Contrasting Treatment- and Farm-Level Metrics of Antimicrobial Use Based on Used Daily Dose vs. Defined Daily Dose for the German Antibiotics Minimization Concept.

animal daily dose antimicrobial use (AMU) benchmarking defined daily dose for animals (DDDvet) livestock treatment frequency used daily dose (UDD)

Journal

Frontiers in veterinary science
ISSN: 2297-1769
Titre abrégé: Front Vet Sci
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101666658

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
2022
Historique:
received: 05 04 2022
accepted: 25 05 2022
entrez: 14 7 2022
pubmed: 15 7 2022
medline: 15 7 2022
Statut: epublish

Résumé

The German Antibiotics Minimization Concept defines a farm-level benchmarking process based on half-yearly treatment frequencies that applies to six animal populations for fattening: calves (≤ 8 months), cattle (> 8 months), piglets (≤ 30 kg), pigs (> 30 kg), broiler chickens, and turkeys. The treatment frequency defined in the Minimization Concept takes into account the number of animals treated, the treatment duration, and the number of active antimicrobial ingredients, for each individual treatment, and is equivalent to a treatment frequency based on the used daily dose (UDD) and the actual weight of the animals at the time of treatment. With data from the German benchmarking system for the seven half-year periods from the second semester 2014 to the end of 2017, we compared UDD-based metrics of antimicrobial use (AMU) at the treatment and the farm level with metrics based on defined daily doses for animals (DDDvet) and standardized animal weights assumed at the time most likely for treatment. We show the extent to which DDDvet-based metrics would introduce errors into the measurement of AMU at the treatment level and consequently at the farm level. To that end, we introduce the average animal daily dose ratio, an aggregate measure that quantifies how choice of antimicrobial substances, deviations of used doses from recommended doses, of recommended doses from DDDvet values, and of treatment weights from standardized weights, affect a farm's AMU metrics. Our results show that in all animal populations considered benchmarking processes would become less successful at targeting high users. This would be especially true for broiler chickens and turkeys where the relative weight gain during fattening is the largest and overdosing appears to be common practice. Therefore, in AMU monitoring systems with the purpose of benchmarking farms UDD-based metrics are preferable to DDDvet-based metrics.

Identifiants

pubmed: 35832330
doi: 10.3389/fvets.2022.913197
pmc: PMC9271936
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Pagination

913197

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2022 Flor, Tenhagen and Käsbohrer.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Références

Lancet. 2022 Feb 12;399(10325):629-655
pubmed: 35065702
Front Vet Sci. 2019 Apr 24;6:116
pubmed: 31069237
Front Vet Sci. 2020 Aug 21;7:540
pubmed: 33195490
Front Vet Sci. 2020 Sep 09;7:638
pubmed: 33033725
Schweiz Arch Tierheilkd. 2018 Oct;160(10):597-605
pubmed: 30301713
J Antimicrob Chemother. 2014 Mar;69(3):827-34
pubmed: 24216767
Front Vet Sci. 2019 Jul 17;6:220
pubmed: 31380397

Auteurs

Matthias Flor (M)

Department Biological Safety, German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment, Berlin, Germany.

Bernd-Alois Tenhagen (BA)

Department Biological Safety, German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment, Berlin, Germany.

Annemarie Käsbohrer (A)

Department Biological Safety, German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment, Berlin, Germany.
Unit of Veterinary Public Health and Epidemiology, Department for Farm Animals and Veterinary Public Health, University of Veterinary Medicine, Vienna, Austria.

Classifications MeSH