VCPR and Telemedicine Rules in Missouri
Missouri's VCPR definition requires that the veterinarian has recently seen and is personally acquainted with the keeping and care of the animal by virtue of an examination or by medically appropriate and timely visits to the premises where the animal is kept.
Whether the examination itself may happen remotely, the statute never says: § 340.200 contains no telehealth or telemedicine term, and silence settles nothing in either direction.
The section was last amended August 28, 2023.
Verify before you rely on this
At a glance
The veterinarian must have recently seen and be personally acquainted with the keeping and care of the animal by virtue of an examination or by medically appropriate and timely visits to the premises where the animal is kept; the text never says whether the examination itself may be conducted remotely.
Not addressed — the statute is silent on electronic means one way or the other, and no telehealth, telemedicine, electronic or remote term appears anywhere in § 340.200.
Not addressed in § 340.200.
Not stated in the sources read.
Not stated in the sources read.
Not addressed in § 340.200.
§ 340.200 was last amended August 28, 2023 (amendment credit line A.L. 2023 S.B. 157).
The text is silent on modality — State statute.
Mo. Rev. Stat. § 340.200(27), the veterinarian-client-patient relationship definition in Missouri's statutory definitions section
What Missouri's definition actually requires
Missouri stacks four elements into one definition: the veterinarian has assumed responsibility for medical judgments and the client has agreed to follow instructions; the veterinarian has sufficient knowledge of the animal to reach at least a general or preliminary diagnosis; the veterinarian has recently seen and is personally acquainted with the keeping and care of the animal by virtue of an examination or by medically appropriate and timely premises visits; and the veterinarian is readily available for follow-up care.
The third element is the one a telemedicine plan turns on, because it names the two routes to acquaintance — an examination, or premises visits — without ever specifying what kind of contact an examination must be.
Note also what is absent: the statute says recently seen and attaches no number to it, so no twelve-month clock or any other fixed deadline can be read out of this text.
A manager building an intake policy can document which route each patient file rests on, but the statute alone will not answer how current that contact has to be.
“the veterinarian has recently seen and is personally acquainted with the keeping and care of the animal by virtue of an examination or by medically appropriate and timely visits to the premises where the animal is kept”
The statute never answers the telemedicine question
No telehealth, telemedicine, electronic or remote term appears anywhere in the definitions section — the absence is verifiable on the face of the text.
That silence is a real answer about the statute and an open question about the law: nothing in § 340.200 authorizes establishing the relationship over video, and nothing in it forbids that either.
A practice cannot cite this section as authority for a remote-only intake, and Missouri cannot cite it as a prohibition.
The sources read date the section's last amendment to August 2023 but do not show which of its definitions that bill changed — either way, the VCPR definition's current text carries no modality term.
If board guidance answers the question, that material sits outside what was read for this page — ask the Missouri veterinary medical board.
Maintenance by telemedicine is equally unaddressed
What the section does say is that the relationship carries an ongoing duty: follow-up care has to be available when the prescribed course of therapy fails or causes adverse reactions.
That element fixes an outcome — follow-up must actually be there — while saying nothing about the channel, so it neither opens nor closes the door on maintaining the relationship by telemedicine.
For a relief veterinarian covering remotely, that means the codified text offers no express rule to lean on in either direction, and the practice's own coverage policy is where the continuity expectation will have to be written.
Confirm how the board reads this in a telemedicine context before relying on remote follow-up.
“The practicing veterinarian is readily available for follow-up care in case of adverse reactions or failure of the prescribed course of therapy”
When § 340.200 was last amended — and what the date does not show
§ 340.200 — the definitions section as a whole — was last amended on August 28, 2023; the statute page's amendment credit line reads A.L. 2023 S.B. 157.
The credit line does not show which of the section's definitions that bill changed, so nothing on this page treats 2023 as the date the VCPR definition itself was reworded.
What can be said is what the current text says: the veterinarian-client-patient relationship definition, as it stands, carries no telehealth, telemedicine, electronic or remote term.
The date still matters operationally — any vendor summary, model policy or internal SOP citing an earlier version of the section should be re-checked against the text now in force before anything is built on it.
There are two VCPRs, and the federal one does not move
What This Page Does — and Doesn’t — Cover
This page describes Missouri’s own text — Mo. Rev. Stat. § 340.200(27), the veterinarian-client-patient relationship definition in Missouri's statutory definitions section as read for this series, current as of September 2026, with the provision itself last changed § 340.200 was last amended August 28, 2023 (amendment credit line A.L. 2023 S.B. 157). It does not cover licensure, scope of practice, or the terms of a specific prescription, and it is not a compliance sign-off for a telemedicine service.
VCPR and telemedicine rules are the fastest-moving area this site covers — nine states changed theirs between 2024 and 2026, and bills are live in others. Confirm the current text with the board before you build an intake policy, a prescribing workflow or a remote-care service on it, and read the federal note above alongside it rather than instead of it.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can a Missouri veterinarian establish a VCPR over video?
Missouri's statute does not answer that.
Section 340.200(27) requires that the veterinarian has recently seen and is personally acquainted with the keeping and care of the animal by virtue of an examination or by medically appropriate and timely visits to the premises, and the section never says whether the examination may be conducted remotely.
The silence neither permits nor prohibits a video-established relationship.
Ask the Missouri veterinary medical board how it reads the definition before building any remote-first intake on it.
What does Missouri law say about veterinary telemedicine?
In the provision this page rests on, nothing: no telehealth, telemedicine, electronic or remote term appears anywhere in § 340.200.
The VCPR definition applies the same recently-seen and personally-acquainted showing regardless of how the contact happens, and the section says nothing about maintaining a relationship by telemedicine or about telemedicine prescribing.
That is a statement about this section of the statutes, not about every Missouri rule that could exist — confirm the full picture with the Missouri veterinary medical board.
Does satisfying Missouri's VCPR rule make a practice federally compliant?
No, and this is the trap.
The federal VCPR at 21 CFR 530.3(i) is a separate relationship governing extralabel drug use and Veterinary Feed Directives, it requires that the veterinarian has recently seen the animal or visited the premises, and the FDA has said it cannot be met solely through telemedicine.
It applies regardless of what Missouri permits, and extralabel use is routine rather than an edge case.
Check both layers, and confirm specifics with the Missouri veterinary medical board.
What can be done in Missouri with no VCPR at all?
The sources read do not say. § 340.200 is a definitions section, and it spells out no allowance for teleadvice, teletriage, prescribing or any other activity performed without a VCPR.
It does define emergency — a life-threatening condition where immediate treatment is necessary to sustain life, or imminent death where action is needed to relieve pain or suffering — but attaches no telemedicine or no-VCPR allowance to that definition.
An absence of text is not permission, so confirm what actually applies with the Missouri veterinary medical board.
When was Missouri's VCPR statute last amended?
§ 340.200 — the definitions section containing the VCPR definition — was last amended August 28, 2023, and the statute page's credit line reads A.L. 2023 S.B. 157.
The credit line does not show which of the section's definitions the bill changed, and this page does not treat 2023 as the date the VCPR definition itself was reworded.
Its current text contains no telehealth or telemedicine term.
Re-check anything citing an earlier version of the section against the text now in force, and confirm with the Missouri veterinary medical board.
More Missouri VCPR & Telemedicine Resources
Sourced from Missouri’s own statute or board rule (see the citations above). Verified September 2026. This page is general information, not legal advice — confirm current rules with the Missouri board before relying on them.