Description of on-farm treatment compliance and risk factors for culling in sows.
Antimicrobial resistance
Body condition score
Drug compliance
Sow treatments
Journal
Porcine health management
ISSN: 2055-5660
Titre abrégé: Porcine Health Manag
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101684126
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
25 Nov 2021
25 Nov 2021
Historique:
received:
09
09
2021
accepted:
17
11
2021
entrez:
26
11
2021
pubmed:
27
11
2021
medline:
27
11
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
In commercial pig farming, sick or injured sows are often treated by producers or hired staff. To date, limited quantitative data exists on treatment compliance and the possible effect on sow longevity post-treatment. The objective of the study was to quantify on-farm compliance of treatment selection, frequency, and dosage, as well as to investigate the association between body condition scores (BCS) and other sow-level factors on post-treatment cull risk. On-farm treatment records, including culling reason or reason of death up to 6 months post-treatment, production records and sow characteristics were obtained for 134 sows over an 8-week period. Treatment compliance was based on the accuracy of recorded treatments compared to the herd veterinarian's established treatment guidelines. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression models including treatment reason, treatment compliance, BCS, parity, production stage and production metrics, were constructed to investigate associations between those variables and sow culling or death. This study found low compliance for on-farm sow treatment protocols, with only 22.4% (30/134) of the sows receiving correct and complete treatment during the duration of the study. No effect of individual treatment components (drug, dosage, or frequency) on sow culling was observed. A trend for an interaction between treatment compliance and BCS was found, and parity and number of piglets born alive were identified as predictors for sow maintenance in the herd. On-farm sow treatment compliance was low, resulting in that approximately 80% of the enrolled sows were not treated according to existing guidelines. Non-compliance of treatment guidelines did not seem to affect the risk of culling in treated sows but may have prolonged any associated pain, recovery time and negatively impacted the sow welfare during that time period.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
In commercial pig farming, sick or injured sows are often treated by producers or hired staff. To date, limited quantitative data exists on treatment compliance and the possible effect on sow longevity post-treatment. The objective of the study was to quantify on-farm compliance of treatment selection, frequency, and dosage, as well as to investigate the association between body condition scores (BCS) and other sow-level factors on post-treatment cull risk.
RESULTS
RESULTS
On-farm treatment records, including culling reason or reason of death up to 6 months post-treatment, production records and sow characteristics were obtained for 134 sows over an 8-week period. Treatment compliance was based on the accuracy of recorded treatments compared to the herd veterinarian's established treatment guidelines. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression models including treatment reason, treatment compliance, BCS, parity, production stage and production metrics, were constructed to investigate associations between those variables and sow culling or death. This study found low compliance for on-farm sow treatment protocols, with only 22.4% (30/134) of the sows receiving correct and complete treatment during the duration of the study. No effect of individual treatment components (drug, dosage, or frequency) on sow culling was observed. A trend for an interaction between treatment compliance and BCS was found, and parity and number of piglets born alive were identified as predictors for sow maintenance in the herd.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
On-farm sow treatment compliance was low, resulting in that approximately 80% of the enrolled sows were not treated according to existing guidelines. Non-compliance of treatment guidelines did not seem to affect the risk of culling in treated sows but may have prolonged any associated pain, recovery time and negatively impacted the sow welfare during that time period.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34823594
doi: 10.1186/s40813-021-00238-7
pii: 10.1186/s40813-021-00238-7
pmc: PMC8613945
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
59Subventions
Organisme : NIH HHS
ID : T35 OD010977
Pays : United States
Informations de copyright
© 2021. The Author(s).
Références
Prev Vet Med. 2014 Feb 1;113(2):268-72
pubmed: 24331733
Zoonoses Public Health. 2014 Feb;61(1):4-17
pubmed: 23556412
Porcine Health Manag. 2019 Nov 20;5:25
pubmed: 31832226
Anim Reprod Sci. 2015 Aug;159:191-7
pubmed: 26139322
J Vet Med A Physiol Pathol Clin Med. 2005 Oct;52(8):423-8
pubmed: 16176574
J Am Vet Med Assoc. 2005 Mar 15;226(6):956-61
pubmed: 15787000
J Anim Sci. 2017 Mar;95(3):1372-1381
pubmed: 28380534
Anim Front. 2018 Jun 23;8(3):53-59
pubmed: 32002223
J Am Vet Med Assoc. 2000 Feb 15;216(4):510-5
pubmed: 10687005
J Am Vet Med Assoc. 2010 Jan 15;236(2):201-10
pubmed: 20074013
J Clin Microbiol. 2012 Jul;50(7):2366-72
pubmed: 22518873
Rev Sci Tech. 2014 Apr;33(1):131-7
pubmed: 25000785
J Anim Sci. 2009 May;87(5):1794-800
pubmed: 19151155
Prev Vet Med. 2007 Dec 14;82(3-4):198-212
pubmed: 17604857
Zoonoses Public Health. 2016 May;63(3):241-50
pubmed: 26355644
Can Vet J. 1998 Feb;39(2):87-96
pubmed: 10051955