Cargando…
Examination of unintended consequences of antibiotic use restrictions in food-producing animals: Sub-analysis of a systematic review
Antimicrobial resistance is considered one of the greatest threats to global and public health today. The World Health Organization, the Food and Agriculture Organization, and the World Organisation for Animal Health, known as the Tripartite Collaboration, have called for urgent action. We have prev...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Elsevier
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6538949/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31193679 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.onehlt.2019.100095 |
_version_ | 1783422268686204928 |
---|---|
author | Tang, Karen L. Caffrey, Niamh P. Nóbrega, Diego B. Cork, Susan C. Ronksley, Paul E. Barkema, Herman W. Polachek, Alicia J. Ganshorn, Heather Sharma, Nishan Kellner, James D. Checkley, Sylvia L. Ghali, William A. |
author_facet | Tang, Karen L. Caffrey, Niamh P. Nóbrega, Diego B. Cork, Susan C. Ronksley, Paul E. Barkema, Herman W. Polachek, Alicia J. Ganshorn, Heather Sharma, Nishan Kellner, James D. Checkley, Sylvia L. Ghali, William A. |
author_sort | Tang, Karen L. |
collection | PubMed |
description | Antimicrobial resistance is considered one of the greatest threats to global and public health today. The World Health Organization, the Food and Agriculture Organization, and the World Organisation for Animal Health, known as the Tripartite Collaboration, have called for urgent action. We have previously published a systematic review of 181 studies, demonstrating that interventions that restrict antibiotic use in food-producing animals are associated with a reduction in antibiotic resistant bacterial isolates in both animals and humans. What remains unknown, however, are whether (and what) unintended consequences may arise from such interventions. We therefore undertook a sub-analysis of the original review to address this research question. A total of 47 studies described potential consequences of antibiotic restrictions. There were no consistent trends to suggest clear harm. There may be increased bacterial contamination of food products, the clinical significance of which remains unclear. There is a need for rigorous evaluation of the unintended consequences of antibiotic restrictions in human health, food availability, and economics, given their possible widespread implications. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6538949 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | Elsevier |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-65389492019-06-03 Examination of unintended consequences of antibiotic use restrictions in food-producing animals: Sub-analysis of a systematic review Tang, Karen L. Caffrey, Niamh P. Nóbrega, Diego B. Cork, Susan C. Ronksley, Paul E. Barkema, Herman W. Polachek, Alicia J. Ganshorn, Heather Sharma, Nishan Kellner, James D. Checkley, Sylvia L. Ghali, William A. One Health Short Communication Antimicrobial resistance is considered one of the greatest threats to global and public health today. The World Health Organization, the Food and Agriculture Organization, and the World Organisation for Animal Health, known as the Tripartite Collaboration, have called for urgent action. We have previously published a systematic review of 181 studies, demonstrating that interventions that restrict antibiotic use in food-producing animals are associated with a reduction in antibiotic resistant bacterial isolates in both animals and humans. What remains unknown, however, are whether (and what) unintended consequences may arise from such interventions. We therefore undertook a sub-analysis of the original review to address this research question. A total of 47 studies described potential consequences of antibiotic restrictions. There were no consistent trends to suggest clear harm. There may be increased bacterial contamination of food products, the clinical significance of which remains unclear. There is a need for rigorous evaluation of the unintended consequences of antibiotic restrictions in human health, food availability, and economics, given their possible widespread implications. Elsevier 2019-05-15 /pmc/articles/PMC6538949/ /pubmed/31193679 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.onehlt.2019.100095 Text en © 2019 The Authors http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Short Communication Tang, Karen L. Caffrey, Niamh P. Nóbrega, Diego B. Cork, Susan C. Ronksley, Paul E. Barkema, Herman W. Polachek, Alicia J. Ganshorn, Heather Sharma, Nishan Kellner, James D. Checkley, Sylvia L. Ghali, William A. Examination of unintended consequences of antibiotic use restrictions in food-producing animals: Sub-analysis of a systematic review |
title | Examination of unintended consequences of antibiotic use restrictions in food-producing animals: Sub-analysis of a systematic review |
title_full | Examination of unintended consequences of antibiotic use restrictions in food-producing animals: Sub-analysis of a systematic review |
title_fullStr | Examination of unintended consequences of antibiotic use restrictions in food-producing animals: Sub-analysis of a systematic review |
title_full_unstemmed | Examination of unintended consequences of antibiotic use restrictions in food-producing animals: Sub-analysis of a systematic review |
title_short | Examination of unintended consequences of antibiotic use restrictions in food-producing animals: Sub-analysis of a systematic review |
title_sort | examination of unintended consequences of antibiotic use restrictions in food-producing animals: sub-analysis of a systematic review |
topic | Short Communication |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6538949/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31193679 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.onehlt.2019.100095 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT tangkarenl examinationofunintendedconsequencesofantibioticuserestrictionsinfoodproducinganimalssubanalysisofasystematicreview AT caffreyniamhp examinationofunintendedconsequencesofantibioticuserestrictionsinfoodproducinganimalssubanalysisofasystematicreview AT nobregadiegob examinationofunintendedconsequencesofantibioticuserestrictionsinfoodproducinganimalssubanalysisofasystematicreview AT corksusanc examinationofunintendedconsequencesofantibioticuserestrictionsinfoodproducinganimalssubanalysisofasystematicreview AT ronksleypaule examinationofunintendedconsequencesofantibioticuserestrictionsinfoodproducinganimalssubanalysisofasystematicreview AT barkemahermanw examinationofunintendedconsequencesofantibioticuserestrictionsinfoodproducinganimalssubanalysisofasystematicreview AT polachekaliciaj examinationofunintendedconsequencesofantibioticuserestrictionsinfoodproducinganimalssubanalysisofasystematicreview AT ganshornheather examinationofunintendedconsequencesofantibioticuserestrictionsinfoodproducinganimalssubanalysisofasystematicreview AT sharmanishan examinationofunintendedconsequencesofantibioticuserestrictionsinfoodproducinganimalssubanalysisofasystematicreview AT kellnerjamesd examinationofunintendedconsequencesofantibioticuserestrictionsinfoodproducinganimalssubanalysisofasystematicreview AT checkleysylvial examinationofunintendedconsequencesofantibioticuserestrictionsinfoodproducinganimalssubanalysisofasystematicreview AT ghaliwilliama examinationofunintendedconsequencesofantibioticuserestrictionsinfoodproducinganimalssubanalysisofasystematicreview |