e In Mekong Delta farms (Vietnam), antimicrobials are extensively used, but limited data are available on levels of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) among Escherichia coli isolates. We performed a structured survey of AMR in E. coli isolates (n ‫؍‬ 434) from 90 pig, chicken, and duck farms. The results were compared with AMR among E. coli isolates (n ‫؍‬ 234) from 66 small wild animals (rats and shrews) trapped on farms and in forests and rice fields. The isolates were susceptibility tested against eight antimicrobials. E. coli isolates from farmed animals were resistant to a median of 4 (interquartile range [IQR], 3 to 6) antimicrobials versus 1 (IQR, 1 to 2) among wild mammal isolates (P < 0.001). The prevalences of AMR among farmed species isolates (versus wild animals) were as follows: tetracycline, 84.7% (versus 25.6%); ampicillin, 78.9% (versus 85.9%); trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole, 52.1% (versus 18.8%); chloramphenicol, 39.9% (versus 22.5%); amoxicillin-clavulanic acid, 36.6% (versus 34.5%); and ciprofloxacin, 24.9% (versus 7.3%). The prevalence of multidrug resistance (MDR) (resistance against three or more antimicrobial classes) among pig isolates was 86.7% compared to 66.9 to 72.7% among poultry isolates. After adjusting for host species, MDR was ϳ8 times greater among isolates from wild mammals trapped on farms than among those trapped in forests/rice fields (P < 0.001). Isolates were assigned to unique profiles representing their combinations of susceptibility results. Multivariable analysis of variance indicated that AMR profiles from wild mammals trapped on farms and those from domestic animals were more alike (R 2 range, 0.14 to 0.30) than E. coli isolates from domestic animals and mammals trapped in the wild (R 2 range, 0.25 to 0.45). The results strongly suggest that AMR on farms is a key driver of environmental AMR in the Mekong Delta.

SummarySalmonellosis is a public health concern in both the developed and developing countries. Although the majority of human non‐typhoidal Salmonella enterica (NTS) cases are the result of foodborne infections or person‐to‐person transmission, NTS infections may also be acquired by environmental and occupational exposure to animals. While a considerable number of studies have investigated the presence of NTS in farm animals and meat/carcasses, very few studies have investigated the risk of NTS colonization in humans as a result of direct animal exposure. We investigated asymptomatic NTS colonization in 204 backyard chicken farms, 204 farmers and 306 matched individuals not exposed to chicken farming, in southern Vietnam. Pooled chicken faeces, collected using boot or handheld swabs on backyard chicken farms, and rectal swabs from human participants were tested. NTS colonization prevalence was 45.6%, 4.4% and 2.6% for chicken farms, farmers and unexposed individuals, respectively. Our study observed a higher prevalence of NTS colonization among chicken farmers (4.4%) compared with age‐, sex‐ and location‐ matched rural and urban individuals not exposed to chickens (2.9% and 2.0%). A total of 164 chicken NTS strains and 17 human NTS strains were isolated, and 28 serovars were identified. Salmonella Weltevreden was the predominant serovar in both chickens and humans. NTS isolates showed resistance (20–40%) against tetracycline, chloramphenicol, sulfamethoxazole‐trimethoprim and ampicillin. Our study reflects the epidemiology of NTS colonization in chickens and humans in the Mekong delta of Vietnam and emphasizes the need of larger, preferably longitudinal studies to study the transmission dynamics of NTS between and within animal and human host populations.

SummaryWe investigated episodes of suspected highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI)‐like illness among 12 meat duck flocks in two districts in Tien Giang province (Mekong Delta, Vietnam) in November 2013. In total, duck samples from 8 of 12 farms tested positive for HPAI virus subtype A/haemagglutinin 5 and neuraminidase 1 (H5N1) by real‐time RT‐PCR. Sequencing results confirmed clade of 2.3.2.1.c as the cause of the outbreaks. Most (7/8) laboratory‐confirmed positive flocks had been vaccinated with inactivated HPAI H5N1 clade 2.3.4 vaccines <6 days prior to onset of clinical signs. A review of vaccination data in relation to estimated production in the area suggested that vaccination efforts were biased towards larger flocks and that vaccination coverage was low [21.2% ducks vaccinated with two shots (range by district 7.4–34.9%)]. The low‐coverage data, the experimental evidence of lack of cross‐protection conferred by the currently used vaccines based on clade 2.3.4 together with the short lifespan of meat duck flocks (60–70 days), suggest that vaccination is not likely to be effective as a tool for control of H5N1 infection in meat duck flocks in the area.