Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39828782›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of the Egyptian Public Health Association2025

Antimicrobial use in animal farms in Egypt: rates, patterns, and determinants.

Nada ElSayed, Amira Amine, Laila El-Attar, Mohamed E K Amin

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of the Egyptian Public Health Association, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Multidrug-ResistantFoods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

4 authors.

Nada ElSayedDepartment of Microbiology, High Institute of Public Health, Alexandria University, Alexandria, Egypt. hiph.nahmed@alexu.edu.eg.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3434-0391
Amira AmineDepartment of Microbiology, High Institute of Public Health, Alexandria University, Alexandria, Egypt.
Laila El-AttarDepartment of Microbiology, High Institute of Public Health, Alexandria University, Alexandria, Egypt.
Mohamed E K AminFaculty of Pharmacy, Alamein International University, Matrouh, Egypt.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWhile antimicrobial use (AMU) in human healthcare has received significant attention as a key driver of antimicrobial resistance (AMR), less emphasis has been placed on AMU practices and attitudes in animal husbandry. To address this gap, this study examines the patterns and underlying drivers of AMU on animal farms.

methodsA survey instrument was distributed to farm staff in 150 animal farms across 15 Egyptian governorates. Farms were selected from a list curated by a private platform specialized in Egypt's poultry and cattle industry. An online search was conducted to identify additional farms not included in the list or when the contact information was unavailable. The instrument covered key items related to AMU including types of antimicrobials used, indications, their perceived benefits, and the feed conversion ratio (FCR). Using the theory of reasoned action (TRA) as a guiding theoretical framework, this study assesses key factors influencing the AMU behavior of farm personnel.

resultsOut of 150 farm personnel invited to fill out the survey forms, 111 (74%) responded and agreed to participate. All surveyed personnel reported using antimicrobials, and almost two-thirds (65%) reported using them for non-therapeutic purposes. Non-therapeutic use of antimicrobials, however, had no impact on FCR across all farm types (poultry, cattle, and mixed). The most used antimicrobials were penicillins (81%), followed by macrolides (78%) and tetracyclines (72%). Half of the studied farms reported using colistin, with more than half of this segment (55%) reporting using it for non-therapeutic purposes. Farm personnel's AMU behavior was associated with the TRA constructs: perceived benefits of antimicrobials (attitude) and perceived AMU behavior in other farms (subjective norm).

conclusionsAntimicrobials are unanimously used in animal farms in Egypt, including those classified as last-resort options, such as colistin. Using antimicrobials for disease prevention or growth promotion did not decrease the FCR. Interventions that target the farm personnel's attitude and the subjective norm should be carried out to change their behavior regarding the use of antimicrobials. Egyptian guidelines for AMU in livestock are urgently needed, along with training to raise awareness of AMR and safer practices. The use of last-resort drugs like colistin should be banned in animal farming, and national surveillance systems should monitor AMU and AMR trends.

Indexed as

Animal farmAntimicrobial resistanceAntimicrobial useBehaviorOne HealthTheory of reasoned action

Identifiers

PMID39828782
PMCPMC11743412

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.