Use of antimicrobials in beef cattle: an observational study in the north of Italy

Diana, Alessia; Santinello, Matteo; Penasa, M.; Scali, Federico; Magni, Edoardo; Alborali, Giovanni Loris; Bertocchi, L.; Marchi, Massimo De

doi:10.1016/j.prevetmed.2020.105032

Cited by 23 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 38 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Scientific Reports | (2020) 10:20939 | https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-77838-w www.nature.com/scientificreports/ total welfare, biosecurity and emergency management reported among farms may contribute to justify the different AMU observed between and within Italian beef farms as described in our previous work 27,47 . Specifically, a significant reduction of frequency of treatment was observed with improved level of welfare making it a potential source of variation of AMU in beef cattle, while no significant results were detected for biosecurity and emergency management.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 81%

“…All animals were first purchased from different beef breeding herds by French cattle cooperatives or private companies, and later sold to Italian beef producers. Data collected, initial editing procedure and calculation were performed as described by Diana et al 47 . The dataset accounted for 1487 batches from 35 beef fattening farms and a total of 87 902 animals, with information on farm, sex, breed, body weight, date of beginning and end of the fattening cycle, number of animals and number of casualties.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Effect of welfare standards and biosecurity practices on antimicrobial use in beef cattle

Diana

Lorenzi

Penasa

et al. 2020

Sci Rep

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Antimicrobial use (AMU) in livestock species and the associated antimicrobial resistance are a global concern, thus strategies for their reduction and a more judicious use are needed. Previous research has revealed a link between improved animal welfare, biosecurity and AMU reduction in pig and dairy sectors, however, little is known about the beef sector. This study aimed to investigate the impact of welfare standards and biosecurity on AMU in beef cattle. Data on performance traits and AMU were collected over a 3.5 year time from 27 specialised beef farms and a treatment incidence was calculated using the defined daily dose for animals. An on-farm assessment was carried out by assigning a score from 0 (very poor) to 100% (very good) to 3 sections: welfare, biosecurity and emergency management. The highest average score was obtained for the welfare section (76%) followed by emergency management (39%) and biosecurity (24%). This suggests that major focus on strategies for the implementation of biosecurity measures and emergency management is needed, due to the low scores reported. A statistically significant lower AMU was observed with improved level of welfare. These results may be helpful for farm benchmarking and highlight the importance of improved animal welfare for an efficient antimicrobial stewardship.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 81%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of welfare standards and biosecurity practices on antimicrobial use in beef cattle

Diana

Lorenzi

Penasa

et al. 2020

Sci Rep

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In this study, DDDvet were not available for 7% of the consumed antimicrobials; however, in other scenarios, this gap may be larger. For instance, in a recent study on Italian beef over 25% of the AMU measured using DDDAit came from antimicrobials for which a DDDvet was not available [38].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

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

“…For example, it is not clear that there is a single standard for the weight of an adult dairy cow with values of 425, 500 and 600 kg being used. 17,[28][29][30] In addition to differences between authors, there are also changes over time, including changes in antimicrobial classification with HPCIAs for some including macrolides 19,43 while another recent classification has relabelled F I G U R E 2 Breakdown of total weight of antimicrobials sold (mg a.i. per kg of bovine animal) by herd type, route of administration and antimicrobial class.…”

Section: Measures Of Antimicrobial Used (The Numerator)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Estimating antimicrobial usage based on sales to beef and dairy farms from UK veterinary practices

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Accurate estimation of antimicrobial use (AMU) is important in assessing reduction of agricultural AMU. This cross‐sectional study aimed to evaluate several approaches for estimating AMU at the herd level and to report on AMU for beef and dairy farms in Scotland. Methods: Pharmaceutical sales data for 75 cattle herds (2011‐2015) were screened for antimicrobial products and aggregated by herd and year. Several denominators for usage estimates were calculated and compared for their suitability at the herd level. Results: The median total mass of active ingredient sold per kg of bovine livestock was 9.5 mg/kg for beef herds and 14.3 mg/kg for dairy herds. The ‘highest priority critically important’ antimicrobials (HPCIA) were by total mass of active ingredient, 10.6% of all sales; by total defined daily dose veterinary (DDDVet), 29.8% and by DCDvet, 20.0%. These are the first estimates of AMU for beef cattle in the UK, and for cattle of any kind in Scotland. Estimates of herd‐level usage based on population correction unit (PCU) were sensitive to low values for PCU for specific herd‐years due to their demographic composition. Conclusion: Pharmaceutical sales data can provide useful estimates of AMU, but estimating usage per PCU is not appropriate for comparing groups of cattle with different demographic compositions or for setting herd‐level targets. Total mass of active ingredient per kilogram of livestock is more stable and hence suitable than PCU‐based methods for assessing AMU at the herd level.

show abstract

Use of antimicrobials in beef cattle: an observational study in the north of Italy

Cited by 23 publications

References 38 publications

Effect of welfare standards and biosecurity practices on antimicrobial use in beef cattle

Effect of welfare standards and biosecurity practices on antimicrobial use in beef cattle

The Use of Antimicrobials in Italian Heavy Pig Fattening Farms

Estimating antimicrobial usage based on sales to beef and dairy farms from UK veterinary practices

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About