ArticleThe Veterinary record2026
'Knowledge, attitudes and practices' survey of Austrian veterinarians' antibiotic use in clinical practice.
Article in The Veterinary record, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAntimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a critical global health issue, with antimicrobial use (AMU) in veterinary medicine playing a relevant role in its emergence. This study aimed to evaluate the knowledge, attitudes and practices of Austrian veterinarians regarding AMU and AMR.
methodsAn online survey was conducted in 2022. Veterinary respondents were grouped according to their type of practice (companion animals, i.e., pets and horses; farm; mixed practice).
resultsKnowledge gaps were identified, particularly among companion animal veterinarians, with only 31% correctly recognising cefovecin as a critically important antimicrobial and 16% incorrectly stating it was a first-choice drug. However, treating groups of animals with orally administered antibiotics was correctly classed as having the highest influence on AMR by 75% of 165 respondents. With respect to deciding to use antibiotics, all practitioners considered a clinical examination to be important or very important, while cost considerations and owner expectations were classed by companion animal practitioners as being significantly less important than among farm and mixed practitioners. Of all 180 veterinarians, 47% reported using antimicrobial susceptibility testing always or regularly (approximately 20%‒50% of antibiotic treatments). LIMITATIONS: The small sample size may have introduced confirmation bias, as practitioners with a particular interest in AMU and AMR may have been more likely to respond to the survey.
conclusionThe findings confirm the need for additional training to improve prudent AMU and awareness of antimicrobial stewardship in clinical practice across all veterinary sectors in Austria. Future efforts should prioritise the knowledge gaps among companion animal practitioners, in particular.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.