The relatively new phrase “Spectrum of Care” appears on the web page of nearly every Veterinary and animal health organization in America. Much like “sustainability” over the past two decades, companies and non-profits have lined up to pay heed (at least electronically) to recognizing Spectrum of Care as a Veterinary priority or milestone.
What we do about Spectrum of Care is another matter. Put differently, saluting Spectrum of Care seems to be popular and non-controversial. Doing something about it is the challenge.
Most groups approach Spectrum of Care in this manner: it’s the range of care or treatments possible for a particular pet medical condition or symptoms. The top of the list is the Gold Standard of Care, then it ladders down. The fundamental idea is that veterinarians should be able (and trained) to provide care options less expensive than the Gold Standard of Care taught in Veterinary school without fear of losing their license by the state Veterinary medical board.
Put differently, if a state Veterinary medical board officially or unofficially views the proper standard of care as synonymous with the Gold Standard, then is a veterinarian at risk for treating or recommending anything less? And does this answer vary within the same state board depending on which veterinarians are serving at the time the question is raised in a particular case?
Sorry to say the answer is yes, but don’t be shocked. The same answer applies to any policy issue before any state board (Veterinary or otherwise), meaning state boards are composed of voluntary members who bring their unique perspective to each meeting, each discussion and, ultimately, each decision.
The only alternative is emerging as a critical topic for Veterinary stakeholders thanks to the PetSmart Charities/Gallup poll on access to care I wrote about last month. It’s apparent that a large percentage of pet owners either avoid Veterinary care altogether or decline the care recommendation offered by their veterinarian due to cost.
This brings into play Spectrum of Care considerations as most of these pet owners were not offered a less expensive alternative. This means that well-intentioned veterinarians either are unaware of care options below the Gold Standard or are fearful that anything less than the Gold Standard puts their license at risk.
The profession and pet healthcare industry have an opportunity to address this problem with a combination of (1) better understanding and official acknowledgment of the ladder of treatment options for medical conditions and (2) explicit respect in practice acts or Veterinary board regulations for the freedom for veterinarians to offer an array of choices for pet owners, including but not limited, to the Gold Standard of care.
More to come, as you might expect.