Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39650015›Full record

ArticleJDS communications2024

Variation in partial direct costs of dry cow therapy on 37 large dairy herds.

J Leite de Campos, A Kates, A Steinberger, A Sethi, G Suen, John Shutske, N Safdar, Tony Goldberg, P L Ruegg

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JDS communications, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

9 authors.

J Leite de CamposDepartment of Animal Science, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI 48824.
A KatesDepartment of Medicine, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI 53705.
A SteinbergerDepartment of Bacteriology, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI 53706.
A SethiDepartment of Population Health Sciences, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI 53726.
G SuenDepartment of Bacteriology, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI 53706.
John ShutskeDepartment of Biological Systems Engineering, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI 53706.
N SafdarDepartment of Medicine, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI 53705.
Tony GoldbergDepartment of Pathobiological Sciences, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI 53706.
P L RueggDepartment of Large Animal Clinical Sciences, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI 48824.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The objective of this observational study was to estimate partial direct costs of dry cow antibiotic therapy (DCT) protocols used on 37 large dairy herds in Wisconsin and to estimate the potential monetary savings and reduction in antimicrobial usage (AMU) if selective DCT was used. Partial direct costs of DCT were calculated using costs of intramammary (IMM) antimicrobials and teat sealants. Data were retrospectively collected on 37 large dairy farms for a period of 1 yr and included the total number of cows dried off, types of IMM antimicrobial used, and product prices (obtained from farm invoices). A single farm visit was performed to verify data. Clinical mastitis (CM) and SCC history across lactation were used as the criteria to identify cows eligible to receive only teat sealants (no antibiotic DCT) based on adoption of a hypothetical selective DCT program. Descriptive statistics were performed using PROC MEANS to summarize continuous herd and cow characteristics. Differences in costs among IMM antibiotic products and eligibility to not receive antibiotics at dry-off by parity were analyzed using ANOVA. Differences in milk yield at the last test-day and DIM at dry-off based on eligibility for selective DCT were analyzed using PROC MIXED. A total of 35,691 cows were dried off across all herds (n = 37) and most of the herds used IMM antibiotic DCT at dry-off in most of the cows. Teat sealant was used as part of the dry-off protocol in all but 3 herds. Of the enrolled farms, 30 used blanket antibiotic DCT in all quarters of all cows and 7 herds used selective DCT with no administration of antibiotics given to 0.8% to 58% of the dry cows within the herd. Across all farms, the average cost of products given per dried cow was $19.57 ± 0.64 (mean ± SE) and ranged from $8.72 to $24.04. As expected, the cost per dried cow was greater ($23.45 ± $0.38) in herds that used higher cost IMM antibiotics as compared with herds that used lower cost IMM antibiotics ($16.64 ± $0.40). When using an algorithm based on udder health records to hypothetically select cows that would be eligible to receive teat sealants only (no antibiotic DCT), eligibility ranged from 27.3% to 93.3% within-herds and varied by parity, milk yield at last test-day, and DIM at dry-off. If a selective DCT program based on udder health records was used, an overall reduction of $5.37 (27% of total costs) per dry cow would be expected. Likewise, adoption of selective DCT based on udder health records would reduce AMU at dry-off by approximately 51%. However, neither of these estimates included potential adverse health complications (such as increased CM) that can occur if selective DCT programs are not effectively performed. Variations in partial direct costs at dry-off were observed among herds based on treatment protocols. In herds that have good udder health management and contagious mastitis pathogens controlled, adoption of selective DCT based on SCC and history of CM can reduce AMU and partial direct costs of dry cow management.

Identifiers

PMID39650015
PMCPMC11624336

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.