Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32201578›Full record

ArticleVeterinary record open2020

Antimicrobial prescriptions and adherence to prudent use guidelines for selected canine diseases in Switzerland in 2016.

Bérénice Lutz, Claudia Lehner, Kira Schmitt, Barbara Willi, Gertraud Schüpbach, Meike Mevissen, Ruth Peter, Cedric Müntener, Hanspeter Naegeli, Simone Schuller

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Veterinary record open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 26 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
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

10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Bérénice LutzDepartment Clinical Veterinary Medicine, Division Small Animal Internal Medicine, Vetsuisse Faculty University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Claudia LehnerDepartment Clinical Veterinary Medicine, Division Small Animal Internal Medicine, Vetsuisse Faculty University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Kira SchmittClinic for Small Animal Internal Medicine, Vetsuisse Faculty University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-5790-3636
Barbara WilliClinic for Small Animal Internal Medicine, Vetsuisse Faculty University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Gertraud SchüpbachVeterinary Public Health Institute, Vetsuisse Faculty, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Meike MevissenDivision of Pharmacology and Toxicology, Vetsuisse Faculty, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Ruth PeterInstitute of Veterinary Pharmacology and Toxicology, Vetsuisse Faculty University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Cedric MüntenerInstitute of Veterinary Pharmacology and Toxicology, Vetsuisse Faculty University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Hanspeter NaegeliInstitute of Veterinary Pharmacology and Toxicology, Vetsuisse Faculty University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Simone SchullerDepartment Clinical Veterinary Medicine, Division Small Animal Internal Medicine, Vetsuisse Faculty University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-7316-4423
University of Bern · CHUniversity of Zurich · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAntimicrobial resistance is an increasing problem in human and veterinary medicine and is closely linked to the use of antimicrobials. The objective of this study was to describe antimicrobial prescriptions for selected canine diseases in Switzerland during 2016.

methodsDogs presented to two university hospitals and 14 private practices for acute diarrhoea (AD; n=371), suspected or confirmed urinary tract infections (UTIs; n=245), respiratory tract infections (RTIs; n=274) or wound infections (WIs; n=175) were included. Clinical history, diagnostic work-up and antimicrobial prescription (class, dosage and duration) were retrospectively assessed. A justification score was applied to evaluate appropriateness of antimicrobial therapy based on available national and international consensus guidelines.

resultsAntimicrobials were prescribed in 65 per cent of dogs with AD, 88 per cent with UTI, 62 per cent with RTI and 90 per cent with WI. The most prescribed antimicrobial classes (monotherapy and combination therapy) were potentiated aminopenicillins (59 per cent), nitroimidazoles (22 per cent), non-potentiated aminopenicillins (16 per cent) and fluoroquinolones (13 per cent). Overall, 38 per cent (95 per cent CI 0.35 to 0.41) of the prescriptions were in accordance with consensus guidelines. In dogs with AD, antimicrobial therapy was associated with the presence of haemorrhagic diarrhoea (P<0.05) and complied in 32 per cent with consensus guidelines, which recommend antimicrobial treatment only when sepsis is suspected. A bacterial aetiology was confirmed via culture and/or sediment examination in 36 per cent of dogs with suspected UTI.

conclusionsOverall, adherence to consensus guidelines was poor both, at university hospitals and private practices. Antimicrobial stewardship measures are therefore needed to improve prudent use.

Indexed as

antimicrobial resistanceantimicrobial stewardshipdogsprescribing habits

Identifiers

PMID32201578
PMCPMC7064144
OpenAlexW3012064870

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.