Antimicrobials in animal production: usage and practices among livestock farmers in Oyo and Kaduna States of Nigeria

Abstract

Antimicrobials have proven to be important for sustainable livestock production by their use as growth promoters and in the control of animal infections. However, injudicious use of antimicrobials could accelerate the emergence and spread of resistant bacterial strains with attendant socioeconomic and public health issues. This work assessed antimicrobial usage in animal production with emphasis on usage and practices by livestock producers in Oyo and Kaduna States of Nigeria. Data on antimicrobial usage were collected through interviews, questionnaire and focus group discussions. Four hundred and fifty-four farmers in 11 communities within 11 Local Government Areas of Oyo and Kaduna States of Nigeria were sampled in a multi-stage sampling procedure. The study showed that antimicrobial agents were widely distributed, readily accessible and commonly used in animal production. Fluoroquinolones and other critically important antimicrobials for human medicine were widely used in animals as prophylactics. Potentially harmful antimicrobials including furazolidones and chloramphenicol already banned for use in humans and animals were freely marketed and used in livestock production. Most of the respondents believed that veterinarians should be responsible for the administration of antimicrobials to animals, but in practice, they buy and administer antimicrobials without consulting veterinary professionals. It was observed that the ready availability of antimicrobial agents promoted the use of antimicrobials in livestock production and may encourage non-adherence to hygienic principles and management laxity in farm operations. The non-involvement of veterinary professionals and laboratory investigations in disease diagnosis prior to antimicrobial use could lead to improper usage that contribute to the development of antimicrobial resistance in bacterial strains. Responsible antimicrobial stewardship and strict regulations are vital to prolonging the benefits derivable from the use of antimicrobials.

Antimicrobial Use in Extensive Smallholder Livestock Farming Systems in Ethiopia: Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practices of Livestock Keepers

“…Penicillins and macrolides were only reported to be used by the pastoral production systems. This is consistent with studies elsewhere that reported these antimicrobials to be frequently used in food animals in Africa (16,27,(29)(30)(31)(32)(33). The penicillin, tetracycline, and aminoglycoside classes were also the most commonly reported antimicrobial usages across pig production systems in Thailand and Vietnam (34).…”

Towards a bottom-up understanding of antimicrobial use and resistance on the farm: A knowledge, attitudes, and practices survey across livestock systems in five African countries

“…Observation of withdrawal periods after treatment with antimicrobials was also limited with farmers both consuming and selling animal products (meat, milk, eggs) from animals currently undergoing treatment or still within the withdrawal period. High levels of engagement in the 'informal veterinary sector'-characterized by 'lay' diagnoses and treatment, limited input from trained health professionals, and non-prudent practices-are consistent with findings from other studies conducted in the project countries including among Maasai pastoralists in Tanzania and Kenya [28,32,38,39], cattle keepers in Eastern Province, Zambia [40] and poultry farmers in Ghana, Kenya, Tanzania, Zambia, and Zimbabwe [28][29][30][31][32][33][34][35][36][37]. Collectively, these results further confirm the negative impacts of the Structural Adjustment Policies that relegated the public veterinary services in many LMICs to policy and regulation functions [45].…”

“…Unfortunately, there is currently little information on antimicrobial use practices and motivating factors in livestock systems for most LMICs [2,21,27]. Available studies generally find that farmers administer antimicrobials themselves, and mostly without prescriptions or using input from animal health professionals, as well as engaging in other non-prudent practices, such as violating antimicrobial withdrawal periods [28][29][30][31][32][33][34][35][36][37], the period of time before slaughter when treatments for the animal must cease in order to effectively eliminate them from the animal's system. However, antimicrobial use patterns vary across subsistence types (e.g., pastoralists, highland farmers), farm size (e.g., small-scale versus commercial) and location (urban versus rural).…”

“…Studies examining antimicrobial treatment patterns, while mostly reliant on self-reported data, have documented other deviations from recommended practices. Across countries, antimicrobials are almost always purchased without prescriptions at 'agrovets' (shops selling animal health products) and to a lesser extent at open markets and feed distributors [28][29][30][32][33][34][35][36][37]. In terms of treatment, a study of poultry farmers in eastern Ghana found that only 63% of farmers completed recommended antibiotic course durations [33].…”

Prevalence and antimicrobial resistance of <em>Salmonella</em> and <em>Yersinia</em> in the feces of hunted wildlife in Abeokuta, Nigeria

“…Improper disposal of antimicrobial packages, migration of wildlife (searching for food) to dwelling areas and farms, discharge of animal effluents from commercial livestock farms and abattoirs into water bodies, discharge of antimicrobial waste from pharmaceutical factories into water bodies are among the various factors that influence exposure of wildlife to antimicrobial residues as well as acquisition of resistant bacteria or resistance genes (Kümmerer, 2004;Radhouani et al, 2014). Antimicrobial usage is a very common practice in Nigerian food animal production (Ojo et al, 2016;. Farmers depend heavily on antimicrobials for growth promotion as well as for the prevention and treatment of infections.…”