Griffioen Karien, Hop Geralda E, Holstege Manon M C, Velthuis Annet G J, Lam Theo J G M
Department of Farm Animal Health, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Utrecht University, PO Box 80151, 3508 TD Utrecht, the Netherlands.
GD Animal Health, PO Box 9, 7400 AA Deventer, the Netherlands.
J Dairy Sci. 2016 Jul;99(7):5551-5561. doi: 10.3168/jds.2015-10816. Epub 2016 May 4.
Although several microbiological mastitis diagnostic tools are currently available, dairy farmers rarely use them to base treatment decisions on. In this study, we conducted a telephone interview among 195 randomly selected Dutch dairy farmers to determine their current use of and their need for microbiological diagnostics for clinical mastitis (CM), subclinical mastitis (SCM), and dry-cow treatment (DCT), followed by the test characteristics they consider important. A structured questionnaire was used, based on face-to-face interviews previously held with other farmers. The answers were registered in a database and analyzed using descriptive statistics and univariable and multivariable models. Antimicrobial treatment decisions for CM, SCM, and DCT were mainly based on clinical signs and somatic cell count. In case of CM, 34% of farmers indicated that they currently submit milk samples for bacteriological culture (BC). This would increase to 71% if an on-farm test resulting in treatment advice within 12 h were available. For SCM, use would increase from 22 to 55%, and for DCT, from 7 to 34%, if the same 12-h test were available. For CM and DCT, the preferred test outcome was advice on which antibiotic to use, according to 58 and 15% of the farmers, respectively. For SCM, the preferred test outcome was the causative bacterium for 38% of the farmers. Farmers who currently submit CM milk samples for BC were 13.1 times more likely to indicate, as the preferred test outcome, advice on which antibiotic to use, compared with farmers who do not currently submit CM milk samples for BC. Fourteen percent of the farmers indicated not being interested at all in microbiological mastitis diagnostics for CM. For SCM and DCT, 27 and 55%, respectively, were not interested in microbiological mastitis diagnostics. Regarding test characteristics that farmers considered important, reliability was most often indicated (44-51% of the farmers). Additionally, a preferred time-to-result of ≤8 h for CM and ≤20 to 24 h for SCM and DCT and ≤7% false test outcomes were indicated as desired characteristics of microbiological mastitis diagnostics. Overall, a need seems to exist for microbiological mastitis diagnostic tests among Dutch dairy farmers, specifically for CM, and resulting in a treatment advice. The availability of a reliable diagnostic test, with a suitable time-to-result, will likely increase the use of microbiological mastitis diagnostics and eventually optimize antibiotic usage.
尽管目前有几种微生物学乳腺炎诊断工具,但奶农很少将其用于治疗决策。在本研究中,我们对195名随机挑选的荷兰奶农进行了电话访谈,以确定他们目前对临床乳腺炎(CM)、亚临床乳腺炎(SCM)和干奶牛治疗(DCT)的微生物学诊断的使用情况及需求,随后了解他们认为重要的检测特征。我们使用了一份基于之前与其他奶农进行的面对面访谈的结构化问卷。答案记录在一个数据库中,并使用描述性统计以及单变量和多变量模型进行分析。CM、SCM和DCT的抗菌治疗决策主要基于临床症状和体细胞计数。对于CM,34%的奶农表示他们目前会提交牛奶样本进行细菌培养(BC)。如果有一种能在12小时内给出治疗建议的农场检测方法,这一比例将增至71%。对于SCM,如果有同样的12小时检测方法,使用比例将从22%增至55%,对于DCT,将从7%增至34%。对于CM和DCT,分别有58%和15%的奶农表示,他们偏好的检测结果是关于使用哪种抗生素的建议。对于SCM,38%的奶农偏好的检测结果是致病细菌。目前提交CM牛奶样本进行BC检测的奶农,将使用哪种抗生素的建议作为偏好检测结果的可能性,是目前不提交CM牛奶样本进行BC检测的奶农的13.1倍。14%的奶农表示对CM的微生物学乳腺炎诊断完全不感兴趣。对于SCM和DCT,分别有27%和55%的奶农对微生物学乳腺炎诊断不感兴趣。关于奶农认为重要的检测特征,可靠性是最常被提及的(44% - 51%的奶农)。此外,CM检测结果的理想时间≤8小时、SCM和DCT检测结果的理想时间≤20至24小时以及假检测结果≤7%被视为微生物学乳腺炎诊断的理想特征。总体而言,荷兰奶农似乎对微生物学乳腺炎诊断检测有需求,特别是对于CM,并且需要检测结果能给出治疗建议。一种可靠的诊断检测方法,加上合适的出结果时间,可能会增加微生物学乳腺炎诊断的使用,并最终优化抗生素的使用。