Dataset Information

Calculation of Antimicrobial Use Indicators in Beef Feedlots-Effects of Choice of Metric and Standardized Values.

ABSTRACT: The potential for antimicrobial use (AMU) to lead to the development of antimicrobial resistant bacteria is an increasingly important priority in human and veterinary medicine. Accurate AMU quantification is essential to assessing the risk of antimicrobial resistance due to AMU. The quantification of AMU in production animals can be difficult, and feedlot beef cattle present a number of unique challenges. This paper presents selected parenteral data from western Canadian beef feedlots to illustrate variations in interpretation of AMU that can arise from the use of different metrics and standards. Specific examples presented compare the number of animal daily doses calculated from a given amount of antimicrobial drug (AMD) using actual and estimated weights of cattle at exposure, dose-based to weight-based indicators representing the same amount of antimicrobial, dose-based AMU indicators using different estimated durations of effect (DOE), and AMU indicators calculated using different standard weights of cattle at exposure. Changing these factors when calculating AMU indicators can have notable influences on the results obtained. Transparency about the methods used to calculate AMU indicators is critical to ensure that comparisons of use among different populations is meaningful and accurate.

SUBMITTER: Brault SA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6794351 | biostudies-literature | 2019

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Calculation of Antimicrobial Use Indicators in Beef Feedlots-Effects of Choice of Metric and Standardized Values.

Brault Stephanie A SA Hannon Sherry J SJ Gow Sheryl P SP Otto Simon J G SJG Booker Calvin W CW Morley Paul S PS

Frontiers in veterinary science 20191009

The potential for antimicrobial use (AMU) to lead to the development of antimicrobial resistant bacteria is an increasingly important priority in human and veterinary medicine. Accurate AMU quantification is essential to assessing the risk of antimicrobial resistance due to AMU. The quantification of AMU in production animals can be difficult, and feedlot beef cattle present a number of unique challenges. This paper presents selected parenteral data from western Canadian beef feedlots to illustr ...[more]

PMID: 31649938

Similar Datasets

Project description:The accurate quantification of antimicrobial use (AMU) in production animals is critical for monitoring trends in exposure to antimicrobial drugs (AMD) over time and examining potential associations with antimicrobial resistance in bacteria. In this study, a census sample of cattle was used to quantify individually-dosed and in-feed AMU as both numbers of animal daily doses (nADD) and total grams of AMD (gAMD) used in cattle placed in 36 western Canadian feedlots between 1-November, 2008 and 31-October, 2012; representing about 21.5% of fed cattle in Canada during that time period. Of the ~2.6 million cattle placed during the 48-month period, 45% were calves, 63% were male, 62% arrived in the fall or winter, and 39% were assessed as high risk for developing bovine respiratory disease (BRD). The proportion of cattle categorized as high risk (HR) for developing BRD was consistent over the 4 years of placement cohorts. Both medically important AMU and ionophore use were summarized but presented separately. A decrease in AMU was observed over the study period, both as nADD and total gAMD, which was primarily driven by a decline in the in-feed administration of tetracyclines. Most in-feed AMU was directed toward prevention and control of liver abscesses. The majority of individually dosed AMU was administered as metaphylaxis to address BRD risks, with category III AMD (medium importance to human medicine as categorized by Health Canada Veterinary Drugs Directorate) used most frequently. Not surprisingly, risk level for developing BRD influenced parenteral AMD exposures, with 95% of cattle categorized as being HR for developing BRD receiving individually dosed AMD compared to 59% of cattle categorized as being low risk (LR) for developing BRD. Cattle categorized as HR for developing BRD were more likely to receive macrolides for BRD metaphylaxis compared to cattle categorized as LR for developing BRD, and cattle categorized as LR for developing BRD were more likely to receive tetracycline for the same purpose. In summary, these data provide an unprecedented representation of AMU in fed cattle in western Canada and direction for future monitoring of AMU in fed cattle.

Project description:The rising public health threat of antimicrobial resistance, the influence of food service companies, as well as the overall lack of positive image of using medical products in intensive farming are major drivers curbing antimicrobial use. In the future, government policies may affect practices of antimicrobial use in beef production in feedlots, a prominent current user of antimicrobials in animal agriculture, but also the agricultural industry generating the highest cash receipt in the U.S. Our objective was to estimate the cost effect from the following policies in feedlots: 1) using antimicrobials for disease prevention, control, and treatment; 2) using antimicrobials only for treatment of disease; and 3) not using antimicrobials for any reason. We modelled a typical U.S. feedlot, where high risk cattle may be afflicted by diseases requiring antimicrobial therapy, namely respiratory diseases, liver abscesses and lameness. We calculated the net revenue loss under each policy of antimicrobial use restriction. With moderate disease incidence, the median net revenue loss was $66 and $96 per animal entering the feedlot, for not using antimicrobials for disease prevention and control, or not using any antimicrobials, respectively, compared to using antimicrobials for disease prevention, control, and treatment. Losses arose mainly from an increase of fatality and morbidity rates, almost doubling for respiratory diseases in the case of antimicrobial use restrictions. In the case of antimicrobial use prohibition, decreasing the feeder cattle price by 9%, or alternatively, increasing the slaughter cattle price by 6.3%, would offset the net revenue losses for the feedlot operator. If no alternatives to antimicrobial therapy for prevention, control and treatment of current infectious diseases are implemented, policies that economically incentivize adoption of non-antimicrobial prevention and control strategies for infectious diseases would be necessary to maintain animal welfare and the profitability of beef production while simultaneously curbing antimicrobial use.

Project description:BackgroundInappropriate antimicrobial use (AMU) is a key modifiable factor that leads to the development of antimicrobial resistance (AMR). The objectives of this study were to determine the following among Tennessee beef cattle producers: (1) the opinions on factors driving AMU (2) opinions on alternatives to antimicrobials, (3) the knowledge and perceptions regarding AMU and AMR, and (4) the preferred avenues for receiving information on prudent AMU. A survey questionnaire was made available to participants both in print and online from January 26, 2018 through May 11, 2018. The questions targeted the producers' demographics and their AMU practices; factors driving producer's choice of antimicrobials; perceptions, opinions and concerns about AMU and AMR in cattle production. Ordinal logistic regression was used to test for associations between the captured demographic information and producers' degree of concern about AMR.ResultsOverall, 231 beef producers responded to all or some of the survey questions. More than 60% of the participants mentioned that they kept up-to-date written records on antimicrobial purchases and AMU. Regarding extra-label use, 169 (84.1%) of the 201 respondents did not practice extra-label AMU. Profitability of the beef operation was a key factor influencing the decisions of many producers to use antimicrobials for disease management and prevention on their farms. Of the 228 producers who completed the question on the rating of their degree of concern about AMR, 50 (21.9%) reported that they were very concerned about AMR, 133 (58.3%) were moderately concerned, and 36 (15.8%) reported that they were not concerned about AMR. Nine producers (4%) did not rate their degree of concern about AMR because they were not familiar with what antimicrobial resistance meant. The inferential analyses suggested that younger beef producers were significantly less concerned about AMR when compared to the older ones (P = 0.019). Regarding avenues for receiving information on prudent AMU, no single medium was most preferred by all the respondents.ConclusionsThere is a need to promote the use of written antimicrobial treatment protocols among beef producers in Tennessee. Continued training for beef producers on infection prevention and control and prudent AMU is needed.

Project description:Foot-and-mouth disease (FMD) is a highly contagious disease of livestock and has severely affected livestock industries during the past two decades in previously FMD-free countries. The disease was eliminated in North America in 1953 but remains a threat for re-introduction. Approximately 44% of the on-feed beef cattle in the U.S. are concentrated in feedlots <32,000 heads, but little information is available on dynamics of FMD in large feedlots. Therefore, there is a need to explore possible management and intervention strategies that might be implemented during potential FMD outbreaks on feedlots. We used a within home-pen stochastic susceptible-latent-infectious-recovered (SLIR) FMD dynamics model nested in a meta-population model of home-pens in a feedlot. The combinatory model was previously developed to simulate foot-and-mouth disease virus (FMDv) transmission within U.S. beef feedlots. We evaluated three intervention strategies initiated on the day of FMD detection: stopping movements of cattle between home-pens and hospital-pen(s) (NH), barrier depopulation combined with NH (NH-BD), and targeted depopulation of at-risk home-pens combined with NH (NH-TD). Depopulation rates investigated ranged from 500 to 4,000 cattle per day. We evaluated the projected effectiveness of interventions by comparing them with the no-intervention FMD dynamics in the feedlot. We modeled a small-size (4,000 cattle), medium-size (12,000 cattle), and large-size (24,000 cattle) feedlots. Implementation of NH delayed the outbreak progression, but it did not prevent infection of the entire feedlot. Implementation of NH-BD resulted in depopulation of 50% of cattle in small- and medium-size feedlots, and 25% in large-size feedlots, but the intervention prevented infection of the entire feedlot in 40% of simulated outbreaks in medium-size feedlots, and in 8% in large-size feedlots. Implementation of NH-TD resulted in depopulation of up to 50% of cattle in small-size feedlots, 75% in medium-size feedlots, and 25% in large-size feedlots, but rarely prevented infection of the entire feedlot. Number of hospital-pens in the feedlot was shown to weakly impact the success of NH-TD. Overall, the results suggest that stopping cattle movements between the home-pens and hospital-pens, without or with barrier or targeted cattle depopulation, would not be highly effective to interrupt FMDv transmission within a feedlot.

Dataset Information

Calculation of Antimicrobial Use Indicators in Beef Feedlots-Effects of Choice of Metric and Standardized Values.

Publications

Calculation of Antimicrobial Use Indicators in Beef Feedlots-Effects of Choice of Metric and Standardized Values.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets