repeating the due date, and a lapsed threshold set from the data rather than from convention. Clients past that threshold move into a separate reactivation track with different copy. Inbound replies route to a named owner inside a defined window.

1. 1

   Weeks 1–3

   Interval audit

   Distribution of days between visits by species and visit type, lapsed threshold derived

   Owner: OmniFlow + practice

2. 2

   Weeks 3–6

   Cadence rebuild

   Reminder timing reset to the measured cluster, second message carries cost and options

   Owner: OmniFlow

3. 3

   Weeks 6–12

   Message test

   Due-date-led against cost-led reactivation copy, run as a split with a fixed sample

   Owner: OmniFlow

4. 4

   Week 6 onward

   Response routing

   Named owner and a defined reply window for reactivation responses

   Owner: Practice

5. 5

   Month 6

   Review

   Interval movement, reactivation rate, revenue from returning clients versus new

   Owner: OmniFlow + practice

The model reports revenue from returning clients against revenue from new ones, and it reports movement in the measured interval as the leading indicator of both. Cost per lead appears only as a comparison: what the practice would pay for a new client at $31.50 against what it costs to bring back one it already has. The Vetsource interval figures are used to frame the problem and are always cited with their August 2023 to August 2024 window, never as a current benchmark. The practice's own distribution replaces them in week three.

Modelled. Inputs: AVMA / Brakke Consulting veterinary economics survey, February 2026; WordStream by LocaliQ, Google Ads Benchmarks 2026 (13,474 US search campaigns, April 2025 – March 2026); Oldroyd, McElheran & Elkington, The Short Life of Online Sales Leads, Harvard Business Review, March 2011 (1.25M leads across 42 US companies). Modelled outputs are not a forecast or a guarantee of results. Cited: Vetsource *Behavior Shift* white paper (via dvm360, 2024–25). --- # MASTER SOURCE LIST *Every figure in this document traces to one of these. Adding even a compact "Source:" line under each stat block on the live site is the single highest-impact credibility change you can make.*.

Every figure below is published research, not a client result. They are the inputs to the arithmetic above, listed so it can be checked rather than taken on trust. The bracketed number points to the full citation at the end of this page.

These are the surfaces this engagement is run and measured from, shown with representative figures built around the benchmarks cited on this page. Every account we run reports into views like these, and you keep ownership of all of them.

Each figure on this page, the system it is read from, and the definition and window it is measured over.

Not applicable — this is a modelled engagement. Its weakest input is that the interval and revenue-per-patient figures come from a dataset covering August 2023 to August 2024 and are two years old at the time of writing, with no comparable release since. They are treated as context for the direction of travel only. The practice's own interval distribution, pulled in week three, is the number the cadence is actually built on.

A modelled capability, not a client account. Figures illustrate what the model produces and are labelled as modelled wherever they appear. See all our work

Full citations for everything cited on this page, with the sample and period each study covers, so you can go and read the original.