Department of Population Medicine, Ontario Veterinary College, University of Guelph, Guelph, ON, Canada, N1G 2W1.
Department of Population Medicine, Ontario Veterinary College, University of Guelph, Guelph, ON, Canada, N1G 2W1.
J Dairy Sci. 2021 Sep;104(9):10143-10157. doi: 10.3168/jds.2020-19873. Epub 2021 Jun 5.
The objective of this scoping review was to characterize all available literature on modifiable management practices used during the dry period that have been evaluated for their effects on udder health in dairy cattle during the dry period and the subsequent lactation. Five databases and two conference proceedings were searched for relevant literature. Articles published in or after 1990 were eligible for inclusion. Eligible interventions or exposures were restricted to modifiable management practices; however, antimicrobial and teat sealant products were enumerated but not further characterized, as systematic reviews have been published on this topic. Other modifiable management practices were reported in 229 articles. Nutrition (n = 79), which included ration formulation and delivery (n = 44) and vitamin and mineral additives (n = 35), was the most commonly reported practice, followed by vaccines (n = 40) and modification of dry period length (n = 27). Risk of clinical mastitis (CM) was the most commonly reported outcome (n = 151); however, reporting of outcome risk periods varied widely between articles. Cure of existing intramammary infections (IMI) over the dry period (n = 40) and prevention of new IMI over the dry period (n = 54) were most commonly reported with a risk period between calving and 30 d in milk. Future systematic reviews with meta-analyses could target management practices such as nutrition, vaccines, and dry period length to quantify their effects on improving udder health during the dry period and early lactation. However, the variation in reporting of time at risk for CM and other outcomes challenges the ability of future synthesis work to inform management decisions on the basis of efficacy to cure or prevent IMI and CM. Consensus on which core outcomes should be evaluated in mastitis research and the selection of consistent risk periods for specific outcomes in animal trials is imperative.
本范围综述的目的是描述所有关于干奶期可调节管理实践的现有文献,这些文献评估了其对奶牛干奶期和随后泌乳期乳房健康的影响。我们对五个数据库和两个会议记录进行了相关文献检索。符合纳入标准的文章发表时间为 1990 年及以后。符合条件的干预或暴露仅限于可调节的管理实践;然而,抗菌和乳头密封剂产品被枚举但没有进一步描述,因为这个主题已经有系统综述发表。其他可调节的管理实践在 229 篇文章中有所报道。营养(n = 79),包括配方和交付(n = 44)和维生素和矿物质添加剂(n = 35),是最常报道的实践,其次是疫苗(n = 40)和干奶期长度的调整(n = 27)。临床乳腺炎(CM)的风险是最常报道的结果(n = 151);然而,文章之间的结果风险期报告差异很大。在干奶期治愈现有的乳房内感染(IMI)(n = 40)和预防干奶期新的 IMI(n = 54)是最常报道的,风险期在分娩和产奶后 30 天之间。未来的系统综述和荟萃分析可以针对管理实践,如营养、疫苗和干奶期长度,以量化它们对改善干奶期和早期泌乳期乳房健康的影响。然而,CM 和其他结果的风险期报告差异很大,这使得未来的综合工作难以根据治愈或预防 IMI 和 CM 的疗效为管理决策提供信息。在乳腺炎研究中就哪些核心结果应该进行评估以及在动物试验中为特定结果选择一致的风险期达成共识是至关重要的。