Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2019 Sep 12;19(1):217.
doi: 10.1186/s12866-019-1576-6.

Antimicrobial use policy change in pre-weaned dairy calves and its impact on antimicrobial resistance in commensal Escherichia coli: a cross sectional and ecological study

Josephine A Afema  1   2 , Margaret A Davis  1 , William M Sischo  3
Affiliations

Antimicrobial use policy change in pre-weaned dairy calves and its impact on antimicrobial resistance in commensal Escherichia coli: a cross sectional and ecological study

Josephine A Afema et al. BMC Microbiol. .

Abstract

Background: This study is based on data collected to investigate the relation of peri-parturient events (colostrum quality, passive transfer of immunity, calving difficulty) on calf health and antimicrobial use. A component of the study was to provide feedback to farm management to identify calves at risk for disease and promote antimicrobial stewardship. At the start of the study (May 2016), a combination of enrofloxacin, penicillin, and sulfamethoxazole was the first treatment given to clinically abnormal calves. Based on feedback and interaction between study investigators, farm management and consulting veterinarians, a new policy was implemented to reduce antimicrobial use in calves. In August, the first treatment was changed to a combination of ampicillin and sulfamethoxazole. In September, the first treatment was reduced to only sulfamethoxazole. We investigated the effects of these policy changes in antimicrobial use on resistance in commensal Escherichia coli.

Results: We enrolled 4301 calves at birth and documented antimicrobial use until weaning. Most calves (99.4%) received antimicrobials and 70.4% received a total of 2-4 treatments. Antimicrobial use was more intense in younger calves (≤ 28 days) relative to older calves. We isolated 544 E. coli from fecal samples obtained from 132 calves. We determined resistance to 12 antimicrobials and 85% of the isolates were resistant to at least 3 antimicrobial classes. We performed latent class analysis to identify underlying unique classes where isolates shared resistance patterns and selected a solution with 4 classes. The least resistant class had isolates that were mainly resistant to only tetracycline and sulfisoxazole. The other 3 classes comprised isolates with resistance to ampicillin, chloramphenicol, aminoglycosides, sulfonamides, tetracycline, in addition to either ceftiofur; or nalidixic acid; or ciprofloxacin plus nalidixic acid and ceftiofur. Overall, E coli from younger calves and calves that received multiple treatments were more likely to have extensive resistance including resistance to fluoroquinolones and ceftiofur. In general, there was a declining trend in resistance to most antimicrobials during and after policy changes were implemented, except for ampicillin, ciprofloxacin, ceftiofur and gentamicin.

Conclusions: Information feedback to farms can influence farm managers to reduce antimicrobial use and this can change endemic farm resistance patterns.

Keywords: Antimicrobial resistance; Antimicrobial use; Feedback; Policy change; Pre-weaned dairy calves.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Treatment intensity for ampicillin, enrofloxacin, penicillin and sulfonamide in pre-weaned calves stratified by age
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Treatment intensity for combined or single antimicrobial treatments in pre-weaned calves stratified by age
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Trends in the proportion of isolates that are resistant to 12 antimicrobials over time. AMP: ampicillin; CHL: chloramphenicol; CIP: ciprofloxacin; NAL: nalidixic acid; AN: amikacin; GEN: gentamicin; KAN: kanamycin; STR: streptomycin; SXT: trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole; SUL: sulfisoxazole; TET: tetracycline; XNL: ceftiofur. *Trend is statistically significant
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. McEwen SA, Fedorka-Cray PJ. Antimicrobial use and resistance in animals. Clin Infect Dis. 2002;34(Suppl 3):S93–S106. doi: 10.1086/340246. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Phillips I, Casewell M, Cox T, De GB, Friis C, Jones R, et al. Does the use of antibiotics in food animals pose a risk to human health? A critical review of published data. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2004;53:28–52. doi: 10.1093/jac/dkg483. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Tang KL, Caffrey NP, Nobrega DB, Cork SC, Ronksley PE, Barkema HW, et al. Restricting the use of antibiotics in food-producing animals and its associations with antibiotic resistance in food-producing animals and human beings: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Planet Health. 2017;1:e316–e327. doi: 10.1016/S2542-5196(17)30141-9. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Hoelzer K, Wong N, Thomas J, Talkington K, Jungman E, Coukell A. Antimicrobial drug use in food-producing animals and associated human health risks: what, and how strong, is the evidence? BMC Vet Res. 2017;13:211. doi: 10.1186/s12917-017-1131-3. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Landers TF, Cohen B, Wittum TE, Larson EL. A review of antibiotic use in food animals: perspective, policy, and potential. Public Health Rep. 2012;127:4–22. doi: 10.1177/003335491212700103. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

Substances