Intramammary antimicrobial sales in Ireland: a 2020 descriptive update

McAloon, Catherine I.; McCoy, Finola; More, Simon J.

doi:10.1186/s13620-022-00213-w

Cited by 1 publication

(3 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We need an accurate understanding of these practices if we are to successfully shape change into the future. Fourthly, the work is part of a broader series of studies investigating constraints to and opportunities for improved mastitis control and intramammary AM usage in the Irish dairy industry [ 10 – 14 , 21 – 26 ]. Schedule 8 prescribing has been an important influencer of both of these issues, and cannot be ignored in this broader discussion.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…AMs were classified with regard to their risk to public health using the classification system outlined by the European Medicines Agency (EMA) [ 20 ]. We used national sales from McAloon et al [ 13 , 14 ] when calculating the percentage of national intramammary AM tubes that were sold by milk purchasers during 2019 and 2020. SCC exceedance was considered to occur when the monthly herd SCC value was 400,000 cells/mL or greater.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Insights are available on milk quality in the national herd [ 10 , 11 ], noting the close linkage between mastitis control and AM usage. In the absence of a national prescribing database, trends in AM usage have relied on national AM sales data, including an understanding of trends in sales during 2003 to the present [ 10 , 12 – 14 ]. As yet, limited published information is available on the role of milk purchasers, either in Schedule 8 prescribing or on AM sales.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Prescribing and sales of intramammary antimicrobials in Ireland in 2019 and 2020: the role of milk purchasers

Madden

McAloon

2022

Ir Vet J

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background In Ireland between 2008 and 2022, intramammary antimicrobial (AM) products could be prescribed by a veterinary practitioner under what was known as Schedule 8 (or remote) prescribing. Under this prescribing route, an annual herd visit was not required when criteria were met as outlined in Animal Remedies Regulation 2007 to 2017 (statutory instruments No. 786/2007 and 558/2017). Under this prescribing route, the responsibilities of the milk purchaser, the farmer and the veterinary practitioner were each outlined, and a written mastitis control programme (MCP) was required. Milk purchasers implemented MCPs on participating farms (so-called MCP herds) with support from veterinary practitioner(s) who undertook Schedule 8 prescribing of intramammary AM tubes. This study seeks a clearer understanding of the role of milk purchasers in the prescribing and sale of intramammary AM products in Ireland during 2019 and 2020, whilst this Regulation was in force. Specifically, the study sought insights into the role of milk purchasers in the prescribing and sale of intramammary AM products in the Irish dairy industry during 2019 and 2020, using anonymised and highly aggregated milk purchaser data. The study also provided insights into milk quality among supplying herds during this period. Methods For this study, we had access to anonymised, highly aggregated data from all milk purchasers that operated a MCP on at least some of their supplying herds during 2019 or 2020. Data collection was undertaken by the Department of Agriculture, Food and Marine. Data analysis was primarily descriptive. Results Data were available on 11 milk purchasers (64.7% of all) and 13,251 supplying herds. Of these, 52% were MCP herds. The quality of milk from supplying herds varied significantly by month, year and milk purchaser. During 2019 and 2020, there was a single Schedule 8 prescriber (a private veterinary practitioner prescribing intramammary AMs as part of a MCP), on average, for 549.3 herds. The sale of intramammary AM products through milk purchasers represented 15.2% and 26.9% of national sales in in-lactation and dry cow tubes, respectively. There was an overall 2% increase in sales through milk purchasers between 2019 and 2020. Few European Medicines Agency (EMA) category B (‘Restrict’) intramammary AM products were sold by milk purchasers. For both in-lactation and dry cow tubes, there was a statistically significant association between EMA classification and route of sale (through milk purchasers or otherwise). Conclusions The study findings provide important insights into mastitis control and intramammary AM stewardship in the Irish dairy industry. Significant differences between milk purchasers were observed in the quality of milk, as measured through somatic cell count (SCC) values, from supplying herds. This warrants further research. In the context of intramammary AM prescribing, veterinary oversight under the Animal Remedies Regulation 2007 to 2017 was very limited during 2019 and 2020. There were also significant associations between EMA classification and route of sale during 2019 and 2020, reinforcing the need for Irish veterinary practitioners to move away from EMA category B intramammary AMs. Higher quality data are needed to address important industry questions. Specifically it is recommended that national bulk tank SCC data are made available for public good research. Past experiences with Schedule 8 prescribing (no longer permitted from 28 January 2022) may influence current efforts towards improved intramammary AM stewardship.

show abstract