Abstract
Abstract
Background
Data on antimicrobial use (AMU) in pig production are needed for the development of good antimicrobial stewardship practices to reduce the risk of antimicrobial resistance in bacteria that can cause illness in animals and humans. In Canada, there is a lack of quantitative data on AMU in the farrowing and nursery stages of pig production. This study aimed to determine which antimicrobial active ingredients are currently used in farrowing, nursery, and grower-finisher herds in the province of Ontario, Canada, and to quantify AMU using various metrics. We collected data on herd demographics, biosecurity, health status, and AMU during one production cycle from 25 farrowing and 25 nursery herds in Ontario, between May 2017 and April 2018, and obtained data from 23 Ontario grower-finisher herds during the same time frame from the Public Health Agency’s Canadian Integrated Program for Antimicrobial Resistance Surveillance. We applied frequency measures, and weight-, and dose-based metrics to the data.
Results
In all pigs, the highest quantity of AMU was administered in-feed. By all routes of administration and compared to other production stages, nursery pigs used more antimicrobials in mg/kg biomass and the number of Canadian defined daily doses per 1000 pig-days (doseCA rate), while grower-finisher pigs used more antimicrobials in total kilograms and the number of Canadian defined daily doses per pig. In suckling pigs in some herds, there was routine disease prevention use of ceftiofur, an antimicrobial active ingredient categorized as very highly important in human medicine by Health Canada. The top antimicrobial used in each stage of pig production often varied by the metric used. There was producer-reported growth promotion use of antimicrobials in suckling and grower-finisher feed.
Conclusions
The results of this study provide a current picture of AMU in pigs in Ontario and can be used as a basis for further research on AMU in farrowing and nursery herds in Canada. Our findings confirm that it would be useful to include farrowing and nursery herds in routine AMU surveillance in Canada. A future analysis using data from this project will examine factors that affect the quantity of AMU.
Funder
Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs
Ontario Veterinary College, University of Guelph
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Animal Science and Zoology,Small Animals
Reference58 articles.
1. Chantziaras I, Boyen F, Callens B, Dewulf J. Correlation between veterinary antimicrobial use and antimicrobial resistance in food-producing animals: a report on seven countries. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2013;69(3):827–34.
2. Scott Weese J, Page SW, Prescott JF. Antimicrobial stewardship in animals. In: Giguère S, Prescott JF, Dowling PM, editors. Antimicrobial therapy in veterinary medicine. 5th ed. Hoboken: Wiley; 2013. p. 117–32. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118675014.ch7.
3. Deckert A, Gow S, Rosengren L, Léger D, Avery B, Daignault D, et al. Canadian Integrated Program for Antimicrobial Resistance Surveillance (CIPARS) Farm Program: results from finisher pig surveillance. Zoonoses Public Health. 2010;57(Suppl 1):71–84.
4. Government of Canada. Canadian Integrated Program for Antimicrobial Resistance Surveillance (CIPARS): 2017 design and methods. [Internet]. Guelph (Ontario): Public Health Agency of Canada; 2020 Jan [cited 2020 Jul 15]. http://publications.gc.ca/site/eng/9.879521/publication.html.
5. Dunlop RH, McEwen SA, Meek AH, Friendship RA, Clarke RC, Black WD. Antimicrobial drug use and related management practices among Ontario swine producers. Can Vet J. 1998;39(2):87–96.