Explore the vast range of titles available.

Antimicrobial use contributes to the global rise of antimicrobial resistance (AMR). In 2014, the poultry industry in Canada initiated its Antimicrobial Use Reduction Strategy to mitigate AMR in the poultry sector. We monitored trends in antimicrobial use and AMR of foodborne bacteria (Salmonella, Escherichia coli, and Campylobacter) in broiler chickens during 2013 and 2019. We quantified the effect of antimicrobial use and management factors on AMR by using LASSO regression and generalized mixed-effect models. AMR in broiler chickens declined by 6%-38% after the decrease in prophylactic antimicrobial use. However, the withdrawal of individual compounds, such as cephalosporins and fluoroquinolones, prompted an increase in use of and resistance levels for other drug classes, such as aminoglycosides. Canada's experience with antimicrobial use reduction illustrates the potential for progressive transitions from conventional antimicrobial-dependent broiler production to more sustainable production with respect to antimicrobial use.

The objective of this study was to report antimicrobial use in a convenience sample of U.S. beef feedyards for the years 2018 and 2019. In addition to antimicrobial use metrics, also reported are the indications for antimicrobial use and outcomes related to these indications. Antimicrobial use is characterized at the study and feedyard levels for a total of 1,141,846 head of cattle in 20 U.S. feedyards. Antimicrobial use is reported as milligrams of active antimicrobial ingredient per kilogram of liveweight sold (mg/kg-LW) and regimens of antimicrobials per animal year (Reg/AY). Regimens are described by antimicrobial class within use category as characterized by mg of active antimicrobial product per regimen (mg/Reg) and calendar days of administration per regimen (CDoA/Reg). A total of 1,128,515 regimens of medically important antimicrobials were captured from records. The number of regimens/100 head-in (Reg/100 head-in) are described in a subset of 10 feedyards with adequate data granularity to directly determine indications for antimicrobial administration. For the indications of bovine respiratory disease (BRD), Lameness (Lame), Liver Abscess Control (LAC), and Other (e.g., central nervous system disease, cellulitis) the Reg/100 head-in study-level values are 37.1, 0.8, 98.4, and 0.7, respectively, for 2018, with similar values for 2019. The regimens for BRD are further categorized in these 10 feedyards by the use categories in-feed, control of BRD, and individual animal therapy, yielding study level values of 4.6, 19.6, and 12.9 Reg/100 head-in, respectively, for 2018, with similar values for 2019. Outcomes of therapy for individual animal treatment of BRD, Lame, and Other are reported as treatment success, retreatment, or mortality by 30 days after the initial therapy of an animal for a disease. Treatment success rates (no treatment or mortality in the next 30 days) for 2018 in the 10 feedyards with sufficient data granularity are 76.5, 86.5, and 83.0% for BRD, Lame, and Other, respectively. The comparison of these results with other reports of antimicrobial use in North American feedyards highlights how differing approaches in calculating metric values may result in substantially different conclusions regarding antimicrobial use, especially in relation to long-duration uses.

Background This study is based on data collected to investigate the relation of peri-parturient events (colostrum quality, passive transfer of immunity, calving difficulty) on calf health and antimicrobial use. A component of the study was to provide feedback to farm management to identify calves at risk for disease and promote antimicrobial stewardship. At the start of the study (May 2016), a combination of enrofloxacin, penicillin, and sulfamethoxazole was the first treatment given to clinically abnormal calves. Based on feedback and interaction between study investigators, farm management and consulting veterinarians, a new policy was implemented to reduce antimicrobial use in calves. In August, the first treatment was changed to a combination of ampicillin and sulfamethoxazole. In September, the first treatment was reduced to only sulfamethoxazole. We investigated the effects of these policy changes in antimicrobial use on resistance in commensal Escherichia coli . Results We enrolled 4301 calves at birth and documented antimicrobial use until weaning. Most calves (99.4%) received antimicrobials and 70.4% received a total of 2–4 treatments. Antimicrobial use was more intense in younger calves (≤ 28 days) relative to older calves. We isolated 544 E. coli from fecal samples obtained from 132 calves. We determined resistance to 12 antimicrobials and 85% of the isolates were resistant to at least 3 antimicrobial classes. We performed latent class analysis to identify underlying unique classes where isolates shared resistance patterns and selected a solution with 4 classes. The least resistant class had isolates that were mainly resistant to only tetracycline and sulfisoxazole. The other 3 classes comprised isolates with resistance to ampicillin, chloramphenicol, aminoglycosides, sulfonamides, tetracycline, in addition to either ceftiofur; or nalidixic acid; or ciprofloxacin plus nalidixic acid and ceftiofur. Overall, E coli from younger calves and calves that received multiple treatments were more likely to have extensive resistance including resistance to fluoroquinolones and ceftiofur. In general, there was a declining trend in resistance to most antimicrobials during and after policy changes were implemented, except for ampicillin, ciprofloxacin, ceftiofur and gentamicin. Conclusions Information feedback to farms can influence farm managers to reduce antimicrobial use and this can change endemic farm resistance patterns.

In order to accurately portray antimicrobial use in food animals, the need for standardized metrics, and an understanding of the characteristics of different metrics, has long been recognized. Fourteen U.S. feedyards were used to evaluate the effects of using centralized constants such as defined daily dose (DDD) and defined course dose (DCD) applied to the weight of medically important antimicrobials by class (mg) as opposed to using electronic individual animal treatment records and lot level in-feed antimicrobial records obtained from the same population. Three numerators were calculated directly from recorded data for each drug product: the number of antimicrobial regimens associated with indication (Reg), milligrams of drug administered per regimen (mg), and calendar days of administration for each regimen (CDoA). There were four use indications to which numerators were assigned: liver abscess control (LAC), bovine respiratory disease (BRD), lameness (lame), or all other indications combined (other). Three denominators were also calculated directly from the data, these being the number of days animals were present (head days), number of cattle received (head in), and kilograms of live weight sold (kg-LW). Numerators and denominators were calculated at the lot level. The use of DDD or DCD was explored to determine how their use would affect interpretation of comparisons between lots or feedyards. At the lot level across both study years, the lot estimate of nDDD differed from the CDoA value by >25% in 49.2% of the lots. The number of Defined Course Doses (nDCD) was then compared to the number of Regimens (Reg). Comparing nDCD to Reg at the lot level across both study years, the lot estimate of nDCD differed from the Reg value by >25% in 46.4% of lots. Both year and metric were also shown to affect numerical feedyard ranking by antimicrobial use according to seven different metrics. The analysis reported here adds to the body of literature reporting substantial effects of metric choice on the conclusions drawn from comparing antimicrobial use across multiple production sites.

Background In recent years, there has been an increased awareness of antimicrobial resistance in both animals and humans, which has triggered concerns over non-judicious antimicrobial use. In the United States, antimicrobial use in food-producing animals for growth promotion or improved feed efficiency is perceived as non-judicious. To facilitate judicious antimicrobial use, the United States Food and Drug Administration implemented the Veterinary Feed Directive, effective from January 1, 2017. Interventions, such as the VFD, designed to ensure the judicious use of antimicrobials among cattle producers may be more effective if the factors that inform and influence producer AMU practices are addressed. The specific objectives of this study were to determine the following among Tennessee beef cattle producers: (1) the most common drivers for using antimicrobials, (2) the perceived alternatives to antimicrobials, (3) the knowledge and perceptions regarding antimicrobial resistance, and (4) the preferred avenues for receiving information on prudent antimicrobial use. A total of 5 focus group meetings with beef producers were conducted in East, Middle, and West Tennessee. Each focus group was video recorded and thematic analysis was performed using NVivo. Results The factors that producers considered to drive antimicrobial use were the type of cattle operation, disease and animal welfare, economic factors, veterinarian consultation, producer’s experience and peer support, Veterinary Feed Directive, and perceived drug efficacy. Vaccination, proper nutrition, and other good management practices were considered alternatives to antimicrobial use. To encourage vaccine use among small producers, participants suggested packaging vaccines into smaller quantities. Antimicrobial resistance was perceived to be a problem affecting animal and public health. Participants suggested additional education for cattle producers on the prudent use of antimicrobials as a measure for improving antimicrobial use. The veterinarian, producer associations and meetings, and county extension agents emerged as trusted avenues for channeling information on prudent antimicrobial use to cattle producers. Conclusions Several factors drive antimicrobial use among cattle producers in Tennessee. Participants generally perceived their antimicrobial use to be discreet and only when necessary. More awareness of drivers for the development of antimicrobial resistance and continuing education on prudent antimicrobial use is needed for Tennessee beef producers.

Timely, accurate, and reliable laboratory tools are important for antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) in food animal production. The objectives of this study were to (1) identify factors that influence live animal respiratory sample collection for laboratory testing and (2) describe the potential for integration of laboratory testing of samples from live animals into an AMS strategy for bovine respiratory disease (BRD) management in Canadian feedlots. Utilizing focused ethnography, virtual key informant interviews were conducted with eight feedlot veterinarians from Alberta, Ontario, and Saskatchewan, Canada. Thematic analysis revealed four themes: (1) lived experience of feedlot veterinarians with laboratory testing for BRD pathogens and antimicrobial resistance (AMR), (2) evidence-informed BRD management that integrates multiple data sources and their components, (3) organizational factors that affect the uptake and use of laboratory tests, and (4) the role of laboratory testing to support AMS in BRD management. While sample collection and laboratory testing are commonly used for BRD and AMR research and surveillance, they are not routinely applied in everyday BRD management. Veterinarians identified key challenges with laboratory testing, including turnaround time, the need for clear benefits, practical implementation, and effective communication with feedlot managers. Laboratory testing must provide valuable, actionable insights to encourage its adoption in Canadian feedlot operations. If successful, such testing could support AMS and be used to justify antimicrobial use if this were to become a regulatory or market requirement.

The main subject of the research is the assessment of the knowledge, attitudes and behaviors of veterinarians regarding the use of antibiotics (AMU) and antimicrobial resistance (AMR) through a questionnaire conducted among veterinarians in the northern region of Serbia. A total of 62 respondents completed the questionnaire, which represents a response rate of 44.3%. Male veterinarians are less likely to be in the group of veterinarians with insufficient knowledge (p < 0.05). Veterinarians engaged in mixed practice (small and large animals) (p < 0.001) and veterinarians who have over 100 patients per month (p < 0.005) are also less likely to be in the group with insufficient knowledge of antimicrobial resistance. The proportion of those with insufficient knowledge is growing among veterinarians whose source is the Internet (p < 0.01), while the proportion of those with insufficient knowledge about antimicrobial resistance is declining among veterinarians whose source of information is continuous education (p < 0.05). The majority of the respondents (n = 59, 95.2%) completely agreed that AMR is a very big issue in the global health sector right now. Unfortunately, there are crucial gaps in the knowledge and attitudes of the surveyed participants. They do not appear to be aware of the importance of AMU in veterinary medicine and its influence on overall AMR, or the crucial part that non-prescribed antibiotics have in all of it. Positively, many veterinarians use good practice AMU guidelines in their everyday practice and in line with the global trend of AMU reduction, respondents have also decreased their AMU compared to the previous year.

Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is influenced by antimicrobial use in human and animal health. This use exerts selection pressure on pathogen populations with the development of resistance and the exchange of resistance genes. While the exact scale of AMR in Vietnam remains uncertain, recent studies suggest that it is a major issue in both human and animal health. This study explored antimicrobial use behaviors in 36 pig farms in the Nam Dinh Province (North) and the Dong Nai Province (South) of Vietnam (with a median of 5.5 breeding sows and 41 fattening pigs). It also estimated the economic costs and benefits of use for the producer. Data were collected through a structured face-to-face interview with additional productivity data collected by farmers during a six-week period following the initial interview. Overall, antimicrobial use was high across the farms; however, in-feed antimicrobial use is likely to be under-reported due to misleading and imprecise labelling on premixed commercial feeds. An economic analysis found that the cost of antimicrobials was low relative to other farm inputs (~2% of total costs), and that farm profitability was precariously balanced, with high disease and poor prices leading to negative and low profits. Future policies for smallholder farms need to consider farm-level economics and livestock food supply issues when developing further antimicrobial use interventions in the region.

Background Inappropriate antimicrobial use (AMU) is a key modifiable factor that leads to the development of antimicrobial resistance (AMR). The objectives of this study were to determine the following among Tennessee beef cattle producers: (1) the opinions on factors driving AMU (2) opinions on alternatives to antimicrobials, (3) the knowledge and perceptions regarding AMU and AMR, and (4) the preferred avenues for receiving information on prudent AMU. A survey questionnaire was made available to participants both in print and online from January 26, 2018 through May 11, 2018. The questions targeted the producers’ demographics and their AMU practices; factors driving producer’s choice of antimicrobials; perceptions, opinions and concerns about AMU and AMR in cattle production. Ordinal logistic regression was used to test for associations between the captured demographic information and producers’ degree of concern about AMR. Results Overall, 231 beef producers responded to all or some of the survey questions. More than 60% of the participants mentioned that they kept up-to-date written records on antimicrobial purchases and AMU. Regarding extra-label use, 169 (84.1%) of the 201 respondents did not practice extra-label AMU. Profitability of the beef operation was a key factor influencing the decisions of many producers to use antimicrobials for disease management and prevention on their farms. Of the 228 producers who completed the question on the rating of their degree of concern about AMR, 50 (21.9%) reported that they were very concerned about AMR, 133 (58.3%) were moderately concerned, and 36 (15.8%) reported that they were not concerned about AMR. Nine producers (4%) did not rate their degree of concern about AMR because they were not familiar with what antimicrobial resistance meant. The inferential analyses suggested that younger beef producers were significantly less concerned about AMR when compared to the older ones ( P  = 0.019). Regarding avenues for receiving information on prudent AMU, no single medium was most preferred by all the respondents. Conclusions There is a need to promote the use of written antimicrobial treatment protocols among beef producers in Tennessee. Continued training for beef producers on infection prevention and control and prudent AMU is needed.

Background Optimal treatment and prudent use of antimicrobials for pigs is imperative to secure animal health and prevent development of critical resistance. An important step in this one-health context is to monitor resistance patterns of important animal pathogens. The aim of this study was to investigate the antimicrobial resistance patterns of five major pathogens in Danish pigs during a period from 2004 to 2017 and elucidate any developments or associations between resistance and usage of antibiotics. Results The minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) for Escherichia coli, Actinobacillus pleuropneumoniae, Streptococcus suis, Bordetella bronchiseptica, and Staphylococcus hyicus was determined to representatives of antibiotic classes relevant for treatment or surveillance. Escherichia coli isolates were mostly sensitive to fluoroquinolones and colistin, whereas high levels of resistance were observed to ampicillin, spectinomycin, streptomycin, sulfonamides and tetracycline. While resistance levels to most compounds remained relatively stable during the period, resistance to florfenicol increased from 2.1% in 2004 to 18.1% in 2017, likely in response to a concurrent increase in usage. A temporal association between resistance and usage was also observed for neomycin. E. coli serovars O138 and O149 were generally more resistant than O139. For A. pleuropneumoniae , the resistance pattern was homogenous and predictable throughout the study period, displaying high MIC values only to erythromycin whereas almost all isolates were susceptible to all other compounds. Most S. suis isolates were sensitive to penicillin whereas high resistance levels to erythromycin and tetracycline were recorded, and resistance to erythromycin and trimethoprim increasing over time. For S. hyicus, sensitivity to the majority of the antimicrobials tested was observed. However, penicillin resistance was recorded in 69.4–88.9% of the isolates. All B. bronchiseptica isolates were resistant to ampicillin, whereas all but two isolates were sensitive to florfenicol. The data obtained have served as background for a recent formulation of evidence-based treatment guidelines for pigs. Conclusions Antibiotic resistance varied for some pathogens over time and in response to usage. Resistance to critically important compounds was low. The results emphasize the need for continuous surveillance of resistance patterns also in pig pathogenic bacteria.