Cargando…
Quantification, description and international comparison of antimicrobial use on Irish pig farms
BACKGROUND: There is concern that the use of antimicrobials in livestock production has a role in the emergence and dissemination of antimicrobial resistance in animals and humans. Consequently, there are increasing efforts to reduce antimicrobial use (AMU) in agriculture. As the largest consumer of...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7549222/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33062293 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40813-020-00166-y |
_version_ | 1783592760923652096 |
---|---|
author | O’Neill, Lorcan Rodrigues da Costa, Maria Leonard, Finola C. Gibbons, James Calderón Díaz, Julia Adriana McCutcheon, Gerard Manzanilla, Edgar García |
author_facet | O’Neill, Lorcan Rodrigues da Costa, Maria Leonard, Finola C. Gibbons, James Calderón Díaz, Julia Adriana McCutcheon, Gerard Manzanilla, Edgar García |
author_sort | O’Neill, Lorcan |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: There is concern that the use of antimicrobials in livestock production has a role in the emergence and dissemination of antimicrobial resistance in animals and humans. Consequently, there are increasing efforts to reduce antimicrobial use (AMU) in agriculture. As the largest consumer of veterinary antimicrobials in several countries, the pig sector is a particular focus of these efforts. Data on AMU in pig production in Ireland are lacking. This study aimed to quantify AMU on Irish pig farms, to identify the major patterns of use employed and to compare the results obtained to those from other published reports and studies. RESULTS: Antimicrobial use data for 2016 was collected from 67 Irish pig farms which represented c. 35% of national production. The combined sample population consumed 14.5 t of antimicrobial by weight of active ingredient suggesting that the pig sector accounted for approximately 40% of veterinary AMU in Ireland in 2016. At farm level, median AMU measured in milligram per population correction unit (mg/PCU) was 93.9 (range: 1.0–1196.0). When measured in terms of treatment incidence (TI200), median AMU was 15.4 (range: 0.2–169.2). Oral treatments accounted for 97.5% of all AMU by weight of active ingredient and were primarily administered via medicated feed to pigs in the post weaning stages of production. AMU in Irish pig production in 2016 was higher than results obtained from the national reports of Sweden, Denmark, the Netherlands and France but lower than the United Kingdom. CONCLUSIONS: Pig production in Ireland is an important consumer of veterinary antimicrobials. The quantities and patterns of AMU on Irish pig farms are comparable to pig production in other European countries but higher than some countries with more advanced AMU reduction strategies. This AMU is characterised by a high proportion of prophylactic use and is primarily administered to pigs post weaning via medicated feed. Further studies to better understand the reasons for AMU on Irish pig farms and strategies to improve health among weaner pigs will be of benefit in the effort to reduce AMU. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7549222 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-75492222020-10-13 Quantification, description and international comparison of antimicrobial use on Irish pig farms O’Neill, Lorcan Rodrigues da Costa, Maria Leonard, Finola C. Gibbons, James Calderón Díaz, Julia Adriana McCutcheon, Gerard Manzanilla, Edgar García Porcine Health Manag Research BACKGROUND: There is concern that the use of antimicrobials in livestock production has a role in the emergence and dissemination of antimicrobial resistance in animals and humans. Consequently, there are increasing efforts to reduce antimicrobial use (AMU) in agriculture. As the largest consumer of veterinary antimicrobials in several countries, the pig sector is a particular focus of these efforts. Data on AMU in pig production in Ireland are lacking. This study aimed to quantify AMU on Irish pig farms, to identify the major patterns of use employed and to compare the results obtained to those from other published reports and studies. RESULTS: Antimicrobial use data for 2016 was collected from 67 Irish pig farms which represented c. 35% of national production. The combined sample population consumed 14.5 t of antimicrobial by weight of active ingredient suggesting that the pig sector accounted for approximately 40% of veterinary AMU in Ireland in 2016. At farm level, median AMU measured in milligram per population correction unit (mg/PCU) was 93.9 (range: 1.0–1196.0). When measured in terms of treatment incidence (TI200), median AMU was 15.4 (range: 0.2–169.2). Oral treatments accounted for 97.5% of all AMU by weight of active ingredient and were primarily administered via medicated feed to pigs in the post weaning stages of production. AMU in Irish pig production in 2016 was higher than results obtained from the national reports of Sweden, Denmark, the Netherlands and France but lower than the United Kingdom. CONCLUSIONS: Pig production in Ireland is an important consumer of veterinary antimicrobials. The quantities and patterns of AMU on Irish pig farms are comparable to pig production in other European countries but higher than some countries with more advanced AMU reduction strategies. This AMU is characterised by a high proportion of prophylactic use and is primarily administered to pigs post weaning via medicated feed. Further studies to better understand the reasons for AMU on Irish pig farms and strategies to improve health among weaner pigs will be of benefit in the effort to reduce AMU. BioMed Central 2020-10-12 /pmc/articles/PMC7549222/ /pubmed/33062293 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40813-020-00166-y Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. 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 in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Research O’Neill, Lorcan Rodrigues da Costa, Maria Leonard, Finola C. Gibbons, James Calderón Díaz, Julia Adriana McCutcheon, Gerard Manzanilla, Edgar García Quantification, description and international comparison of antimicrobial use on Irish pig farms |
title | Quantification, description and international comparison of antimicrobial use on Irish pig farms |
title_full | Quantification, description and international comparison of antimicrobial use on Irish pig farms |
title_fullStr | Quantification, description and international comparison of antimicrobial use on Irish pig farms |
title_full_unstemmed | Quantification, description and international comparison of antimicrobial use on Irish pig farms |
title_short | Quantification, description and international comparison of antimicrobial use on Irish pig farms |
title_sort | quantification, description and international comparison of antimicrobial use on irish pig farms |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7549222/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33062293 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40813-020-00166-y |
work_keys_str_mv | AT oneilllorcan quantificationdescriptionandinternationalcomparisonofantimicrobialuseonirishpigfarms AT rodriguesdacostamaria quantificationdescriptionandinternationalcomparisonofantimicrobialuseonirishpigfarms AT leonardfinolac quantificationdescriptionandinternationalcomparisonofantimicrobialuseonirishpigfarms AT gibbonsjames quantificationdescriptionandinternationalcomparisonofantimicrobialuseonirishpigfarms AT calderondiazjuliaadriana quantificationdescriptionandinternationalcomparisonofantimicrobialuseonirishpigfarms AT mccutcheongerard quantificationdescriptionandinternationalcomparisonofantimicrobialuseonirishpigfarms AT manzanillaedgargarcia quantificationdescriptionandinternationalcomparisonofantimicrobialuseonirishpigfarms |