Under indirect supervision, treatment may proceed only if:

• A. The supervisor is on the premises.
• B. The animal has not been examined.
• C. The supervisor has given instructions and the animal has been examined.
• D. There is no need for veterinary input.

Answer: (C)

Under indirect supervision, the veterinarian must still provide oversight by having examined the patient and given clear instructions for the care to be carried out. This ensures there’s a validated plan and safety checks in place, even though the veterinarian isn’t physically present during the procedure. Because of this, treatment may proceed only when the animal has been examined by the supervising veterinarian and explicit instructions have been issued to guide the staff.

Why the other ideas don’t fit: the supervisor being on the premises isn’t necessary for indirect supervision—availability for consultation and a prior exam with instructions suffice. Treating an animal that has not been examined would bypass essential medical assessment. And there is still veterinary input required in the form of instructions or a protocol; saying no input is needed would ignore the supervisory role that ensures proper patient care.