No abstract

Antimicrobial resistance is a growing global health issue. It is also a recognised problem in veterinary medicine. Between September and December 2015 the authors administered a cross-sectional survey to licensed veterinarians in Washington State to assess factors affecting antimicrobial prescribing practices among veterinarians in Washington State. Two hundred and three veterinarians completed the survey. The majority of respondents (166, 82 per cent) were engaged in small animal or exotic animal practice. 24 per cent of respondents reported not ordering culture and sensitivity (C/S) testing in practice. Of the 76 per cent of veterinarians who reported ordering C/S tests, 36 per cent reported ordering such testing 'often' or 'always' when treating presumptive bacterial infections. Most respondents (65 per cent) mentioned cost as the most common barrier to ordering a C/S test. Only 16 (10 per cent) respondents reported having access to or utilising a clinic-specific antibiogram. This survey demonstrated that while antimicrobials are commonly used in veterinary practice, and veterinarians are concerned about antimicrobial resistance, cost is a barrier to obtaining C/S tests to guide antimicrobial therapy. Summaries of antimicrobial resistance patterns are rarely available to the practising veterinarian. Efforts to promote antimicrobial stewardship in a 'One Health' manner should address barriers to the judicious use of antimicrobials in the veterinary practice setting.

There are currently no clear guidelines in the US and some other countries regarding euthanasia decision making timelines for dairy cattle that become injured or ill to the extent that recovery is unlikely or impossible. Our study aimed to identify decision making criteria and the most common factors considered when making and carrying out euthanasia decisions. Dairy producers were recruited to participate in a mailed survey (Part I, 307 completed surveys were returned) or in one of three focus groups (Part II, 8–10 producers/group, n = 24). Part I (survey): Farm owners were most commonly responsible for on-farm euthanasia and most respondents would treat and monitor compromised cattle for a majority of 15 health conditions. Responses were highly variable; for example, 6.3% and 11.7% of respondents would never euthanize a non-ambulatory cow or calf, respectively. Part II (focus groups): Three main themes (animal, human, and farm operation) were identified from discussion which focused primarily on animal welfare (16% of the discussion) and human psychology (16%). Participants expressed a desire to eliminate animal suffering by euthanizing, alongside a wide range of emotional states. Development of specific standards for euthanasia is a critical next step and more research is needed to understand the human emotions surrounding euthanasia decision making.

OBJECTIVE To identify the scope of occupational hazards encountered by veterinary personnel and compare hazard exposures between veterinarians and technicians working in small and large animal practices. DESIGN Cross-sectional survey. POPULATION Licensed veterinarians and veterinary staff in Minnesota. PROCEDURES A survey of Minnesota veterinary personnel was conducted between February 1 and December 1, 2012. Adult veterinary personnel working in clinical practice for > 12 months were eligible to participate. Information was collected on various workplace hazards as well as on workplace safety culture. RESULTS 831 eligible people responded, representing approximately 10% of Minnesota veterinary personnel. A greater proportion of veterinarians (93%; 368/394) reported having received preexposure rabies vaccinations than did veterinary technicians (54%; 198/365). During their career, 226 (27%) respondents had acquired at least 1 zoonotic infection and 636 (77%) had been injured by a needle or other sharps. Recapping of needles was reported by 87% of respondents; the most common reason reported by veterinarians (41%; 142/345) and veterinary technicians (71%; 238/333) was being trained to do so at school or work. Recent feelings of depression were reported by 204 (25%) respondents. A greater proportion of technicians (42%; 155/365) than veterinarians (21%; 81/394) indicated working in an environment in which employees experienced some form of workplace abuse. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE Veterinary personnel in Minnesota were exposed to several work-related hazards. Practice staff should assess workplace hazards, implement controls, and incorporate instruction on occupational health into employee training.

When dairy cattle become ill or injured to the extent that recovery is unlikely or impossible, on-farm euthanasia should be used as a tool to eliminate pain and suffering. Our study aimed to identify decision-making criteria and the most common factors considered by veterinarians when making and carrying out euthanasia decisions. Dairy cattle veterinarians were recruited to participate in an online survey (Part I, 61 surveys collected) or in one of three focus groups (Part II, 4–10 veterinarians/group, n = 22). Part I (survey): Surveyed veterinarians varied regarding health condition management and demonstrated a strong proclivity to treat compromised cattle, mirroring trends amongst dairy producers identified in previous research. Sixty percent of respondents indicated that most facilities for which they serve as the primary veterinarian have a written euthanasia protocol in place. Part II (focus groups): Three main themes about euthanasia decision-making (logistical, animal, and human) were identified from focus group discussions. Discussions focused primarily on logistical factors such as financial considerations and client/public perceptions. Development of specific standards for euthanasia, alongside interactive training programs for dairy veterinarians and producers are vital next steps to improving cattle welfare and consistency in euthanasia decision-making across the United States dairy industry.

SUMMARY Raising poultry flocks in urban backyard settings is becoming increasingly popular across the United States., but carries a risk of zoonotic infection. In the US from 1990–2014, 53 outbreaks of human salmonellosis linked to live poultry have been documented resulting in 2611 known illnesses, 387 known hospitalizations, and 5 known deaths. (CDC 2015a). A cross-sectional descriptive study was developed to better understand knowledge, attitudes, and practices of urban backyard poultry owners regarding Salmonella risk and prevention. The study included a survey of bird health, animal husbandry and hygiene practices, and knowledge, attitudes, and practices relating to Salmonella risk. Participants were videotaped while caring for their birds, and the recordings were transcribed using notational analysis to determine if reported practices differed from observed practices. The results indicated that while a large proportion of participants knew that exposure to Salmonella is an inherent risk associated with raising poultry and harvesting eggs, their reported and observed practices would not consistently reduce risk of transmission of Salmonella and other zoonotic diseases. Approximately 1 in 4 participants reported performing practices that increase risk of inoculation, such as snuggling and kissing birds or eating/drinking near them. None of the participants were observed kissing their birds on video; however, snuggling (holding birds to clothes) or touching their face during routine care was observed in approximately two-thirds of the video recordings. The video data provided a unique opportunity to compare reported practices with actions recorded during site visits. While the differences were not statistically significant, findings from our study suggest that flock owners may not accurately report the frequency with which risky practices are performed during routine animal care. Education and outreach targeting backyard flock owners should aim to improve husbandry and hygiene practices and reduce risk of zoonotic diseases associated with raising poultry in the backyard setting.

Dairy farming involves frequent contact among animals, workers and farm environments. To explore the Staphylococcus spp. diversity that occurs on dairy farms, a pilot study sampled dairy workers, cows and the farm environments from five farms, two organic and three conventional farms, in Washington State. Samples were taken from the nares and hands of consenting workers (n = 24), udders and nares of selected cows (n = 25) and representative environmental surfaces (n = 96) from each farm. To increase diversity of the Staphylococcus spp. characterized, five distinct colonies were selected from each sample for identification with 16S analysis. A total of 198 staphylococci were characterized representing 19 different Staphylococcus spp. The diversity of species ranged from 9-15 Staphylococcus spp./farm with no difference between conventional and organic farms. S. haemolyticus [n = 60 isolates] was the most common species and was isolated from all farms and from cows, humans and environmental samples. Whole genome sequencing of selected S. haemolyticus found no genetically related isolates among human, animal and environmental samples within the same farm. S. epidermidis, S. saprophyticus, S. sciuri and S. xylosus were also found in ≥1 farms from human, animal and environmental samples.

The emergence, spread, and expansion of antibiotic resistance and increasing restrictions on the use of antibiotics in animal agriculture have created a need for efficacious alternatives that remains unmet. Prioritizing research needs in the development of alternatives is key to ensuring that scarce research resources are dedicated to the most promising approaches. However, frameworks to enable a consistent, systematic, and transparent evaluation of antibiotic alternative candidates are lacking. Here, we present such an evaluation framework.