Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35643964›Full record

ArticleZoonoses and public health2022

A quarterly Survey of antibiotic prescribing in small animal and equine practices-Minnesota and North Dakota, 2020.

Emma R Bollig, Jennifer L Granick, Teckla L Webb, Christie Ward, Amanda L Beaudoin

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Zoonoses and public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
5.0field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 38 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. 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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Emma R BolligCollege of Veterinary Medicine, University of Minnesota, St. Paul, Minnesota, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-5997-3208
Jennifer L GranickCollege of Veterinary Medicine, University of Minnesota, St. Paul, Minnesota, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-8330-3848
Teckla L WebbCollege of Health Professions, North Dakota State University, Fargo, North Dakota, USA.
Christie WardCollege of Veterinary Medicine, University of Minnesota, St. Paul, Minnesota, USA.
Amanda L BeaudoinMinnesota Department of Health, Saint Paul, Minnesota, USA.
University of Minnesota · USMinnesota Department of Health · USNorth Dakota State University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Antimicrobials are critical for medicine, but the problem of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) threatens the effectiveness of these valuable drugs. In USA, there are no national- or state-level programs or policies in place to track antibiotic use (AU) in dogs, cats, and horses, despite acknowledgement of this sector's importance to both the AMR problem and its solution. AU measurement is a key part of antibiotic stewardship and AMR prevention. This study aimed to fill existing gaps in the veterinary professions' knowledge of antibiotic prescribing in small animals and horses. To address this aim, medical record data were collected on a single day per quarter for 1 year from 19 Minnesota and North Dakota small animal and equine practices, totaling 1,899 veterinarian consults of dogs, cats, and horses. Overall, 25.8% of all canine, feline, and equine consults involved an antibiotic prescription. Third-generation cephalosporins were the most commonly prescribed systemic antibiotic drug class, and the long-acting injectable drug, cefovecin, was the most commonly prescribed antibiotic for cats (34.5%). Topical antibiotic preparations were prescribed frequently, especially in dogs (42.5% of canine prescriptions), though systemic antibiotics were often prescribed concurrently. Common general indications, based on problem or diagnosis recorded in the medical record, for antibiotics in all species combined were skin conditions (24.4%), otitis (22.1%), ophthalmic (9.4%), gastrointestinal (8.3%), respiratory (8.3%), and urinary tract (7.6%) diseases. While 44.2% of patients for which antibiotics were prescribed had cytology performed, only 3.9% had bacterial culture and susceptibility performed. In a pre-study survey, veterinarians' recommendations for AU differed from actual prescribing, suggesting collection of AU data provides more accurate assessments of veterinary prescribing behaviour than surveys. This study shows feasibility of AU measurement in small animals and horses. The data collection tool and standard operating procedures described prove suitable for national AU data collection.

Indexed as

Anti-Bacterial AgentsAnti-Infective AgentsAnimalsCatsCephalosporinsDogsHorsesMinnesotaNorth DakotaSurveys and QuestionnairesAnti-Bacterial AgentsAnti-Infective AgentsCephalosporinsanti-bacterial agentsantibiotic prophylaxisantimicrobial stewardshipdrug resistancemicrobialpublic health

Identifiers

PMID35643964
PMCPMC9796041
OpenAlexW4281749575

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.