Antimicrobial Usage in Animal Production: A Review of the Literature with a Focus on Low- and Middle-Income Countries

Antimicrobial use (AMU) in animal production is a key contributor to antimicrobial resistance (AMR) worldwide. As consumption of animal protein and associated animal production is forecast to increase markedly over coming years in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), accurate monitoring of AMU...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Nguyen V. Cuong (Author), Pawin Padungtod (Author), Guy Thwaites (Author), Juan J. Carrique-Mas (Author)
Format: Book
Published: MDPI AG, 2018-08-01T00:00:00Z.
Subjects:
Online Access:Connect to this object online.
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!

MARC

LEADER 00000 am a22000003u 4500
001 doaj_fd35a7c69b504e17b7b5b75790763e5b
042 |a dc 
100 1 0 |a Nguyen V. Cuong  |e author 
700 1 0 |a Pawin Padungtod  |e author 
700 1 0 |a Guy Thwaites  |e author 
700 1 0 |a Juan J. Carrique-Mas  |e author 
245 0 0 |a Antimicrobial Usage in Animal Production: A Review of the Literature with a Focus on Low- and Middle-Income Countries 
260 |b MDPI AG,   |c 2018-08-01T00:00:00Z. 
500 |a 2079-6382 
500 |a 10.3390/antibiotics7030075 
520 |a Antimicrobial use (AMU) in animal production is a key contributor to antimicrobial resistance (AMR) worldwide. As consumption of animal protein and associated animal production is forecast to increase markedly over coming years in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), accurate monitoring of AMU has become imperative. We summarized data from 89 scientific studies reporting AMU data in animal production published in English since 1998, identified through the ‘ISI Web of Knowledge’ search engine. The aims were as follows: (a) to describe methodologies and metrics used to quantify AMU; (b) to summarize qualitative (on-farm prevalence of use) and quantitative (amounts of antimicrobial active principle) data, in order to identify food animal species at the highest risk of AMU; and (c) to highlight data gaps from LMICs. Only 17/89 (19.1%) studies were conducted in LMICs. Sixty (67.3%) reported quantitative data use, with ‘daily doses per animal-time’ being the most common metric. AMU was greatest in chickens (138 doses/1000 animal-days [inter quartile range (IQR) 91.1–438.3]), followed by swine (40.2 [IQR 8.5–120.4]), and dairy cattle (10.0 [IQR 5.5–13.6]). However, per kg of meat produced, AMU was highest in swine, followed by chickens and cattle. Our review highlights a large deficit of data from LMICs, and provides a reference for comparison with further surveillance and research initiatives aiming to reduce AMU in animal production globally. 
546 |a EN 
690 |a antimicrobial use 
690 |a livestock 
690 |a poultry 
690 |a metrics 
690 |a pigs 
690 |a cattle 
690 |a chickens 
690 |a Therapeutics. Pharmacology 
690 |a RM1-950 
655 7 |a article  |2 local 
786 0 |n Antibiotics, Vol 7, Iss 3, p 75 (2018) 
787 0 |n http://www.mdpi.com/2079-6382/7/3/75 
787 0 |n https://doaj.org/toc/2079-6382 
856 4 1 |u https://doaj.org/article/fd35a7c69b504e17b7b5b75790763e5b  |z Connect to this object online.