Monitoring of Farm-Level Antimicrobial Use to Guide Stewardship: Overview of Existing Systems and Analysis of Key Components and Processes

Sanders, Pim; Vanderhaeghen, Wannes; Fertner, Mette Ely; Fuchs, Klemens; Obritzhauser, W.; Agunos, Agnes; Carson, Carolee A.; Høg, Birgitte Borck; Andersen, V.; Chauvin, Claire; Hémonic, A.; Käsbohrer, Annemarie; Merle, Roswitha; Alborali, Giovanni Loris; Scali, Federico; Stärk, Katharina D.C.; Muentener, Cedric; Geijlswijk, Ingeborg M. van; Broadfoot, Fraser; Pokludová, Lucie; Firth, Clair L.; Carmo, Luís Pedro; Manzanilla, Edgar García; Jensen, Laura M.; Sjölund, Marie; Ferreira, Jorge Pinto; Brown, Stacey; Heederik, Dick; Dewulf, Jeroen

doi:10.3389/fvets.2020.00540

Cited by 88 publications

(118 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

118

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…), a five-fold difference still underlines how high the AMU was in the investigated farms. AMU is typically higher in younger age groups of animals [ 23 ], which suggests that in the early stages of Italian pig production, such as weaning, the AMU is likely even higher. The AMU may be further underestimated due to the 100 kg standard weight.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although different metrics may be used to estimate the AMU at the farm level, international agreement regarding a unique indicator for AMU in animals has still not been obtained [ 22 ]. Among the available metrics, the ones based on the concept of “defined daily dose” (DDD) are used in countries such Belgium, Denmark, and the Netherlands in their respective nation-wide monitoring systems [ 23 ]. The European Surveillance of Veterinary Antimicrobial Consumption (ESVAC) project of the European Medicines Agency (EMA) developed standardized units of measurements, namely, defined daily doses for animals (DDDvet)—for cattle, pigs, and poultry [ 24 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Use of Antimicrobials in Italian Heavy Pig Fattening Farms

et al. 2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Data on antimicrobial use (AMU) in heavy pig production (>150 kg) are limited. The aim of this study was to investigate the AMU in this production. Data from 2015 were collected for 143 fattening farms. The AMU was estimated through a treatment index per 100 days (TI100) using the defined daily dose animal for Italy (DDDAit). When possible, a comparison with the European Medicines Agency’s defined daily doses for animals (DDDvet) was performed. The median TI100 was 10.7 (range, 0.2–49.5). Group treatments represented 94.6% of overall consumption. The AMU calculated using DDDAit and DDDvet were strongly correlated (ρ = 0.976; p < 0.001). The AMU was negatively correlated with injectables use (ρ = −0.46, p < 0.001) and positively correlated with oral products (ρ = 0.21, p = 0.014), premixes (ρ = 0.26, p = 0.002), and mortality (ρ = 0.18; p = 0.027). Farm size was negatively correlated with AMU (ρ = −0.29, p < 0.001). Smaller farms were more frequently above the median TI100 (odds ratio = 2.3, 95% confidence interval = 1.2–4.7), suggesting that they may have lower biosecurity and management standards. The results of this study should provide useful insights for the development of an Italian monitoring system.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Use of Antimicrobials in Italian Heavy Pig Fattening Farms

et al. 2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Antimicrobial usage data was collected using a count-based approach, representing the use (yes/no) of an antimicrobial during the current production cycle (38). In addition, data on trade names of antimicrobials with active ingredients derived from trade name labels, purpose of antimicrobial application, frequency, dosage, duration, and route of administration of antimicrobials, adherence to withholding periods, sources from where antimicrobials were obtained, and sources of advice on antimicrobial administration and on sales of antimicrobials by chicken farmers were collected.…”

Section: Questionnaire and Interviewsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Cross-Sectional Study of Antimicrobial Usage on Commercial Broiler and Layer Chicken Farms in Bangladesh

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Commercial poultry production is growing rapidly in Bangladesh to address the increasing demand for poultry meat and eggs. Challenges faced by producers include the occurrence of poultry diseases, which are usually treated or controlled by antimicrobials. A cross-sectional study was conducted on 57 commercial layer and 83 broiler farms in eight subdistricts of the Chattogram district, Bangladesh, to assess antimicrobial usage in relation to clinical signs observed in chicken flocks on these farms. Of the 140 commercial chicken farms, 137 (97.9%) used antimicrobials and 24 different antimicrobial agents were administered. On layer farms, the most commonly used antimicrobials were ciprofloxacin (37.0% of farms, 20/54), amoxicillin (33.3%, 18/54), and tiamulin (31.5%, 17/54), while on broiler farms, colistin (56.6%, 47/83), doxycycline (50.6%, 42/83), and neomycin (38.6%, 32/83) were most commonly administered. Only 15.3% (21/137) of farmers used antimicrobials exclusively for therapeutic purposes, while 84.7% (116/137) of farmers used them prophylactically, administering them either for prophylactic purposes only (22.6% of farmers, 31/137) or in combination with therapeutic purposes (62.1% of farmers, 85/137). About 83.3% (45/54) of layer farmers were selling eggs while antimicrobials were being administered compared to 36.1% (30/83) of the broiler farmers selling broiler chickens while administering antimicrobials. Overall, 75.2% (103/137) of farmers reported clinical signs for which they administered antimicrobials, while 24.8% (34/137) of farmers reported no clinical signs but still administered antimicrobials. Respiratory signs (71.8% of farms with clinical signs, 74/103) were most commonly reported, followed by enteric signs (32.0%, 33/103) and increased mortality (16.5%, 17/103). About 37.2% (51/137) of farmers bought antimicrobials exclusively from feed and chick traders, followed by veterinary medical stores (35.0%, 48/137). Purchasing antimicrobials from feed and chick traders was more common among broiler than layer farmers. It is recommended that commercial poultry farmers should keep records of antimicrobials used with dosage and duration of administration along with indication of use. This would allow farmers and veterinarians to review if antimicrobial usage had the desired effects and to evaluate the appropriate use of antimicrobial agents under an antimicrobial stewardship approach.

show abstract

“…Surveillance and monitoring systems on AMR and AMU in animals, a relevant pillar of NAPs, are highly important means to (a) document the situation; (b) identify trends; (c) set up the basis for risk assessment and interventions; (d) assess effects of efforts carried out; (e) associate AMU and AMR; (f) focus and target the research [ 6 ]; and (g) advise on veterinary treatments and antimicrobial stewardship [ 7 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of Phenotypical Antimicrobial Resistance between Clinical and Non-Clinical E. coli Isolates from Broilers, Turkeys and Calves in Four European Countries

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Livestock data on antimicrobial resistance (AMR) are commonly collected from bacterial populations of clinical and non-clinical isolates. In contrast to data on non-clinical isolates from livestock, data on clinical isolates are not harmonized in Europe. The Normalized Resistance Interpretation (NRI) method was applied to overcome the lack of harmonization of laboratory methods and interpretation rules between monitoring systems. Statistical analyses were performed to identify associations between the isolate type (clinical vs. non-clinical) and resistance to four antimicrobials (ampicillin, tetracycline, gentamicin, and nalidixic acid) per animal category in Germany and France. Additional statistical analyses comparing clinical and non-clinical isolates were performed with the available data on the same antimicrobial panel and animal categories from the UK and Norway. Higher resistance prevalence was found in clinical isolates compared to non-clinical isolates from calves to all antimicrobials included in Germany and France. It was also found for gentamicin in broilers from France. In contrast, in broilers and turkeys from Germany and France and in broilers from the UK, a higher resistance level to ampicillin and tetracycline in non-clinical isolates was encountered. This was also found in resistance to gentamicin in isolates from turkeys in Germany. Resistance differed within countries and across years, which was partially in line with differences in antimicrobial use patterns. Differences in AMR between clinical and non-clinical isolates of Escherichia coli are associated with animal category (broiler, calf, and turkey) and specific antimicrobials. The NRI method allowed comparing results of non-harmonized AMR systems and might be useful until international harmonization is achieved.

show abstract

Monitoring of Farm-Level Antimicrobial Use to Guide Stewardship: Overview of Existing Systems and Analysis of Key Components and Processes

Cited by 88 publications

References 31 publications

The Use of Antimicrobials in Italian Heavy Pig Fattening Farms

The Use of Antimicrobials in Italian Heavy Pig Fattening Farms

A Cross-Sectional Study of Antimicrobial Usage on Commercial Broiler and Layer Chicken Farms in Bangladesh

Comparison of Phenotypical Antimicrobial Resistance between Clinical and Non-Clinical E. coli Isolates from Broilers, Turkeys and Calves in Four European Countries

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About