After more than two years of analysis, the Federal Trade Commission published a much-awaited report on the pet medications industry. The FTC found that veterinarians will continue to face increasing competition from non-veterinary retailers on pet medication sales.

In October 2012 the FTC brought together a number of stakeholders for a public workshop to examine consumer protection issues within the pet medications industry. That workshop, along with more than 700 written comments, informed the agency’s report released yesterday.

With nearly $7.6 billion spent in 2013 on prescription and over-the-counter medications for dogs and cats, the agency aimed to answer three specific questions about the pet medications industry:

• To what extent, if any, is competition in the pet medications industry adversely affected by limited consumer knowledge of and access to “portable prescriptions” (i.e. written prescriptions that can be filled outside of a veterinary clinic)?
• To what extent, if any, is competition in the pet medications industry adversely affected by manufacturer distribution practices that restrict non-veterinary retailers’ access to pet medications?
• To the extent that competition in the pet medications industry may be adversely affected by current industry practices, are there less restrictive approaches that could be used to enhance competition without compromising animal health and safety?

Among the findings in the report, the FTC staff believes that improved consumer access to prescriptions would likely be beneficial to consumers, but does not show any evidence that veterinarians are withholding written prescriptions from their clients. The executive summary states:

“Staff concluded that portability likely benefits consumers, and therefore generally supports policies that would increase consumer awareness of the availability of portable prescriptions and veterinary release of prescriptions to consumers. Consumers could then choose whether to purchase pet medications from their veterinarian or an alternative retail outlet. More information is necessary, however, to determine the extent to which consumers are aware of their ability to receive portable prescriptions and the extent to which veterinarians refuse to provide portable prescriptions to their clients. Likewise, more information is needed to determine the full economic impact of greater prescription portability.”

The report also finds that exclusive distribution and exclusive dealing practices by pet medication manufacturers could come under increasing competitive pressure in the marketplace and may be difficult to sustain, particularly if prescriptions become even more widely requested by clients, and retail pharmacies continue to compete to fill them. The FTC staff said that a number of issues could benefit from further investigation, including: the pricing of pet medications across different channels of distribution; the rate of errors in pet medication dispensing by retail pharmacists and veterinarians; the need for and impact of automatic prescription release requirements; and details regarding the secondary distribution system for pet medications.

The report says what many of us have known for a while—that the pet medications industry is evolving. As consumers are presented with more choices of where to fill their pet’s medications, we, as veterinarians, hope that the health and welfare of our animal patients is central to that decision. We acknowledge, however, that more work needs to be done to improve the lines of communication and education between animal and human pharmacists, and the AVMA has been leading that dialogue on this important issue so we can ensure that our animal patients are not only given the right doses of the right medications, but that the medicine they are receiving is safe.