Visschers V H M, Backhans A, Collineau L, Iten D, Loesken S, Postma M, Belloc C, Dewulf J, Emanuelson U, Beilage E Grosse, Siegrist M, Sjölund M, Stärk K D C
ETH Zurich, Institute for Environmental Decisions, Consumer Behavior, Zurich, Switzerland.
Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Department of Clinical Sciences, Uppsala, Sweden.
Prev Vet Med. 2015 Apr 1;119(1-2):10-20. doi: 10.1016/j.prevetmed.2015.01.018. Epub 2015 Feb 7.
We conducted a survey among convenient samples of pig farmers (N=281) in Belgium, France, Germany, Sweden and Switzerland. We identified some significant differences among the five investigated countries (independent variable) regarding farmers' antimicrobial usage compared to their own country and worries related to pig farming (dependent variables), but most of the differences were rather small. In general, farmers perceived their own antimicrobial usage to be lower than that of their peers in the same country and lower than or similar to that of farmers from other countries. This may be a consequence of our convenience sample, resulting in self-selection of highly motivated farmers. Farmers were significantly more worried about financial/legal issues than about antimicrobial resistance. They believed that a reduction in revenues for slaughter pigs treated with a large amount of antimicrobials would have the most impact on reduced antimicrobial usage in their country. Further, farmers who were more worried about antimicrobial resistance and who estimated their own antimicrobial usage as lower than their fellow countrymen, perceived more impact from policy measures on the reduction of antimicrobials. Our results indicated that the same policy measures can be applied to reduce antimicrobial usage in pig farming in all five countries. Moreover, it seems worthwhile to increase pig farmers' awareness of the threat of antimicrobial resistance and its relation to antimicrobial usage; not only because pig farmers appeared little worried about antimicrobial usage but also because it affected farmers' perception of policy measures to reduce antimicrobial usage. Our samples were not representative for the national pig farmer populations. Further research is therefore needed to examine to what extent our findings can be generalised to these populations and to farmers in other countries.
我们对比利时、法国、德国、瑞典和瑞士的养猪户(N = 281)进行了便利抽样调查。我们发现,在五个被调查国家(自变量)中,与本国相比,养猪户的抗菌药物使用情况以及与养猪相关的担忧(因变量)存在一些显著差异,但大多数差异相当小。总体而言,养殖户认为自己的抗菌药物使用量低于本国同行,且低于或类似于其他国家养殖户的使用量。这可能是我们便利抽样的结果,导致自我选择了积极性较高的养殖户。养殖户对财务/法律问题的担忧明显高于对抗菌药物耐药性的担忧。他们认为,大量使用抗菌药物治疗的屠宰猪收入减少,对本国抗菌药物使用量减少的影响最大。此外,那些更担心抗菌药物耐药性且认为自己的抗菌药物使用量低于本国同胞的养殖户,认为政策措施对减少抗菌药物的影响更大。我们的结果表明,相同的政策措施可应用于减少所有五个国家养猪业的抗菌药物使用。此外,提高养猪户对抗菌药物耐药性威胁及其与抗菌药物使用关系的认识似乎是值得的;这不仅是因为养猪户似乎对抗菌药物使用不太担心,还因为这影响了养殖户对减少抗菌药物使用政策措施的看法。我们的样本不代表全国养猪户群体。因此,需要进一步研究,以检验我们的研究结果在多大程度上可以推广到这些群体以及其他国家的养殖户。