Cargando…
A survey of antimicrobial use practices of Tennessee beef producers
BACKGROUND: Inappropriate 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 al...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6604443/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31266492 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12917-019-1978-6 |
_version_ | 1783431714152906752 |
---|---|
author | Ekakoro, John E. Caldwell, Marc Strand, Elizabeth B. Strickland, Lew Okafor, Chika C. |
author_facet | Ekakoro, John E. Caldwell, Marc Strand, Elizabeth B. Strickland, Lew Okafor, Chika C. |
author_sort | Ekakoro, John E. |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Inappropriate 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. RESULTS: Overall, 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. CONCLUSIONS: There 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. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12917-019-1978-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6604443 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-66044432019-07-12 A survey of antimicrobial use practices of Tennessee beef producers Ekakoro, John E. Caldwell, Marc Strand, Elizabeth B. Strickland, Lew Okafor, Chika C. BMC Vet Res Research Article BACKGROUND: Inappropriate 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. RESULTS: Overall, 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. CONCLUSIONS: There 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. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12917-019-1978-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2019-07-02 /pmc/articles/PMC6604443/ /pubmed/31266492 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12917-019-1978-6 Text en © The Author(s). 2019 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Ekakoro, John E. Caldwell, Marc Strand, Elizabeth B. Strickland, Lew Okafor, Chika C. A survey of antimicrobial use practices of Tennessee beef producers |
title | A survey of antimicrobial use practices of Tennessee beef producers |
title_full | A survey of antimicrobial use practices of Tennessee beef producers |
title_fullStr | A survey of antimicrobial use practices of Tennessee beef producers |
title_full_unstemmed | A survey of antimicrobial use practices of Tennessee beef producers |
title_short | A survey of antimicrobial use practices of Tennessee beef producers |
title_sort | survey of antimicrobial use practices of tennessee beef producers |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6604443/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31266492 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12917-019-1978-6 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT ekakorojohne asurveyofantimicrobialusepracticesoftennesseebeefproducers AT caldwellmarc asurveyofantimicrobialusepracticesoftennesseebeefproducers AT strandelizabethb asurveyofantimicrobialusepracticesoftennesseebeefproducers AT stricklandlew asurveyofantimicrobialusepracticesoftennesseebeefproducers AT okaforchikac asurveyofantimicrobialusepracticesoftennesseebeefproducers AT ekakorojohne surveyofantimicrobialusepracticesoftennesseebeefproducers AT caldwellmarc surveyofantimicrobialusepracticesoftennesseebeefproducers AT strandelizabethb surveyofantimicrobialusepracticesoftennesseebeefproducers AT stricklandlew surveyofantimicrobialusepracticesoftennesseebeefproducers AT okaforchikac surveyofantimicrobialusepracticesoftennesseebeefproducers |