1
|
de Jong E, McCubbin KD, Uyama T, Brummelhuis C, Bodaneze J, Kelton DF, Dufour S, Sanchez J, Roy JP, Heider LC, Rizzo D, Léger D, Barkema HW. Adoption and decision factors regarding selective treatment of clinical mastitis on Canadian dairy farms. J Dairy Sci 2024; 107:476-488. [PMID: 37709015 DOI: 10.3168/jds.2023-23608] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/12/2023] [Accepted: 08/08/2023] [Indexed: 09/16/2023]
Abstract
As clinical mastitis (CM) treatments are responsible for a large portion of antimicrobial use on dairy farms, many selective CM treatment protocols have been developed and evaluated against a blanket treatment approach of CM cases. Selective treatment protocols use outcomes of diagnostic tests to exclude CM cases from antimicrobial treatment when they are unlikely to benefit. To tailor interventions to increase uptake of selective treatment strategies, a comprehension of current on-farm treatment practices and factors affecting treatment decisions is vital. Two questionnaires were conducted among 142 farms across 5 provinces participating in the Canadian Dairy Network for Antimicrobial Stewardship and Resistance in this cross-sectional study. Self-reported adoption of selective CM treatments by dairy farmers was 64%, with median of 82% of cows treated in those herds using selective treatment. Using logistic regression models, the odds to implement a selective CM treatment protocol increased with a decreasing average cow somatic cell count. No other associations were identified between use of a selective CM treatment protocol and farm characteristics (herd size, CM incidence, province, milking system, and housing system). Three subsets of farmers making cow-level CM treatment decisions were identified using a cluster analysis approach: those who based decisions almost exclusively on severity of clinical signs, those who used various udder health indicators, and farmers who also incorporated more general cow information such as production, age, and genetics. When somatic cell count was considered, the median threshold used for treating was >300,000 cells/mL at the last Dairy Herd Improvement test. Various thresholds were present among those considering CM case history. Veterinary laboratories were most frequently used for bacteriological testing. Test results were used to start, change, and stop treatments. Regardless of protocol, reasons for antimicrobial treatment withheld included cow being on a cull list, having a chronic intramammary infection, or being at end of lactation (i.e., close to dry off). If clinical signs persisted after treatment, farmers indicated that they would ask veterinarians for advice, stop treatment, or continue with the same or different antibiotics. Results of this study can be used to design interventions targeting judicious mastitis-related antimicrobial use, and aid discussions between veterinarians and dairy producers regarding CM-related antimicrobial use.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ellen de Jong
- Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada, T2N 4N1; One Health at UCalgary, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada, T2N 4N1
| | - Kayley D McCubbin
- Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada, T2N 4N1; One Health at UCalgary, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada, T2N 4N1
| | - Tamaki Uyama
- Department of Population Medicine, Ontario Veterinary College, University of Guelph, Guelph, ON, Canada, N1G 2W1
| | - Carmen Brummelhuis
- Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Utrecht University, 3584CS Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Julia Bodaneze
- Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada, T2N 4N1; One Health at UCalgary, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada, T2N 4N1
| | - David F Kelton
- Department of Population Medicine, Ontario Veterinary College, University of Guelph, Guelph, ON, Canada, N1G 2W1
| | - Simon Dufour
- Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Université de Montréal, Saint-Hyacinthe, Canada, J2S 2M2
| | - Javier Sanchez
- Department of Health Management, Atlantic Veterinary College, University of Prince Edward Island, Charlottetown, PEI, Canada, C1A 4P3
| | - Jean-Philippe Roy
- Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Université de Montréal, Saint-Hyacinthe, Canada, J2S 2M2
| | - Luke C Heider
- Department of Health Management, Atlantic Veterinary College, University of Prince Edward Island, Charlottetown, PEI, Canada, C1A 4P3
| | - Daniella Rizzo
- Public Health Agency of Canada, Centre for Foodborne, Environmental and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases, Guelph, ON, Canada, N1H 8J1
| | - David Léger
- Public Health Agency of Canada, Centre for Foodborne, Environmental and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases, Guelph, ON, Canada, N1H 8J1
| | - Herman W Barkema
- Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada, T2N 4N1; One Health at UCalgary, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada, T2N 4N1.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
McCubbin KD, de Jong E, Brummelhuis CM, Bodaneze J, Biesheuvel M, Kelton DF, Uyama T, Dufour S, Sanchez J, Rizzo D, Léger D, Barkema HW. Antimicrobial and teat sealant use and selection criteria at dry-off on Canadian dairy farms. J Dairy Sci 2023; 106:7104-7116. [PMID: 37500435 DOI: 10.3168/jds.2022-23083] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/27/2022] [Accepted: 03/31/2023] [Indexed: 07/29/2023]
Abstract
Infections with antimicrobial resistant pathogens are a major threat to human and animal health worldwide. Further, reduction of livestock-associated antimicrobial use (AMU) is often identified as an area of focus. Selective dry cow therapy (DCT) warrants consideration as an important way to decrease AMU on Canadian dairy farms. In addition, teat sealants (TS) are a nonantimicrobial alternative for prevention of intramammary infection during the dry period. Therefore, objectives of this study were to determine how antimicrobials and TS are used at dry-off on Canadian dairy farms to determine selective DCT uptake and enacted selection protocols. It was expected that these data will provide a baseline understanding of DCT practices and highlight areas for future intervention to further reduce AMU. An observational study was conducted utilizing 2 in-person questionnaires conducted between July 2019 and September 2021 on 144 participating dairy farms in 5 Canadian provinces (British Columbia = 30, Alberta = 30, Ontario = 31, Québec = 29, and Nova Scotia = 24). Overall, 45 farms (31%) reported adopting selective DCT, 95 (66%) enacted blanket DCT, and 4 (3%) did not provide antimicrobial DCT. Farms enacting selective DCT had approximately 50% less intramammary antimicrobials used at dry-off compared with blanket DCT farms. Cow somatic cell count history was the most common criterion for selective DCT decision-making, followed by previous clinical mastitis history, bacteriological culture, and milk production. A slight majority of farms (56%) applied TS to all cows at dry-off, whereas 17 farms (12%) used TS selectively, and 46 farms (32%) did not use TS. Larger herds more often used TS, and farms with an automatic milking system more often used TS selectively than applied to all cows. Results highlighted the variability in antimicrobial treatment and TS use protocols at dry-off on Canadian dairy farms, and the potential for further antimicrobial reduction with increased adoption of selective DCT.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kayley D McCubbin
- Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada T2N 4N1; One Health at UCalgary, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada T2N 4N1.
| | - Ellen de Jong
- Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada T2N 4N1
| | - Carmen M Brummelhuis
- Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Utrecht University, 3584CS Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Julia Bodaneze
- Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada T2N 4N1
| | - Marit Biesheuvel
- Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada T2N 4N1
| | - David F Kelton
- Department of Population Medicine, Ontario Veterinary College, University of Guelph, Guelph, ON, Canada N1G 2W1
| | - Tamaki Uyama
- Department of Population Medicine, Ontario Veterinary College, University of Guelph, Guelph, ON, Canada N1G 2W1
| | - Simon Dufour
- Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Université de Montréal, Saint-Hyacinthe, QC, Canada J2S 2M2
| | - Javier Sanchez
- Department of Health Management, Atlantic Veterinary College, University of Prince Edward Island, Charlottetown, PE, Canada C1A 4P3
| | - Daniella Rizzo
- Public Health Agency of Canada, Centre for Foodborne, Environmental and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases, Guelph, ON, Canada N1H 8J1
| | - David Léger
- Public Health Agency of Canada, Centre for Foodborne, Environmental and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases, Guelph, ON, Canada N1H 8J1
| | - Herman W Barkema
- Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada T2N 4N1; One Health at UCalgary, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada T2N 4N1
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
McCubbin KD, de Jong E, Smid AMC, Ida JA, Bodaneze J, Anholt RM, Larose S, Otto SJG, Barkema HW. Perceptions of antimicrobial stewardship: identifying drivers and barriers across various professions in Canada utilizing a one health approach. Front Public Health 2023; 11:1222149. [PMID: 37637830 PMCID: PMC10456999 DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2023.1222149] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/13/2023] [Accepted: 07/19/2023] [Indexed: 08/29/2023] Open
Abstract
Introduction As antimicrobial resistance (AMR) represents a substantial threat to the efficacy of available antimicrobial options, it is important to understand how to implement effective and practical mitigation efforts, including antimicrobial stewardship (AMS), across human, animal, and environmental sectors. Methods A mixed-methods questionnaire was distributed virtually to attendees of the virtual One Health Antimicrobial Stewardship Conference (March 10-12, 2021) and their professional networks. Respondents (n = 81) were largely from the veterinary (75%) or human (19%) health sectors. Qualitative data were analyzed in NVivo using template analysis whereas quantitative data were analyzed in STATA using Kruskall-Wallis tests. The questionnaire asked respondents about their perceptions of AMS, as well as the perceived barriers and drivers of AMS efforts. Results Perceptions of what AMS meant to the respondents personally and their profession as a whole were grouped into 3 main themes: 1) AMS strategies or considerations in antimicrobial prescribing and use; 2) responsibility to maintain health and preserve antimicrobial effectiveness; and 3) reducing antimicrobial use (AMU) as a goal of AMS efforts. Identified AMS barriers had 3 main themes: 1) lack of various prescribing and AMU support mechanisms; 2) shift in prescriber attitudes to drive change; and 3) stronger economic considerations to support shifting prescribing practices. Drivers of AMS had the following themes: 1) leadership to guide change; 2) education to support optimizing AMU; and 3) research to identify best practices and opportunities for action. Across all questions, 2 cross-cutting themes emerged: 1) a One Health understanding of AMS; and 2) blame placed on others for a lack of AMS success. Conclusion Overall, sector-specific, but particularly cross-sectoral AMS drivers and barriers were identified, highlighting the importance of a One Health approach in AMR research and mitigation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kayley D. McCubbin
- Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
- One Health at UCalgary, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
| | - Ellen de Jong
- Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
- One Health at UCalgary, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
| | | | - Jennifer A. Ida
- College of Veterinary Medicine, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, United States
| | - Julia Bodaneze
- Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
- One Health at UCalgary, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
| | | | - Samantha Larose
- One Health at UCalgary, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
| | - Simon J. G. Otto
- HEAT-AMR Research Group, School of Public Health, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada
- School of Public Health, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada
| | - Herman W. Barkema
- Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
- One Health at UCalgary, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Warder LMC, Heider LC, Léger DF, Rizzo D, McClure JT, de Jong E, McCubbin KD, Uyama T, Fonseca M, Jaramillo AS, Kelton DF, Renaud D, Barkema HW, Dufour S, Roy JP, Sánchez J. Quantifying antimicrobial use on Canadian dairy farms using garbage can audits. Front Vet Sci 2023; 10:1185628. [PMID: 37456957 PMCID: PMC10347401 DOI: 10.3389/fvets.2023.1185628] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/13/2023] [Accepted: 06/16/2023] [Indexed: 07/18/2023] Open
Abstract
Antimicrobial resistance in pathogenic bacteria is one of the preeminent concerns for the future of global health. There is a dose-dependent relationship between antimicrobial use (AMU) and the prevalence of antimicrobial-resistant pathogens. As most AMU in Canada is related to animal agriculture, there is a need to reduce overall AMU, which could be accomplished through surveillance of AMU in animal agriculture, including the dairy industry. The objective of this study was to quantify AMU on dairy farms across Canada. This study had two parts: a description of data collected in 2019-2020, and a meta-analysis comparing this data to previous estimates of AMU in the Canadian dairy industry. The first included a garbage can audit (GCA) on 107 farms in four Canadian provinces (British Columbia, Alberta, Ontario, and Nova Scotia) in 2020; AMU data were converted to the dose-based metrics of defined course doses (DCD) and defined daily doses (DDD). Mixed-effect linear models were fit to determine the relationship between province and use of different classes of antimicrobials. On average, for every 100 animals on the farm, 117 DCD of antimicrobials were administered per year (IQR: 55, 158). These treatments amounted to 623 DDD / 100 animal-yr (IQR: 302, 677 DDD/100 animal-years). Penicillins were the most used class of antimicrobials, followed by first-and third-generation cephalosporins. Farms in Ontario used more third-generation cephalosporins than other provinces. The second part of this study compared AMU in 2020 to previously reported Canadian studies through a meta-analysis. A GCA was conducted in 2007-2008 in Alberta, Ontario, Québec, and the Maritime provinces (Prince Edward Island, New Brunswick and Nova Scotia); another GCA was conducted in Québec in 2018. Overall, AMU was lower in 2018-2020 than in 2007-2008, with the exception of third-generation cephalosporin use, which increased.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Landon M. C. Warder
- Department of Health Management, Atlantic Veterinary College, University of Prince Edward Island, Charlottetown, PE, Canada
| | - Luke C. Heider
- Department of Health Management, Atlantic Veterinary College, University of Prince Edward Island, Charlottetown, PE, Canada
| | | | | | - J. T. McClure
- Department of Health Management, Atlantic Veterinary College, University of Prince Edward Island, Charlottetown, PE, Canada
| | - Ellen de Jong
- Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
| | - Kayley D. McCubbin
- Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
| | - Tamaki Uyama
- Department of Population Medicine, Ontario Veterinary College, University of Guelph, Guelph, ON, Canada
| | - Mariana Fonseca
- Department of Health Management, Atlantic Veterinary College, University of Prince Edward Island, Charlottetown, PE, Canada
| | - Ana Soffia Jaramillo
- Department of Health Management, Atlantic Veterinary College, University of Prince Edward Island, Charlottetown, PE, Canada
| | - David F. Kelton
- Department of Population Medicine, Ontario Veterinary College, University of Guelph, Guelph, ON, Canada
| | - David Renaud
- Department of Population Medicine, Ontario Veterinary College, University of Guelph, Guelph, ON, Canada
| | - Herman W. Barkema
- Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
| | - Simon Dufour
- Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Université de Montréal, Montréal, QC, Canada
| | - Jean-Philip Roy
- Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Université de Montréal, Montréal, QC, Canada
| | - Javier Sánchez
- Department of Health Management, Atlantic Veterinary College, University of Prince Edward Island, Charlottetown, PE, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
de Jong E, McCubbin KD, Speksnijder D, Dufour S, Middleton JR, Ruegg PL, Lam TJGM, Kelton DF, McDougall S, Godden SM, Lago A, Rajala-Schultz PJ, Orsel K, De Vliegher S, Krömker V, Nobrega DB, Kastelic JP, Barkema HW. Invited review: Selective treatment of clinical mastitis in dairy cattle. J Dairy Sci 2023; 106:3761-3778. [PMID: 37080782 DOI: 10.3168/jds.2022-22826] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/26/2022] [Accepted: 01/01/2023] [Indexed: 04/22/2023]
Abstract
Treatment of clinical mastitis (CM) and use of antimicrobials for dry cow therapy are responsible for the majority of animal-defined daily doses of antimicrobial use (AMU) on dairy farms. However, advancements made in the last decade have enabled excluding nonsevere CM cases from antimicrobial treatment that have a high probability of cure without antimicrobials (no bacterial causes or gram-negative, excluding Klebsiella spp.) and cases with a low bacteriological cure rate (chronic cases). These advancements include availability of rapid diagnostic tests and improved udder health management practices, which reduced the incidence and infection pressure of contagious CM pathogens. This review informed an evidence-based protocol for selective CM treatment decisions based on a combination of rapid diagnostic test results, review of somatic cell count and CM records, and elucidated consequences in terms of udder health, AMU, and farm economics. Relatively fast identification of the causative agent is the most important factor in selective CM treatment protocols. Many reported studies did not indicate detrimental udder health consequences (e.g., reduced clinical or bacteriological cures, increased somatic cell count, increased culling rate, or increased recurrence of CM later in lactation) after initiating selective CM treatment protocols using on-farm testing. The magnitude of AMU reduction following a selective CM treatment protocol implementation depended on the causal pathogen distribution and protocol characteristics. Uptake of selective treatment of nonsevere CM cases differs across regions and is dependent on management systems and adoption of udder health programs. No economic losses or animal welfare issues are expected when adopting a selective versus blanket CM treatment protocol. Therefore, selective CM treatment of nonsevere cases can be a practical tool to aid AMU reduction on dairy farms.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ellen de Jong
- Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada T2N 4N1; One Health at UCalgary, University of Calgary, AB, Canada T2N 4N1; Mastitis Network, Saint-Hyacinthe, QC, Canada J25 2M2
| | - Kayley D McCubbin
- Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada T2N 4N1; One Health at UCalgary, University of Calgary, AB, Canada T2N 4N1; Mastitis Network, Saint-Hyacinthe, QC, Canada J25 2M2
| | - David Speksnijder
- Department of Infectious Diseases and Immunology, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Utrecht University, 3584 CL Utrecht, the Netherlands; University Animal Health Clinic ULP, 3481 LZ Harmelen, the Netherlands
| | - Simon Dufour
- Mastitis Network, Saint-Hyacinthe, QC, Canada J25 2M2; Department of Pathology and Microbiology, Faculté de Médecine Vétérinaire, Université de Montréal, Saint-Hyacinthe, QC, Canada J2S 2M2
| | - John R Middleton
- Department of Veterinary Medicine and Surgery, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Missouri, Columbia 65211
| | - Pamela L Ruegg
- Department of Large Animal Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, Michigan State University, East Lansing 48824
| | - Theo J G M Lam
- Department Population Health Sciences, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Utrecht University, 3584 CL Utrecht, the Netherlands; GD Animal Health, 7400 AA Deventer, the Netherlands
| | - David F Kelton
- Mastitis Network, Saint-Hyacinthe, QC, Canada J25 2M2; Department of Population Medicine, Ontario Veterinary College, University of Guelph, Guelph, ON, Canada N1G 2W1
| | - Scott McDougall
- Cognosco, Anexa, Morrinsville 3340, New Zealand; School of Veterinary Science, Massey University, Palmerston North 4442, New Zealand
| | - Sandra M Godden
- Department of Veterinary Population Medicine, University of Minnesota, St. Paul 55108
| | | | - Päivi J Rajala-Schultz
- Department of Production Animal Medicine, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, 00014 University of Helsinki, Finland
| | - Karin Orsel
- Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada T2N 4N1
| | - Sarne De Vliegher
- M-team and Mastitis and Milk Quality Research Unit, Department of Internal Medicine, Reproduction and Population Health, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Ghent University, 9820 Merelbeke, Belgium
| | - Volker Krömker
- Section for Animal Production, Nutrition and Health, Department of Veterinary and Animal Sciences, University of Copenhagen, 1870 Frederiksberg, Denmark
| | - Diego B Nobrega
- Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada T2N 4N1; One Health at UCalgary, University of Calgary, AB, Canada T2N 4N1
| | - John P Kastelic
- Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada T2N 4N1
| | - Herman W Barkema
- Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada T2N 4N1; One Health at UCalgary, University of Calgary, AB, Canada T2N 4N1; Mastitis Network, Saint-Hyacinthe, QC, Canada J25 2M2.
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
de Jong E, Creytens L, De Vliegher S, McCubbin KD, Baptiste M, Leung AA, Speksnijder D, Dufour S, Middleton JR, Ruegg PL, Lam TJGM, Kelton DF, McDougall S, Godden SM, Lago A, Rajala-Schultz PJ, Orsel K, Krömker V, Kastelic JP, Barkema HW. Selective treatment of nonsevere clinical mastitis does not adversely affect cure, somatic cell count, milk yield, recurrence, or culling: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Dairy Sci 2023; 106:1267-1286. [PMID: 36543640 DOI: 10.3168/jds.2022-22271] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/04/2022] [Accepted: 09/18/2022] [Indexed: 12/24/2022]
Abstract
Treatment of clinical mastitis (CM) contributes to antimicrobial use on dairy farms. Selective treatment of CM based on bacterial diagnosis can reduce antimicrobial use, as not all cases of CM will benefit from antimicrobial treatment, e.g., mild and moderate gram-negative infections. However, impacts of selective CM treatment on udder health and culling are not fully understood. A systematic search identified 13 studies that compared selective versus blanket CM treatment protocols. Reported outcomes were synthesized with random-effects models and presented as risk ratios or mean differences. Selective CM treatment protocol was not inferior to blanket CM treatment protocol for the outcome bacteriological cure. Noninferiority margins could not be established for the outcomes clinical cure, new intramammary infection, somatic cell count, milk yield, recurrence, or culling. However, no differences were detected between selective and blanket CM treatment protocols using traditional analyses, apart from a not clinically relevant increase in interval from treatment to clinical cure (0.4 d) in the selective group and higher proportion of clinical cure at 14 d in the selective group. The latter occurred in studies co-administering nonsteroidal anti-inflammatories only in the selective group. Bias could not be ruled out in most studies due to suboptimal randomization, although this would likely only affect subjective outcomes such as clinical cure. Hence, findings were supported by a high or moderate certainty of evidence for all outcome measures except clinical cure. In conclusion, this review supported the assertion that a selective CM treatment protocol can be adopted without adversely influencing bacteriological and clinical cure, somatic cell count, milk yield, and incidence of recurrence or culling.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ellen de Jong
- Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, T2N 4N1 Canada; Mastitis Network, St-Hyacinthe, Quebec, J25 2M2 Canada
| | - Lien Creytens
- M-team and Mastitis and Milk Quality Research Unit, Department of Internal Medicine, Reproduction and Population Medicine, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Ghent University, Merelbeke, 9820 Belgium
| | - Sarne De Vliegher
- M-team and Mastitis and Milk Quality Research Unit, Department of Internal Medicine, Reproduction and Population Medicine, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Ghent University, Merelbeke, 9820 Belgium
| | - Kayley D McCubbin
- Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, T2N 4N1 Canada; Mastitis Network, St-Hyacinthe, Quebec, J25 2M2 Canada
| | - Mya Baptiste
- Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, T2N 4N1 Canada
| | - Alexander A Leung
- Departments of Medicine and Community Health Science, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, T2N 4N1 Canada
| | - David Speksnijder
- Department of Infectious Diseases and Immunology, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Utrecht University, Utrecht, 3508 TD, the Netherlands; University Farm Animal Practice, Harmelen, 3481 LZ, the Netherlands
| | - Simon Dufour
- Mastitis Network, St-Hyacinthe, Quebec, J25 2M2 Canada; Department of Pathology and Microbiology, Faculté de Médecine Vétérinaire, Université de Montréal, Saint-Hyacinthe, Quebec, J2S 2M2 Canada
| | - John R Middleton
- Department of Veterinary Medicine and Surgery, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Missouri, Columbia 65211
| | - Pamela L Ruegg
- Department of Large Animal Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, Michigan State University, East Lansing 48824
| | - Theo J G M Lam
- Department Population Health Sciences, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Utrecht University, Utrecht, 3584 CL, the Netherlands; GD Animal Health, Deventer, 7400 AA, the Netherlands
| | - David F Kelton
- Mastitis Network, St-Hyacinthe, Quebec, J25 2M2 Canada; Department of Population Medicine, Ontario Veterinary College, University of Guelph, Guelph, ON N1G 2W1 Canada
| | - Scott McDougall
- Cognosco, Anexa, Morrinsville, 3340 New Zealand; School of Veterinary Science, Massey University, Palmerston North, 4442 New Zealand
| | - Sandra M Godden
- Department of Veterinary Population Medicine, University of Minnesota, St. Paul 55108
| | | | - Päivi J Rajala-Schultz
- Department of Production Animal Medicine, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Helsinki, 00014 Finland
| | - Karin Orsel
- Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, T2N 4N1 Canada
| | - Volker Krömker
- Section for Animal Production, Nutrition and Health, Department of Veterinary and Animal Sciences, University of Copenhagen, 1870 Frederiksberg, Denmark
| | - John P Kastelic
- Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, T2N 4N1 Canada
| | - Herman W Barkema
- Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, T2N 4N1 Canada; Mastitis Network, St-Hyacinthe, Quebec, J25 2M2 Canada; Departments of Medicine and Community Health Science, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, T2N 4N1 Canada.
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Narayana SG, de Jong E, Schenkel FS, Fonseca PA, Chud TC, Powel D, Wachoski-Dark G, Ronksley PE, Miglior F, Orsel K, Barkema HW. Underlying genetic architecture of resistance to mastitis in dairy cattle: A systematic review and gene prioritization analysis of genome-wide association studies. J Dairy Sci 2022; 106:323-351. [DOI: 10.3168/jds.2022-21923] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/04/2022] [Accepted: 08/01/2022] [Indexed: 11/05/2022]
|
8
|
McCubbin KD, de Jong E, Lam TJGM, Kelton DF, Middleton JR, McDougall S, De Vliegher S, Godden S, Rajala-Schultz PJ, Rowe S, Speksnijder DC, Kastelic JP, Barkema HW. Invited review: Selective use of antimicrobials in dairy cattle at drying-off. J Dairy Sci 2022; 105:7161-7189. [PMID: 35931474 DOI: 10.3168/jds.2021-21455] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/19/2021] [Accepted: 04/27/2022] [Indexed: 11/19/2022]
Abstract
Administering intramammary antimicrobials to all mammary quarters of dairy cows at drying-off [i.e., blanket dry cow therapy (BDCT)] has been a mainstay of mastitis prevention and control. However, as udder health has considerably improved over recent decades with reductions in intramammary infection prevalence at drying-off and the introduction of teat sealants, BDCT may no longer be necessary on all dairy farms, thereby supporting antimicrobial stewardship efforts. This narrative review summarizes available literature regarding current dry cow therapy practices and associated impacts of selective dry cow therapy (SDCT) on udder health, milk production, economics, antimicrobial use, and antimicrobial resistance. Various methods to identify infections at drying-off that could benefit from antimicrobial treatment are described for selecting cows or mammary quarters for treatment, including utilizing somatic cell count thresholds, pathogen identification, previous clinical mastitis history, or a combination of criteria. Selection methods may be enacted at the herd, cow, or quarter levels. Producers' and veterinarians' motivations for antimicrobial use are discussed. Based on review findings, SDCT can be adopted without negative consequences for udder health and milk production, and concurrent teat sealant use is recommended, especially in udder quarters receiving no intramammary antimicrobials. Furthermore, herd selection should be considered for SDCT implementation in addition to cow or quarter selection, as BDCT may still be temporarily necessary in some herds for optimal mastitis control. Costs and benefits of SDCT vary among herds, whereas impacts on antimicrobial resistance remain unclear. In summary, SDCT is a viable management option for maintaining udder health and milk production while improving antimicrobial stewardship in the dairy industry.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kayley D McCubbin
- Department of Production Animal Health, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada T2N 4N1; One Health at UCalgary, University of Calgary, AB, Canada T2N 4N1
| | - Ellen de Jong
- Department of Production Animal Health, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada T2N 4N1; One Health at UCalgary, University of Calgary, AB, Canada T2N 4N1
| | - Theo J G M Lam
- Department Population Health Sciences, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Utrecht University, 3584CS Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - David F Kelton
- Department of Population Medicine, Ontario Veterinary College, University of Guelph, Guelph, ON, Canada N1G 2W1
| | - John R Middleton
- Department of Veterinary Medicine and Surgery, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Missouri, Columbia 65211
| | - Scott McDougall
- Cognosco, Anexa FVC Morrinsville, PO Box 21, Morrinsville 3340, New Zealand; School of Veterinary Science, Massey University, Palmerston North 4474, New Zealand
| | - Sarne De Vliegher
- M-team and Mastitis and Milk Quality Research Unit, Department of Reproduction, Obstetrics, and Herd Health, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Ghent University, 9820, Merelbeke, Belgium
| | - Sandra Godden
- College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Minnesota, St. Paul 55108
| | - Päivi J Rajala-Schultz
- Department of Production Animal Medicine, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Helsinki, 04920 Saarentaus, Finland
| | - Sam Rowe
- Faculty of Science, Sydney School of Veterinary Science, The University of Sydney, Camden, New South Wales 2570, Australia
| | - David C Speksnijder
- Department of Biomolecular Health Sciences, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Utrecht University, 3584CS Utrecht, the Netherlands; University Farm Animal Clinic ULP, 3481LZ Harmelen, the Netherlands
| | - John P Kastelic
- Department of Production Animal Health, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada T2N 4N1
| | - Herman W Barkema
- Department of Production Animal Health, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada T2N 4N1; One Health at UCalgary, University of Calgary, AB, Canada T2N 4N1.
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Uyama T, Kelton DF, Morrison EI, de Jong E, McCubbin KD, Barkema HW, Dufour S, Sanchez J, Heider LC, LeBlanc SJ, Winder CB, McClure J, Renaud DL. Cross-sectional study of antimicrobial use and treatment decision for preweaning Canadian dairy calves. JDS Communications 2022; 3:72-77. [PMID: 36340675 PMCID: PMC9623784 DOI: 10.3168/jdsc.2021-0161] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/19/2021] [Accepted: 10/15/2021] [Indexed: 11/19/2022]
Abstract
More than half of producers used multiple signs when treating calf pneumonia. More than half of producers included systemic signs when treating calf diarrhea. Farmers with a treatment protocol used multiple signs for antimicrobial use (bovine respiratory disease). Farmers with a treatment protocol used systemic signs for antimicrobial use (scours).
Antimicrobials should be used prudently in farm animals to prevent the development of resistant bacteria in both humans and animals. The objective of this study was to investigate Canadian dairy producers' practices for antimicrobial use in the treatment of disease in preweaning dairy calves. In-person questionnaires were administered to 144 dairy producers across 5 provinces in Canada between July 2019 and August 2020. Almost all (96%) producers used antimicrobials to treat calves with respiratory disease, but only 27% indicated they had a written treatment protocol for respiratory disease. Most (95%) of these protocols for respiratory disease were developed with input from the herd veterinarian. Seventy-four percent of producers used antimicrobials to treat calf diarrhea, with 37% of producers having a written treatment protocol for calf diarrhea with input from the herd veterinarian. The combinations of signs adopted by the producers for antimicrobial treatment in calf respiratory disease and diarrhea were evaluated based on findings from other studies. More than half (56%) of producers who used antimicrobials for calf respiratory disease decided to use antimicrobials by evaluating multiple clinical signs. Eighty-two percent of producers who used antimicrobials for calf diarrhea made decisions based on systemic signs of disease, presence of bloody stool, no response to previous treatment, or on the recommendation from the herd veterinarian. Producers with a written treatment protocol had 3 to 7 times greater odds of using antimicrobials based on multiple signs or systemic signs of disease compared with those without a protocol. Further research may investigate other calf management practices related to decision-making by producers in using antimicrobials to improve antimicrobial stewardship on dairy farms.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tamaki Uyama
- Department of Population Medicine, University of Guelph, Guelph, ON, N1G 2W1, Canada
- Corresponding author
| | - David F. Kelton
- Department of Population Medicine, University of Guelph, Guelph, ON, N1G 2W1, Canada
| | - Emma I. Morrison
- Department of Population Medicine, University of Guelph, Guelph, ON, N1G 2W1, Canada
| | - Ellen de Jong
- Department of Production Animal Health, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, T2N 4N1, Canada
| | - Kayley D. McCubbin
- Department of Production Animal Health, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, T2N 4N1, Canada
| | - Herman W. Barkema
- Department of Production Animal Health, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, T2N 4N1, Canada
| | - Simon Dufour
- Faculté de médecine vétérinaire, Université de Montréal, St-Hyacinthe, QC, J2S 2M2, Canada
| | - Javier Sanchez
- Department of Health Management, Atlantic Veterinary College, University of Prince Edward Island, Charlottetown, PE, C1A 4P3, Canada
| | - Luke C. Heider
- Department of Health Management, Atlantic Veterinary College, University of Prince Edward Island, Charlottetown, PE, C1A 4P3, Canada
| | - Stephen J. LeBlanc
- Department of Population Medicine, University of Guelph, Guelph, ON, N1G 2W1, Canada
| | - Charlotte B. Winder
- Department of Population Medicine, University of Guelph, Guelph, ON, N1G 2W1, Canada
| | - J.T. McClure
- Department of Health Management, Atlantic Veterinary College, University of Prince Edward Island, Charlottetown, PE, C1A 4P3, Canada
| | - David L. Renaud
- Department of Population Medicine, University of Guelph, Guelph, ON, N1G 2W1, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
de Jong E, Frankena K, Orsel K. Risk factors for digital dermatitis in free-stall-housed, Canadian dairy cattle. Vet Rec Open 2021; 8:e19. [PMID: 34377496 PMCID: PMC8330421 DOI: 10.1002/vro2.19] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/23/2020] [Revised: 06/15/2021] [Accepted: 07/14/2021] [Indexed: 11/12/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND A comprehensive analysis of the relation between digital dermatitis (DD) and cow and herd characteristics in Canadian dairies is currently lacking. METHODS A multilevel logistic regression analysis was performed using 12,260 cow records from 62 dairy farms to assess association between 27 cow and herd-level variables, and presence of DD. RESULTS The odds for a cow to have at least 1 DD lesion were higher in first-parity cows and those in later lactation (≥45 days in milk). Housing cows on a concrete base was associated with higher odds (OR 2.24) for DD when bedding was added once a week or less. Bedding the concrete base more frequently reduced odds for DD. Wood shavings or other bedding types were more positively associated with DD (OR 2.31 and 1.87, respectively) compared to sawdust. Also, the odds of DD were lower on farms with a scraping manure frequency of every 2 h compared to less frequent scraping (OR 0.54). CONCLUSION Nine risk factors for DD were identified and quantified, with stall base, bedding type, and manure scraping frequency associated with lower odds of DD. DD prevalence could be reduced by implementing management practices for first-parity cows, as they had higher odds of DD.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ellen de Jong
- Department of Production Animal HealthFaculty of Veterinary MedicineUniversity of CalgaryCalgaryCanada
| | - Klaas Frankena
- Adaptation Physiology GroupWageningen Institute of Animal SciencesWageningen University & ResearchWageningenThe Netherlands
| | - Karin Orsel
- Department of Production Animal HealthFaculty of Veterinary MedicineUniversity of CalgaryCalgaryCanada
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
McCubbin KD, Anholt RM, de Jong E, Ida JA, Nóbrega DB, Kastelic JP, Conly JM, Götte M, McAllister TA, Orsel K, Lewis I, Jackson L, Plastow G, Wieden HJ, McCoy K, Leslie M, Robinson JL, Hardcastle L, Hollis A, Ashbolt NJ, Checkley S, Tyrrell GJ, Buret AG, Rennert-May E, Goddard E, Otto SJG, Barkema HW. Knowledge Gaps in the Understanding of Antimicrobial Resistance in Canada. Front Public Health 2021; 9:726484. [PMID: 34778169 PMCID: PMC8582488 DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2021.726484] [Citation(s) in RCA: 17] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/17/2021] [Accepted: 09/16/2021] [Indexed: 01/21/2023] Open
Abstract
Current limitations in the understanding and control of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) in Canada are described through a comprehensive review focusing on: (1) treatment optimization; (2) surveillance of antimicrobial use and AMR; and (3) prevention of transmission of AMR. Without addressing gaps in identified areas, sustained progress in AMR mitigation is unlikely. Expert opinions and perspectives contributed to prioritizing identified gaps. Using Canada as an example, this review emphasizes the importance and necessity of a One Health approach for understanding and mitigating AMR. Specifically, antimicrobial use in human, animal, crop, and environmental sectors cannot be regarded as independent; therefore, a One Health approach is needed in AMR research and understanding, current surveillance efforts, and policy. Discussions regarding addressing described knowledge gaps are separated into four categories: (1) further research; (2) increased capacity/resources; (3) increased prescriber/end-user knowledge; and (4) policy development/enforcement. This review highlights the research and increased capacity and resources to generate new knowledge and implement recommendations needed to address all identified gaps, including economic, social, and environmental considerations. More prescriber/end-user knowledge and policy development/enforcement are needed, but must be informed by realistic recommendations, with input from all relevant stakeholders. For most knowledge gaps, important next steps are uncertain. In conclusion, identified knowledge gaps underlined the need for AMR policy decisions to be considered in a One Health framework, while highlighting critical needs to achieve realistic and meaningful progress.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kayley D. McCubbin
- Department of Production Animal Health, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
- One Health at UCalgary, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
| | | | - Ellen de Jong
- Department of Production Animal Health, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
- One Health at UCalgary, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
| | - Jennifer A. Ida
- Department of Production Animal Health, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
| | - Diego B. Nóbrega
- Department of Production Animal Health, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
| | - John P. Kastelic
- Department of Production Animal Health, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
| | - John M. Conly
- One Health at UCalgary, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
- O'Brien Institute of Public Health, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
- Snyder Institute for Chronic Diseases, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
- Department of Microbiology, Immunology and Infectious Diseases, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
- Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
- Department of Medicine, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
- Alberta Health Services, Calgary, AB, Canada
| | - Matthias Götte
- Department of Medical Microbiology and Immunology, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada
| | - Tim A. McAllister
- Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Lethbridge Research Centre, Lethbridge, AB, Canada
| | - Karin Orsel
- Department of Production Animal Health, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
- One Health at UCalgary, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
| | - Ian Lewis
- One Health at UCalgary, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
- Department of Biological Sciences, Faculty of Science, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
| | - Leland Jackson
- One Health at UCalgary, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
- Department of Biological Sciences, Faculty of Science, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
| | - Graham Plastow
- Department of Agricultural, Food and Nutritional Science, Faculty of Agricultural, Life and Environmental Sciences, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada
| | - Hans-Joachim Wieden
- Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, University of Lethbridge, Lethbridge, AB, Canada
| | - Kathy McCoy
- One Health at UCalgary, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
- Snyder Institute for Chronic Diseases, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
- Department of Physiology and Pharmacology, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
| | - Myles Leslie
- One Health at UCalgary, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
- O'Brien Institute of Public Health, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
- Department of Community Health Sciences, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
- School of Public Policy, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
| | - Joan L. Robinson
- Department of Pediatrics, Faculty of Medicine, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada
| | - Lorian Hardcastle
- One Health at UCalgary, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
- O'Brien Institute of Public Health, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
- Department of Community Health Sciences, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
- Faculty of Law, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
| | - Aidan Hollis
- One Health at UCalgary, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
- O'Brien Institute of Public Health, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
- Department of Economics, Faculty of Arts, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
| | - Nicholas J. Ashbolt
- Faculty of Science and Engineering, Southern Cross University, Lismore, NSW, Australia
| | - Sylvia Checkley
- One Health at UCalgary, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
- O'Brien Institute of Public Health, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
- Department of Microbiology, Immunology and Infectious Diseases, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
- Department of Ecosystem and Public Health, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
| | - Gregory J. Tyrrell
- Alberta Precision Laboratories, Alberta Health Services, Calgary, AB, Canada
- Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Alberta, Calgary, AB, Canada
| | - André G. Buret
- One Health at UCalgary, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
- Snyder Institute for Chronic Diseases, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
- Department of Biological Sciences, Faculty of Science, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
| | - Elissa Rennert-May
- One Health at UCalgary, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
- O'Brien Institute of Public Health, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
- Snyder Institute for Chronic Diseases, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
- Department of Medicine, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
- Alberta Health Services, Calgary, AB, Canada
- Department of Community Health Sciences, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
| | - Ellen Goddard
- Department of Resource Economics and Environmental Sociology, Faculty of Agriculture, Life and Environmental Science, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada
| | - Simon J. G. Otto
- HEAT-AMR Research Group, School of Public Health, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada
- Thematic Area Lead, Healthy Environments, Centre for Healthy Communities, School of Public Health, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada
| | - Herman W. Barkema
- Department of Production Animal Health, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
- One Health at UCalgary, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
- O'Brien Institute of Public Health, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
- Snyder Institute for Chronic Diseases, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
- Department of Community Health Sciences, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
de Jong E, Jourquin J, Kauffold J, Sarrazin S, Dewulf J, Maes D. Effect of a GnRH analogue (peforelin) on the litter performance of gilts and sows. Porcine Health Manag 2017; 3:6. [PMID: 28405462 PMCID: PMC5382462 DOI: 10.1186/s40813-017-0054-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/26/2016] [Accepted: 02/10/2017] [Indexed: 11/18/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Maintaining optimal reproductive and litter performance is essential for meeting economic targets in commercial pig production. Treatment with exogenous gonadotropins in sows after weaning or in gilts after altrenogest treatment has been used to stimulate follicular development leading to more piglets born and eventually higher birth weights. The effect of peforelin on litter performance was investigated in 212 gilts, primi- and pluriparous sows in three herds. Animals were randomly allocated to three treatments 24 h after weaning: peforelin (P group), eCG (E group), and physiological saline solution (C group). Numbers of total, liveborn and stillborn piglets and mortality rate during lactation were recorded. Birth weights and coefficient of variation in weights within litter were assessed. All parameters were compared among treatments. Results Over all parities, no difference was found among treatments in litter size nor mortality rate, but birth weights were significantly lower in the E group. Stillbirth numbers in pluriparous sows were 2.2, 0.9 and 1.4 for P, E and C groups, respectively (p = 0.04). Piglets in the P group had significantly higher live born birth weights in gilts, compared to the E group (1.36, 1.26, 1.32 kg (p < 0.02) for P, E and C group, respectively). No significant differences were found for the other investigated parameters. Conclusions Peforelin treatment showed no improvement of litter performance compared to no treatment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ellen de Jong
- Department of Reproduction Obstetrics and Herd Health, Unit Porcine Health Management, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Ghent, Salisburylaan 133, B-9820 Merelbeke, Belgium.,Present address: Flemish Animal Health Service (Dierengezondheidszorg Vlaanderen), Industrielaan 29, B-8820 Torhout, Belgium
| | - Jan Jourquin
- Elanco, S.A. Eli Lilly Benelux N.V., Stoofstraat 52, B-1000 Brussels, Belgium
| | - Johannes Kauffold
- Large Animal Clinic for Theriogenology and Ambulatory Services, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Leipzig, An den Tierkliniken 19, 04103 Leipzig, Germany
| | - Steven Sarrazin
- Department of Reproduction Obstetrics and Herd Health, Veterinary Epidemiology Unit, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Ghent, Salisburylaan 133, B-9820 Merelbeke, Belgium
| | - Jeroen Dewulf
- Department of Reproduction Obstetrics and Herd Health, Veterinary Epidemiology Unit, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Ghent, Salisburylaan 133, B-9820 Merelbeke, Belgium
| | - Dominiek Maes
- Department of Reproduction Obstetrics and Herd Health, Unit Porcine Health Management, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Ghent, Salisburylaan 133, B-9820 Merelbeke, Belgium
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Hopman J, Maat I, Jong ED, Liem D, Boode WD, Voss A, Tostmann A. Risk factors for enterobacter cloacae colonisation at a neonatal intensive care unit in the Netherlands. Antimicrob Resist Infect Control 2015. [PMCID: PMC4475099 DOI: 10.1186/2047-2994-4-s1-p237] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/21/2022] Open
|
14
|
Callens B, Faes C, Maes D, Catry B, Boyen F, Francoys D, de Jong E, Haesebrouck F, Dewulf J. Presence of antimicrobial resistance and antimicrobial use in sows are risk factors for antimicrobial resistance in their offspring. Microb Drug Resist 2014; 21:50-8. [PMID: 25098762 DOI: 10.1089/mdr.2014.0037] [Citation(s) in RCA: 43] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
Abstract
This study investigated whether antimicrobial-resistant Escherichia coli in apparently healthy sows and antimicrobial administration to sows and piglets influenced antimicrobial resistance in fecal commensal E. coli from piglets. Sixty sows from three herds and three of their piglets were sampled at several time points. Antimicrobial usage data during parturition and farrowing were collected. Clinical resistance was determined for two isolates per sampling time point for sows and piglets using disk diffusion. Only 27.4% of E. coli isolates from newborn piglets showed no resistance. Resistance to one or two antimicrobial classes equaled 41.2% and 46.8% in isolates from sows and piglets, respectively, for the overall farrowing period. Multiresistance to at least four classes was found as frequently in sows (15.6%) as in piglets (15.2%). Antimicrobial resistance in piglets was influenced by antimicrobial use in sows and piglets and by the sow resistance level (p≤0.05). Using aminopenicillins and third-generation cephalosporins in piglets affected resistance levels in piglets (odds ratios [OR] >1; p≤0.05). Using enrofloxacin in piglets increased the odds for enrofloxacin resistance in piglets (OR=26.78; p≤0.0001) and sows at weaning (OR=4.04; p≤0.05). For sows, antimicrobial exposure to lincomycin-spectinomycin around parturition increased the resistance to ampicillin, streptomycin, trimethoprim-sulfadiazine in sows (OR=21.33, OR=142.74, OR=18.03; p≤0.05) and additionally to enrofloxacin in piglets (OR=7.50; p≤0.05). This study demonstrates that antimicrobial use in sows and piglets is a risk factor for antimicrobial resistance in the respective animals. Moreover, resistance determinants in E. coli from piglets are selected by using antimicrobials in their dam around parturition.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Bénédicte Callens
- 1 Veterinary Epidemiology Unit, Department of Reproduction, Obstetrics and Herd Health, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine , Ghent University, Merelbeke, Belgium
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
15
|
de Jong E, Kauffold J, Engl S, Jourquin J, Maes D. Effect of a GnRH analogue (Maprelin) on the reproductive performance of gilts and sows. Theriogenology 2013; 80:870-7. [PMID: 23987986 DOI: 10.1016/j.theriogenology.2013.07.012] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/12/2013] [Revised: 07/18/2013] [Accepted: 07/22/2013] [Indexed: 10/26/2022]
Abstract
The ability of peforelin (l-GnRH-III) to stimulate follicular growth, FSH release, and estrus in gilts after altrenogest treatment and in sows after weaning was investigated. In three farrow-to-wean herds, with at least 600 sows and average production performance, 216 gilts, 335 primiparous, and 1299 pluriparous sows were randomly allocated to three treatments: peforelin (M group: Maprelin), eCG (F group: Folligon), and physiological saline solution (C group). Animals were treated 48 hours after their last altrenogest treatment (gilts) or 24 hours after weaning (sows). The weaning-to-estrus interval, estrus duration, estrus rate (ER), pregnancy rate, and total born (TB), live born, and stillborn (SB) numbers were recorded and compared between treatments for the different parity groups (gilts and primiparous and pluriparous sows). Follicle sizes were measured in representative animals from each group on the occasion of their last altrenogest treatment or at weaning, and also on the occasions of their first (FS1) and second (FS2) attempted inseminations. Blood samples were taken to determine FSH concentrations at weaning and 2 hours after injection, and progesterone concentrations 10 days after the first insemination attempt. The relative change in FSH concentrations was calculated. Significant differences were found for ER within 7 days of weaning in pluriparous sows (95%, 91%, and 90% for the M, F, and C groups, respectively, P = 0.005). Gilts in the F-group had high TB numbers, and pluriparous sows in the M group had high SB numbers (TB gilts = 13.6, 15.4, and 14.9 [P = 0.02] and SB pluriparous sows = 1.8, 1.4, and 1.7 [P = 0.05] for the M, F, and C groups, respectively). The M group had the highest FS1 (for gilts) and FS2 (for pluriparous sows) values: FS1 = 5.4, 4.9, and 4.9 mm [P = 0.02] and FS2 = 6.8, 5.3, and 6.3 mm [P = 0.03] for the M, F, and C groups, respectively. There were no significant differences between the different treatments within each parity group with respect to any of the other variables. Overall, peforelin treatment had small but positive effects on the ER and follicle growth in certain parity groups but did not seem to affect litter sizes or FSH and progesterone levels in sows on the occasions of the corresponding examinations.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ellen de Jong
- Department of Reproduction Obstetrics and Herd Health, Unit Porcine Health Management, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Ghent, Merelbeke, Belgium.
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|