Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24289212›Full record

ArticleBMC veterinary research2013

Describing antimicrobial use and reported treatment efficacy in Ontario swine using the Ontario Swine Veterinary-based Surveillance program.

Shiona K Glass-Kaastra, David L Pearl, Richard J Reid-Smith, Beverly McEwen, Scott A McEwen, Rocio Amezcua, Robert M Friendship

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC veterinary research, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Shiona K Glass-KaastraDepartment of Population Medicine, University of Guelph, 50 Stone Road East, Guelph, Ontario N1G2W1, Canada. sglass@uoguelph.ca.
David L Pearl
Richard J Reid-Smith
Beverly McEwen
Scott A McEwen
Rocio Amezcua
Robert M Friendship

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe objective of this work was to retrospectively assess records received through the Ontario Swine Veterinary-based Surveillance program July 2007 - July 2009 to describe and assess relationships between reported treatment failure, antimicrobial use, diagnosis and body system affected.

resultsAntimicrobial use occurred in 676 records, 80.4% of all records recording treatment (840). The most commonly used antimicrobials were penicillin (34.9%), tetracyclines (10.7%) and ceftiofur (7.8%), and the use of multiple antimicrobials occurred in 141/676 records (20.9%). A multi-level logistic regression model was built to describe the probability of reported treatment failure. The odds of reported treatment failure were significantly reduced if the record indicated that the gastro-intestinal (GI) system was affected, as compared to all other body systems (p < 0.05). In contrast, the odds of reported treatment failure increased by 1.98 times if two antimicrobials were used as compared to one antimicrobial (p = 0.009) and by 6.52 times if three or more antimicrobials were used as compared to one antimicrobial (p = 0.005). No significant increase in reported treatment failure was seen between the use of two antimicrobials and three or more antimicrobials. No other antimicrobials were significantly associated with reported treatment failure after controlling for body system and the number of antimicrobials used.

conclusionsFailure of antimicrobial treatment is more likely to occur in non-GI conditions, as compared to GI conditions and the use of multiple antimicrobial products is also associated with an increased probability of antimicrobial treatment failure. The authors suggest that a more preventative approach to herd health should be taken in order to reduce antimicrobial inputs on-farm, including improved immunity via vaccination, management and biosecurity strategies. Furthermore, improved immunity may be viewed as a form of antimicrobial stewardship to the industry by reducing required antimicrobial inputs and consequently, reduced selection pressure for AMR.

Indexed as

AnimalsAnti-Infective AgentsCephalosporinsOntarioPenicillinsPopulation SurveillanceRetrospective StudiesSwineSwine DiseasesTetracyclineTreatment FailureTreatment OutcomeVeterinary MedicineAnti-Infective AgentsceftiofurCephalosporinsPenicillinsTetracycline

Identifiers

PMID24289212
PMCPMC4220827

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.