Literature DB >> 33551167

Quantification of antimicrobial usage in adult cows and preweaned calves on 40 large Wisconsin dairy farms using dose-based and mass-based metrics.

J Leite de Campos1, A Kates2, A Steinberger3, A Sethi4, G Suen3, J Shutske5, N Safdar2, T Goldberg6, P L Ruegg7.   

Abstract

Use of antimicrobials in animal agriculture is under increasing scrutiny, but the quantity of antimicrobials used on large US dairy farms has not been evaluated using data from large farms and different metrics. This study investigated total antimicrobial usage (AMU) in adult dairy cows and preweaned calves (PWC) and contrasted 2 metrics used for measurement of AMU. Wisconsin dairy farms were eligible if they had >250 lactating cows, maintained computerized animal health records, and were willing to allow researchers access to treatment records. Animal health data for a 1-yr period was retrospectively collected from computerized records, and a farm visit was performed to verify case definitions and recording accuracy. Both dose-based (animal daily doses; ADD) and mass-based (total mg of antimicrobials per kg of body weight; BW) metrics were calculated at the herd, cow, and PWC levels. Descriptive statistics for AMU were examined for both age groups. Mean AMU was compared among active ingredients and route of usage using ANOVA models that included farm as a random variable. At enrollment, farms (n = 40) contained approximately 52,639 cows (mean: 1,316 ± 169; 95% CI: 975, 1657) and 6,281 PWC (mean: 180 ± 33; 95% CI: 112, 247). When estimated using ADD, total herd AMU was 17.2 ADD per 1,000 animal-days (95% CI: 14.9, 19.5), with 83% of total herd-level AMU in adult cows. When estimated using the mass-based metric, total herd AMU was 13.6 mg of antimicrobial per kilogram of animal BW (95% CI: 10.3, 17.0), with 86% of total AMU used in adult cows. For cows, 78% of total ADD (15.8 ADD per 1,000 cow-d) was administered as intramammary (IMM) preparations. In contrast, when AMU was estimated using a mass-based metric, IMM preparations represented only 24% of total AMU (12.1 mg of antimicrobial/kg of cow BW). For cows, ceftiofur was the primary antimicrobial used and accounted for 53% of total ADD, with 80% attributed to IMM and 20% attributed to injectable treatments. When estimated using a mass-based metric, ampicillin was the predominant antimicrobial used in cows and accounted for 33% of total antimicrobial mass per kilogram of BW. When AMU was estimated for PWC using ADD, injectable antimicrobials represented 79% of total usage (28.3 ADD per 1,000 PWC-d). In contrast, when AMU was estimated for PWC using a mass-based metric, injectable products represented 42% of total AMU, even though more farms administered antimicrobials using this route. When AMU in PWC was summarized using ADD, penicillin represented 32% of AMU, and there were no significant differences in ADD among ampicillin, oxytetracycline or enrofloxacin. When a mass-based metric was used to estimate AMU in PWC, oral products (sulfadimethoxine and trimethoprim-sulfa) represented more than half of the total AMU given to this group. Overall, these results showed that choice of metric and inclusion of different age groups can substantially influence interpretation of AMU on dairy farms. The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. and Fass Inc. on behalf of the American Dairy Science Association®. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

Entities:  

Keywords:  antibiotic; antimicrobial usage; dairy; disease

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2021        PMID: 33551167     DOI: 10.3168/jds.2020-19315

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Dairy Sci        ISSN: 0022-0302            Impact factor:   4.034


  6 in total

1.  Antibiotic Use in Alpine Dairy Farms and Its Relation to Biosecurity and Animal Welfare.

Authors:  Francesca Menegon; Katia Capello; Jacopo Tarakdjian; Dario Pasqualin; Giovanni Cunial; Sara Andreatta; Debora Dellamaria; Grazia Manca; Giovanni Farina; Guido Di Martino
Journal:  Antibiotics (Basel)       Date:  2022-02-10

2.  Wisconsin dairy farm worker perceptions and practices related to antibiotic use, resistance, and infection prevention using a systems engineering framework.

Authors:  Ashley E Kates; Mary Jo Knobloch; Ali Konkel; Amanda Young; Andrew Steinberger; John Shutske; Pamela L Ruegg; Ajay K Sethi; Tony Goldberg; Juliana Leite de Campos; Garret Suen; Nasia Safdar
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2021-12-16       Impact factor: 3.240

3.  Prevalence of Multidrug-Resistant CTX-M Extended Spectrum Beta-Lactamase-Producing Escherichia coli From Different Bovine Faeces in China.

Authors:  Xiaojuan Wei; Weiwei Wang; Ningning Lu; Lingyu Wu; Zhen Dong; Bing Li; Xuzheng Zhou; Fusheng Cheng; Kairen Zhou; Haijian Cheng; Hongmei Shi; Jiyu Zhang
Journal:  Front Vet Sci       Date:  2022-08-01

Review 4.  Realities, Challenges and Benefits of Antimicrobial Stewardship in Dairy Practice in the United States.

Authors:  Pamela L Ruegg
Journal:  Microorganisms       Date:  2022-08-11

Review 5.  Antimicrobial Use and Resistance in Surplus Dairy Calf Production Systems.

Authors:  Poonam G Vinayamohan; Samantha R Locke; Rafael Portillo-Gonzalez; David L Renaud; Gregory G Habing
Journal:  Microorganisms       Date:  2022-08-16

6.  Evaluating the antimicrobial use on dairy farms in Chiba Prefecture in Japan using the antimicrobial treatment incidence, an indicator based on Japanese defined daily doses from 2014-2016.

Authors:  Masato Kikuchi; Takuma Okabe; Hideshige Shimizu; Takashi Matsui; Fuko Matsuda; Takeshi Haga; Kyoko Fujimoto; Yuko Endo; Katsuaki Sugiura
Journal:  J Vet Med Sci       Date:  2022-07-14       Impact factor: 1.105

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.