• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

采用选择性干奶牛疗法:了解爱尔兰奶农所感知到的障碍和促进因素。

Engaging with selective dry cow therapy: understanding the barriers and facilitators perceived by Irish farmers.

作者信息

Huey Sarah, Kavanagh Michaela, Regan Aine, Dean Moira, McKernan Clare, McCoy Finola, Ryan Eoin G, Caballero-Villalobos Javier, McAloon Catherine I

机构信息

Institute for Global Food Security, School of Biological Sciences, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, Northern Ireland.

Section of Herd Health and Animal Husbandry, School of Veterinary Medicine, University College Dublin, Belfield, Dublin 4, Ireland.

出版信息

Ir Vet J. 2021 Oct 23;74(1):28. doi: 10.1186/s13620-021-00207-0.

DOI:10.1186/s13620-021-00207-0
PMID:34686221
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8540178/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Selective dry cow therapy (SDCT) is widely promoted in dairy farming as a method to reduce antimicrobial usage. New legislation introduced by the European Union will restrict and regulate the prophylactic and metaphylactic use of antibiotics from January 2022. Blanket dry cow therapy continues to be a practice engaged in by many farmers in Ireland and for many of these farmers, moving towards SDCT would require a significant infrastructural, behavioural and/or cultural change on their farm. Existing research has reported the important need to understand farmers' motivations to initiate any substantial behaviour change. However, it is currently unknown what farmers know, think and believe about SDCT in Ireland. The aim of this study was to use qualitative methods to explore what barriers and facilitators farmers perceived to exist with SDCT and explore if they had chosen to implement SDCT after voluntarily participating in a funded dry cow consult with a trained veterinarian, with the objective of maximising the dry period udder health performance and moving safely to SDCT.

RESULTS

In this study, 19 farmers were contacted, and telephone interviews were conducted regarding farmers' beliefs about the consequences of SDCT. Audio recordings were professionally transcribed verbatim and analysed qualitatively using an inductive thematic analysis. The analysis identified 6 barriers and 6 facilitators to implementing SDCT. A significant fear of increasing mastitis incidence was evident that caused reluctance towards SDCT and reliance on antibiotics. Mixed perceptions on SDCT, infrastructure limitations, a perceived lack of preventive advice as well as peer influence were presented as barriers to SDCT. Farmers can build confidence when a graded approach to SDCT is implemented, which could help overcome the fear of SDCT and reliance on antibiotics. Regulatory pressure, high standards of farm hygiene and use of targeted veterinary consults were found to facilitate SDCT. Education was suggested to motivate farmers in the future uptake of SDCT. Despite cited negative influences, peer influence can be utilised to encourage the farming community.

CONCLUSIONS

This study prioritises areas to facilitate the major behaviour change required as a dairy industry in order to move from blanket dry cow therapy to SDCT.

摘要

背景

选择性干奶牛疗法(SDCT)作为一种减少抗菌药物使用的方法,在奶牛养殖中得到广泛推广。欧盟出台的新立法将从2022年1月起限制和规范抗生素的预防性和群体预防性使用。在爱尔兰,许多奶农仍在继续采用全面干奶牛疗法,而对其中许多奶农来说,转向选择性干奶牛疗法需要在农场进行重大的基础设施、行为和/或文化变革。现有研究报告称,了解农民发起任何重大行为改变的动机非常重要。然而,目前尚不清楚爱尔兰的奶农对选择性干奶牛疗法了解、思考和相信些什么。本研究的目的是使用定性方法来探讨奶农认为选择性干奶牛疗法存在哪些障碍和促进因素,并探讨他们在自愿参加由训练有素的兽医提供的有偿干奶牛咨询后是否选择实施选择性干奶牛疗法,目标是最大限度地提高干奶期乳房健康水平并安全转向选择性干奶牛疗法。

结果

在本研究中,联系了19位奶农,并就他们对选择性干奶牛疗法后果的看法进行了电话访谈。音频记录被专业逐字转录,并使用归纳主题分析法进行定性分析。分析确定了实施选择性干奶牛疗法的6个障碍和6个促进因素。明显存在对乳腺炎发病率增加的严重担忧,这导致对选择性干奶牛疗法的不情愿和对抗生素的依赖。对选择性干奶牛疗法的看法不一、基础设施限制、认为缺乏预防性建议以及同行影响被认为是选择性干奶牛疗法的障碍。当实施分级的选择性干奶牛疗法时,奶农可以建立信心,这有助于克服对选择性干奶牛疗法的恐惧和对抗生素的依赖。发现监管压力、高标准的农场卫生和使用有针对性的兽医咨询有助于选择性干奶牛疗法的实施。建议开展教育,以促使奶农未来采用选择性干奶牛疗法。尽管提到了负面影响,但可以利用同行影响来鼓励养殖社区。

结论

本研究确定了促进乳制品行业从全面干奶牛疗法转向选择性干奶牛疗法所需的重大行为改变的优先领域。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/23ab/8540178/e9cfeb6a5a11/13620_2021_207_Fig2_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/23ab/8540178/186221b4c5d1/13620_2021_207_Fig1_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/23ab/8540178/e9cfeb6a5a11/13620_2021_207_Fig2_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/23ab/8540178/186221b4c5d1/13620_2021_207_Fig1_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/23ab/8540178/e9cfeb6a5a11/13620_2021_207_Fig2_HTML.jpg

相似文献

1
Engaging with selective dry cow therapy: understanding the barriers and facilitators perceived by Irish farmers.采用选择性干奶牛疗法:了解爱尔兰奶农所感知到的障碍和促进因素。
Ir Vet J. 2021 Oct 23;74(1):28. doi: 10.1186/s13620-021-00207-0.
2
Udder health outcomes in Irish herds participating in CellCheck dry cow consults.爱尔兰参与 CellCheck 干奶牛咨询的牛群的乳房健康结果。
J Dairy Sci. 2024 Oct;107(10):8387-8401. doi: 10.3168/jds.2024-24751. Epub 2024 May 31.
3
Farmers' attitude toward the introduction of selective dry cow therapy.农民对引入选择性干奶牛疗法的态度。
J Dairy Sci. 2016 Oct;99(10):8259-8266. doi: 10.3168/jds.2016-11349. Epub 2016 Jul 21.
4
Veterinarians' attitudes toward antimicrobial use and selective dry cow treatment in the Netherlands.荷兰兽医对抗生素使用和选择性干奶牛治疗的态度。
J Dairy Sci. 2018 Jul;101(7):6336-6345. doi: 10.3168/jds.2017-13591. Epub 2018 Mar 28.
5
Understanding veterinarians' prescribing decisions on antibiotic dry cow therapy.了解兽医关于抗生素干奶牛治疗的处方决策。
J Dairy Sci. 2017 Apr;100(4):2909-2916. doi: 10.3168/jds.2016-11923. Epub 2017 Jan 26.
6
Exploring the relationship between mastitis risk perceptions and farmers' readiness to engage in milk recording.探讨乳腺炎风险认知与农民参与牛奶记录意愿之间的关系。
Prev Vet Med. 2021 Aug;193:105393. doi: 10.1016/j.prevetmed.2021.105393. Epub 2021 May 31.
7
Effect of selective dry cow treatment on udder health and antimicrobial usage on Dutch dairy farms.选择性干奶牛治疗对荷兰奶牛场乳房健康和抗菌药物使用的影响。
J Dairy Sci. 2022 Jun;105(6):5381-5392. doi: 10.3168/jds.2021-21026. Epub 2022 Apr 2.
8
Monitoring udder health on routinely collected census data: Evaluating the short- to mid-term consequences of implementing selective dry cow treatment.监测常规收集的普查数据中的乳房健康:评估实施选择性干奶牛治疗的短期到中期后果。
J Dairy Sci. 2021 Feb;104(2):2280-2289. doi: 10.3168/jds.2020-18973. Epub 2020 Dec 23.
9
Factors influencing dairy farmers' antibiotic use: An application of the COM-B model.影响奶农抗生素使用的因素:COM-B 模型的应用。
J Dairy Sci. 2023 Jun;106(6):4059-4071. doi: 10.3168/jds.2022-22263. Epub 2023 Apr 5.
10
Partial budget analysis of culture- and algorithm-guided selective dry cow therapy.文化和算法指导的选择性干奶牛疗法的部分预算分析。
J Dairy Sci. 2021 May;104(5):5652-5664. doi: 10.3168/jds.2020-19366. Epub 2021 Mar 6.

引用本文的文献

1
Livestock Antibiotics Use and Antimicrobial Resistance.家畜抗生素的使用与抗菌药物耐药性
Antibiotics (Basel). 2025 Jun 19;14(6):621. doi: 10.3390/antibiotics14060621.
2
Development of an animal health testing tool to reduce antimicrobial use on farms: perceptions, implications, and needs of Irish dairy farmers and farm veterinarians.开发一种动物健康检测工具以减少农场抗菌药物使用:爱尔兰奶农和农场兽医的看法、影响及需求
Ir Vet J. 2024 Jun 21;77(1):12. doi: 10.1186/s13620-024-00268-x.
3
Survey of farm, parlour and milking management, parlour technologies, SCC control strategies and farmer demographics on Irish dairy farms.

本文引用的文献

1
New York State dairy farmers' perceptions of antibiotic use and resistance: A qualitative interview study.纽约州奶农对抗生素使用和耐药性的看法:一项定性访谈研究。
PLoS One. 2020 May 27;15(5):e0232937. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0232937. eCollection 2020.
2
Scoping review of approaches for improving antimicrobial stewardship in livestock farmers and veterinarians.针对改善畜牧农民和兽医的抗菌药物管理的方法的范围综述。
Prev Vet Med. 2020 Jul;180:105025. doi: 10.1016/j.prevetmed.2020.105025. Epub 2020 May 11.
3
European perspectives on efforts to reduce antimicrobial usage in food animal production.
爱尔兰奶牛场的农场、挤奶厅及挤奶管理、挤奶厅技术、体细胞计数控制策略和奶农人口统计学调查。
Ir Vet J. 2024 May 6;77(1):8. doi: 10.1186/s13620-024-00267-y.
4
A Comparison of Dry Period Outcomes after Selective Dry Cow Therapy Carried Out by Farm Staff versus Veterinary Students in a Low-Cell-Count Dairy Herd.农场工作人员与兽医专业学生在低细胞计数奶牛群中进行选择性干奶治疗后的干奶期结果比较。
Animals (Basel). 2023 Jul 15;13(14):2318. doi: 10.3390/ani13142318.
5
Behaviour change interventions for responsible antimicrobial use on farms.农场中促进负责任使用抗菌药物的行为改变干预措施。
Ir Vet J. 2023 Apr 3;76(1):8. doi: 10.1186/s13620-023-00236-x.
欧洲对减少食用动物生产中抗菌药物使用所做努力的看法。
Ir Vet J. 2020 Jan 27;73:2. doi: 10.1186/s13620-019-0154-4. eCollection 2020.
4
Shared Goals, Different Barriers: A Qualitative Study of UK Veterinarians' and Farmers' Beliefs About Antimicrobial Resistance and Stewardship.共同目标,不同障碍:对英国兽医和农民关于抗菌药物耐药性及管理观念的定性研究
Front Vet Sci. 2019 Apr 25;6:132. doi: 10.3389/fvets.2019.00132. eCollection 2019.
5
The informative value of an overview on antibiotic consumption, treatment efficacy and cost of clinical mastitis at farm level.农场层面临床乳腺炎抗生素使用量、治疗效果及成本概述的信息价值。
Prev Vet Med. 2019 Apr 1;165:63-70. doi: 10.1016/j.prevetmed.2019.02.004. Epub 2019 Feb 11.
6
Dairy farmers' perspectives on antibiotic use: A qualitative study.奶农对抗生素使用的看法:一项定性研究。
J Dairy Sci. 2019 Mar;102(3):2724-2737. doi: 10.3168/jds.2018-15015. Epub 2019 Jan 3.
7
A survey of dairy cow farmers in the United Kingdom: knowledge, attitudes and practices surrounding antimicrobial use and resistance.英国奶牛养殖户调查:抗菌药物使用与耐药性方面的知识、态度和做法
Vet Rec. 2018 Dec 22;183(24):746. doi: 10.1136/vr.104986. Epub 2018 Nov 9.
8
Veterinarians' attitudes toward antimicrobial use and selective dry cow treatment in the Netherlands.荷兰兽医对抗生素使用和选择性干奶牛治疗的态度。
J Dairy Sci. 2018 Jul;101(7):6336-6345. doi: 10.3168/jds.2017-13591. Epub 2018 Mar 28.
9
Antimicrobial Resistance: a One Health Perspective.抗微生物药物耐药性:一种从“同一健康”角度看问题的方式。
Microbiol Spectr. 2018 Mar;6(2). doi: 10.1128/microbiolspec.ARBA-0009-2017.
10
Control of Staphylococcus aureus in dairy herds in a region with raw milk cheese production: farmers' attitudes, knowledge, behaviour and belief in self-efficacy.生乳奶酪生产地区奶牛场金黄色葡萄球菌的控制:农民的态度、知识、行为及自我效能信念
BMC Vet Res. 2018 Feb 13;14(1):46. doi: 10.1186/s12917-018-1352-0.