Characteristics of commercial pig farms in Great Britain and their use of antimicrobials

Stevens, Kim; Gilbert, Jeffrey M.; Strachan, W. D.; Robertson, Jamie; Johnston, A.M.; Pfeiffer, Dirk U.

doi:10.1136/vr.161.2.45

Cited by 29 publications

(52 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Farmers also rated the risks of AMU and of AMR to be moderate. The latter finding seems to be in line with that of previous studies showing that farmers were neither very aware (Friedman and others 2007, Stevens and others 2007) nor very worried about AMR (Visschers and others 2015). In contrast to the benefits of AM, the risks of AMU are not directly noticeable to farmers as long as they do not experience therapeutic failure in their animals, themselves or the people living and working with them.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

Higher perceived risks of antimicrobial use are related to lower usage among pig farmers in four European countries

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The prudent use of antimicrobials (AMs) should be widened in pig farming to reduce the risk of AM resistance (AMR) in human and veterinary medicine. It is therefore important to understand pig farmers' motivators and the barriers to AM usage (AMU) on their farms. The authors investigated pig farmers' self-estimated levels of AMU, their perceived benefits and risks and the need for AMs in a cross-sectional survey in Belgium, France, Germany and Sweden. The authors also compared these perceptions between the four countries and related them to pig farmers' actual AMU. The results showed that farmers who used more AMs also estimated their own usage as higher. Farmers perceived many benefits but relatively few risks of AMU in pig farming. Some significant cross-country differences in farmers' perceptions were found, but they were relatively small. After controlling for country differences and farm differences, only perceived risks had a significant association with AMU. The authors therefore conclude that in order to promote prudent AMU, it seems most promising to focus on the structural differences in pig farming and veterinary medicine (e.g. legislation, role of the veterinarian) among countries. In addition, interventions which aim at reducing AMU should increase farmers' awareness of the risks of extensive AMU.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

Higher perceived risks of antimicrobial use are related to lower usage among pig farmers in four European countries

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Similarly, Stevens and others (2007) found that 79 per cent of UK pig farmers considered ‘improved housing’ as an alternative to antimicrobial use. Participants considered the lack of profitability in the pig industry to limit their ability to improve housing, however, previous work shows that farms, where the farmer felt there was room for improvement in the farm environment, used more in-feed antimicrobials than those who did not (Scott and others 2006, 2007, Stevens and others 2007). This would inevitably increase drug costs on these farms.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This opinion was echoed in work by Stevens and others (2007) who showed that 96 per cent of pig farmers considered responsibility for ‘good practice in the use of antimicrobials’ to lie with vets. Busani and others (2004) defined a ‘judicious user’ of antimicrobials to be a cattle practitioner who showed an awareness of the problem of antimicrobial resistance and the importance of responsible use; three-quarters of cattle vets conformed to this description (Busani and others 2004).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Guidelines on their responsible use in animals have been advocated by various UK organisations including the Responsible Use of Medicines in Agriculture, the British Veterinary Association (Andrews 2009, Anon 2013a, c), and more recently the Pig Veterinary Society (Anon 2014). Alongside the judicious use of antimicrobials, improvements in the management practices and housing of pigs have been shown to reduce the reliance of some farms on antimicrobials (Dunlop and others 1998, Stevens and others 2007, Fels-Klerx and others 2011). While existing quantitative studies have attempted to investigate and quantify antimicrobial use and the associations with particular practices (Dunlop and others 1998, Stevens and others 2007, Gibbons and others 2013), there has been little research investigating prescribing behaviours in the UK pig industry.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Understanding antimicrobial use and prescribing behaviours by pig veterinary surgeons and farmers: a qualitative study

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Increasing awareness of bacterial antimicrobial resistance in human beings and veterinary medicine has raised concerns over the issue of overprescribing and the indiscriminate use of antimicrobials. Their use in food-producing animals is under scrutiny due to the perceived risk from the zoonotic transfer of resistant pathogens from animals to human beings. This study used focus groups to explore the drivers and motivators behind antimicrobial use and prescribing by veterinary surgeons and farmers in the pig industry in the UK. Studies of two veterinary and four farmer focus groups were undertaken, each with between three and six participants, in three geographically distinct regions of low, moderate and high pig density in England. Thematic analysis of the focus group transcriptions revealed convergent themes, both within and across, the veterinary and farmer focus groups. Veterinary opinion was such that 'external pressures', such as pressure from clients, legislation and public perception, were considered to strongly influence prescribing behaviour, whereas, farmers considered issues surrounding farming systems and management to be greater drivers towards antimicrobial use. Acquiring such in-depth insight into the antimicrobial prescribing behaviours in veterinary medicine provides more detailed understanding of prescribing practice and will aid the development of interventions to promote the responsible use of antimicrobials.

show abstract

“…▪ Farmers may see AM use as a tool that can be used to produce more and cheaper food (Stevens and others 2007) or to enhance performance parameters (Moreno 2014). …”

Section: The Problemmentioning

confidence: 99%

Achieving responsible antimicrobial use: communicating with farmers

Reyher¹,

Barrett

Tisdall

2017

In Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

General rightsThis document is made available in accordance with publisher policies. Please cite only the published version using the reference above. Full terms of use are available: http://www.bristol.ac.uk/pure/about/ebr-terms Achieving responsible medicines use -communicating with farmers Kristen K. Reyher, David C. Barrett, David A. Tisdall All human behaviour is complex, and when complicated scenarios of animal health and welfare, responsible use of antimicrobials (AMs) and the immediate and long-term effects of such use on antimicrobial resistance (AMR) are combined, the complexities multiply.

show abstract

Characteristics of commercial pig farms in Great Britain and their use of antimicrobials

Cited by 29 publications

References 3 publications

Higher perceived risks of antimicrobial use are related to lower usage among pig farmers in four European countries

Higher perceived risks of antimicrobial use are related to lower usage among pig farmers in four European countries

Understanding antimicrobial use and prescribing behaviours by pig veterinary surgeons and farmers: a qualitative study

Achieving responsible antimicrobial use: communicating with farmers

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About