Department of Veterinary and Animal Sciences, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Grønnegårdsvej 8, 1870, Frederiksberg C, Denmark.
Acta Vet Scand. 2024 Aug 29;66(1):40. doi: 10.1186/s13028-024-00763-9.
Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a significant global health concern, necessitating the monitoring of antimicrobial usage (AMU). However, there is a lack of consensus on the standardized collection and reporting of AMU data in the veterinary field. In Denmark, the Danish Cattle Database (DCDB) contains treatment information on animal level, which allows counting of number of treatments carried out, used daily doses (UDD). The Danish VetStat database (VetStat) contains information on veterinary medicinal prescriptions at farm level and uses fixed standard doses of each product to calculate number of daily treatments, animal daily doses (ADD). This study aimed to compare two different numerators, UDD and ADD, used to describe AMU on Danish cattle farms, and estimate their correlation.
Routinely collected registry data from conventional dairy farms in Denmark for 2019 were used, including a total of 2,197 conventional dairy farms. The data from VetStat and the DCDB were aggregated and analysed, and treatment frequencies (TF) were calculated for both UDD and ADD, adjusting for farm size. Spearman correlation analysis and Bland-Altman plots were employed to assess the relationship and agreement between TF for ADD and UDD, respectively. The results showed a high correlation between TF for ADD and UDD for most prescription groups, i.e., groups used to categorise antibiotics based on target organs. An exception is found for the Udder prescription group, where a systematic underreporting of UDD compared to ADD was observed. This discrepancy may be due to combination treatments, and potential missing or grouped registrations in the DCDB.
Our UDD and ADD comparison yields valuable insights on farm-level AMU. We observe strong correlations between UDD and ADD, except for udder treatments, where some farms report only 1/3 UDD compared to ADD, indicating potential underreporting. Further investigations are needed to understand the factors contributing to these patterns and to ensure the accuracy and completeness of recorded information. Standardizing AMU data collection and reporting remains crucial to tackle the global challenge of AMR effectively.
抗菌药物耐药性（AMR）是一个重大的全球健康问题，需要监测抗菌药物的使用（AMU）。然而，在兽医领域，关于抗菌药物使用数据的标准化收集和报告尚未达成共识。在丹麦，丹麦牛群数据库（DCDB）包含了动物层面的治疗信息，这使得可以计算进行的治疗次数和使用的每日剂量（UDD）。丹麦兽医统计数据库（VetStat）包含了农场层面的兽医药物处方信息，并使用每种产品的固定标准剂量来计算每日治疗次数和动物每日剂量（ADD）。本研究旨在比较用于描述丹麦奶牛场 AMU 的两种不同的分子（UDD 和 ADD），并估计它们的相关性。
使用了丹麦常规奶牛场 2019 年的常规登记数据，包括 2197 个常规奶牛场。汇总和分析了 VetStat 和 DCDB 的数据，并为 UDD 和 ADD 计算了治疗频率（TF），同时调整了农场规模。使用 Spearman 相关分析和 Bland-Altman 图分别评估了 ADD 和 UDD 的 TF 之间的关系和一致性。结果表明，对于大多数基于目标器官对抗生素进行分类的处方组，ADD 和 UDD 的 TF 之间存在高度相关性。但是，在乳房处方组中，发现 UDD 相对于 ADD 存在系统性的漏报。这种差异可能是由于联合治疗以及 DCDB 中潜在的缺失或分组登记。
我们的 UDD 和 ADD 比较提供了有关农场层面 AMU 的有价值的见解。我们观察到 UDD 和 ADD 之间存在很强的相关性，除了乳房治疗外，一些农场报告的 UDD 仅为 ADD 的 1/3，表明存在潜在的漏报。需要进一步调查以了解导致这些模式的因素，并确保记录信息的准确性和完整性。标准化 AMU 数据收集和报告仍然是有效应对全球 AMR 挑战的关键。
