Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36277073›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in veterinary science2022

Improving farm-level antimicrobial stewardship benchmarks by reporting antimicrobial use within the context of both the magnitude of disease pressure and the outcome of therapy.

Nora F D Schrag, Sandra M Godden, Randall S Singer, Jason E Lombard, John R Wenz, David E Amrine, Brian V Lubbers, Michael D Apley

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in veterinary science, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

8 authors.

Nora F D SchragCollege of Veterinary Medicine, Department of Clinical Sciences Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS, United States.
Sandra M GoddenDepartment of Veterinary Population Medicine, University of Minnesota, Saint Paul, MN, United States.
Randall S SingerDepartment of Veterinary and Biomedical Sciences, University of Minnesota, Saint Paul, MN, United States.
Jason E LombardUSDA Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, Field Epidemiological Investigation Services, Fort Collins, CO, United States.
John R WenzDepartment of Veterinary Clinical Science, College of Veterinary Medicine, Washington State University, Pullman, WA, United States.
David E AmrineCollege of Veterinary Medicine, Department of Clinical Sciences Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS, United States.
Brian V LubbersCollege of Veterinary Medicine, Department of Clinical Sciences Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS, United States.
Michael D ApleyCollege of Veterinary Medicine, Department of Clinical Sciences Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This manuscript explores a method of benchmarking antimicrobial use within the context of farm level therapeutic incidence (a proxy for disease incidence), and the outcome of that therapy. This is reported both within the same farm over time (2016-2019), as well as evaluated across participating farms. Reporting antimicrobial use in this format addresses multiple primary questions necessary for evaluating on farm antimicrobial stewardship: How much disease is recorded? How much antimicrobial use is recorded? How often are antimicrobials included in therapy for each disease? What is the outcome of therapy? The three primary metrics reported are: therapeutic events per 100 cow years (TE/100CY), antimicrobial regimens per 100 cow years (REG/100CY), and the percent therapeutic success (% Success). Success was defined as: the cow remained in the herd and had no further TE recorded within 30 days of the end of the TE being evaluated. These measures identify opportunities for change on an individual farm, such as improvement in disease prevention, or a change in choices about when to include an antimicrobial in the treatment protocol. Therapeutic outcomes provide additional context, in some instances demonstrating differences in recording practices and case definitions, while in other cases serving to safeguard animal welfare as efforts are made to decrease antimicrobial use in the future. Although developed for farm level reporting, the metrics may also be more broadly summarized to meet future reporting requirements for marketing chain or national level antimicrobial use reports. The process outlined here serves as a prototype to be considered when developing antimicrobial use reporting systems where farm level antimicrobial stewardship is the primary objective.

Indexed as

antimicrobial stewardshipantimicrobial usebenchmarkingdairylivestockmonitoringpharmacoepidemiology

Identifiers

PMID36277073
PMCPMC9581275

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.