Antimicrobial use in poultry flocks in Austria between 2013 and 2019

Trend of Antimicrobial Use in Food-Producing Animals from 2018 to 2020 in Nepal

Antimicrobial resistance is a global public health problem and is primarily driven by the widespread overuse of antibiotics. However, antimicrobial use data in animals are not readily available due to the absence of a national database in many developing countries, including Nepal. This study was conducted to estimate the quantities of antimicrobials available in Nepal as an indicator of their use in food-producing animals between 2018 and 2020. Data were collected through surveys targeting major stakeholders: (i) the Department of Drug Administration (DDA), the Government of Nepal (GoN) for the authorized antimicrobials for veterinary use in Nepal, (ii) veterinary pharmaceuticals for antimicrobials produced in Nepal, (iii) the DDA and Veterinary Importers Association for antimicrobials bought by veterinary drug importers, and (iv) the Department of Customs, GoN, for antibiotics sourced through customs. Data showed that in the 3 years, a total of 96 trade names, comprising 35 genera of antibiotics representing 10 classes, were either produced or imported in Nepal. In total, 91,088 kg, 47,694 kg, and 45,671 kg of active ingredients of antimicrobials were available in 2018, 2019, and 2020, respectively. None of the antibiotics were intended for growth promotion, but were primarily for therapeutic purposes. Oxytetracycline, tilmicosin, and sulfadimidine were among the most-used antibiotics in Nepal in 2020. Oxytetracycline was primarily intended for parenteral application, whereas tilmicosin was solely for oral use. Sulfadimidine was available for oral use, except for a small proportion for injection purposes. Aminoglycosides, fluroquinolones, nitrofurans, sulfonamides, and tetracyclines were mostly produced locally, whereas cephalosporins, macrolides and "other" classes of antimicrobials were imported. Amphenicols and penicillins were exclusively imported and nitrofurans were produced locally only. In general, except for tetracyclines, the volume of antimicrobials produced locally and/or imported in 2020 was lower than that in 2018, which corresponded to a decreasing trend in total antimicrobials available. Furthermore, the subsequent years have seen a decrease in the use of critically important antibiotics, particularly class I antibiotics. Finally, this study has firstly established a benchmark for future monitoring of antimicrobial usage in food-producing animals in Nepal. These data are useful for risk analysis, planning, interpreting resistance surveillance data, and evaluating the effectiveness of prudent use, efforts, and mitigation strategies.

Assigning Defined Daily/Course Doses for Antimicrobials in Turkeys to Enable a Cross-Country Quantification and Comparison of Antimicrobial Use

Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) threatens our public health and is mainly driven by antimicrobial usage (AMU). For this reason the World Health Organization calls for detailed monitoring of AMU over all animal sectors involved. Therefore, we aimed to quantify AMU on turkey farms. First, turkey-specific Defined Daily Dose (DDD_turkey) was determined. These were compared to the broiler alternative from the European Surveillance of Veterinary Antimicrobial Consumption (DDD_vet), that mention DDD_vet as a proxy for other poultry species. DDD_turkey ranged from being 81.5% smaller to 48.5% larger compared to its DDD_vet alternative for broilers. Second, antimicrobial treatments were registered on 60 turkey farms divided over France, Germany and Spain between 2014 and 2016 (20 flocks per country). Afterwards, AMU was quantified using treatment incidence (TI) per 100 days. TI expresses the percentage of the rearing period that the turkeys were treated with a standard dose of antimicrobials. Minimum, median and maximum TI at flock level and based on DDD_turkey = 0.0, 10.0 and 65.7, respectively. Yet, a huge variation in amounts of antimicrobials used at flock level was observed, both within and between countries. Seven farms (12%) did not use any antimicrobials. Aminopenicillins, polymyxins, and fluoroquinolones were responsible for 72.2% of total AMU. The proportion of treating farms peaked on week five of the production cycle (41.7%), and 79.4% of the total AMU was administered in the first half of production. To conclude, not all DDD_vet values for broilers can be applied to turkeys. Additionally, the results of AMU show potential for reducing and improving AMU on turkey farms, especially concerning the usage of critically important antimicrobials.