Health outcomes following antimicrobial treatment of septic arthritis in Canadian feedlot calves.

Brian Warr, Sarah Parker, Karen Schwartzkopf-Genswein, Tim McAllister, Murray Jelinski

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial, Veterinary

In one paragraph

Article in The Canadian veterinary journal = La revue veterinaire canadienne, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it

0cells of the map it votes in

0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Brian WarrLarge Animal Clinical Sciences, Western College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Saskatchewan, 52 Campus Drive, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan S7N 5B4 (Warr, Parker, Jelinski); Lethbridge Research Centre, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Lethbridge, Alberta T1J 4B1 (Schwartzkopf-Genswein, McAllister).

Sarah ParkerLarge Animal Clinical Sciences, Western College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Saskatchewan, 52 Campus Drive, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan S7N 5B4 (Warr, Parker, Jelinski); Lethbridge Research Centre, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Lethbridge, Alberta T1J 4B1 (Schwartzkopf-Genswein, McAllister).

Karen Schwartzkopf-GensweinLarge Animal Clinical Sciences, Western College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Saskatchewan, 52 Campus Drive, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan S7N 5B4 (Warr, Parker, Jelinski); Lethbridge Research Centre, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Lethbridge, Alberta T1J 4B1 (Schwartzkopf-Genswein, McAllister).

Tim McAllisterLarge Animal Clinical Sciences, Western College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Saskatchewan, 52 Campus Drive, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan S7N 5B4 (Warr, Parker, Jelinski); Lethbridge Research Centre, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Lethbridge, Alberta T1J 4B1 (Schwartzkopf-Genswein, McAllister).

Murray JelinskiLarge Animal Clinical Sciences, Western College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Saskatchewan, 52 Campus Drive, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan S7N 5B4 (Warr, Parker, Jelinski); Lethbridge Research Centre, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Lethbridge, Alberta T1J 4B1 (Schwartzkopf-Genswein, McAllister).

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: To assess the clinical efficacy of treating septic arthritis (SA) with 3 different antimicrobials: oxytetracycline, florfenicol, and tulathromycin. Animal: The study population comprised fall-placed steer and heifer calves at 4 commercial western Canadian feedlots. All calves received tulathromycin at induction for bovine respiratory disease (BRD). Procedure: Calves that developed SA were allocated to a randomized clinical field trial over a 2-year period. Arthritic calves ( Results: The numbers of calves allocated to florfenicol, oxytetracycline, and tulathromycin treatments were 85, 81, and 85, respectively. There were no differences in health outcomes among antimicrobial treatments ( Conclusion: This clinical field trial identified no health outcome differences when comparing florfenicol, oxytetracycline, and tulathromycin for the 1st treatment of SA in feedlot calves. Clinical relevance: Practitioners can use these results when creating treatment protocols for SA cases. Since results indicated similar health outcomes among the 3 antimicrobials, the lowest-priced antimicrobial may be the most cost-effective option. Perhaps antimicrobial treatment does not affect SA outcomes, but this could not be determined as negative controls were not included in this study.

Indexed as

Anti-Bacterial AgentsArthritis, InfectiousCattle DiseasesDisaccharidesHeterocyclic CompoundsOxytetracyclineThiamphenicolAnimalsCanadaCattleFemaleMacrolidesMaleTreatment OutcomeAnti-Bacterial AgentsDisaccharidesflorfenicolHeterocyclic CompoundsMacrolidesOxytetracyclineThiamphenicoltulathromycin

Identifiers

PMID40671898

PMCPMC12261943

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata

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.