Factors affecting the cost-effectiveness of on-farm culture prior to the treatment of clinical mastitis in dairy cows

Abstract

The objective of this study was to use probabilistic sensitivity analysis to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of using an on-farm culture (OFC) approach to the treatment of clinical mastitis in dairy cows and compare this to a ‘standard’ treatment approach. A specific aim was to identify the herd circumstances under which an OFC approach would be most likely to be cost-effective. A stochastic Monte Carlo model was developed to simulate 5000 cases of clinical mastitis at the cow level and to calculate the associated costs simultaneously when treated according to 2 different treatment protocols; i) a 'conventional' approach (3 tubes of intramammary antibiotic) and ii) an OFC programme, whereby cows are treated according to the results of OFC. Model parameters were taken from recent peer reviewed literature on the use of OFC prior to treatment of clinical mastitis. Spearman rank correlation coefficients were used to evaluate the relationships between model input values and the estimated difference in cost between the standard and OFC treatment protocols. The simulation analyses revealed that both the difference in the bacteriological cure rate due to a delay in treatment when using OFC and the proportion of Gram-positive cases that occur on a dairy unit would have a fundamental impact on whether OFC would be cost-effective. The results of this study illustrated that an OFC approach for the treatment of clinical mastitis would probably not be cost-effective in many circumstances, in particular, not those in which Gram-positive pathogens were responsible for more than 20% of all clinical cases. The results highlight an ethical dilemma surrounding reduced use of antimicrobials for clinical mastitis since it may be associated with financial losses and poorer cow welfare in many instances.

Diagnostics and the challenge of antimicrobial resistance: a survey of UK livestock veterinarians’ perceptions and practices

“…Current arguments around achieving more sustainable antibiotic use in both humans and animals frequently point to the need to reduce unnecessary or inappropriate treatment. For many (Anomaly, 2019;Down et al, 2017;Krömker and Leimbach, 2017;O'Neill, 2016aO'Neill, , 2016b), a key mechanism for achieving this is better and faster diagnostic tests, not only to ensure that the medicines deployed are appropriately targeted to bacterial pathogens but also to justify decisions to employ those medicines, particularly in cases where critically important antibiotics are deemed necessary to protect animal or herd/flock health. In the light of such arguments, the present study sought to identify current approaches amongst farm animal veterinarians to both diagnostic tests generally as well as rapid and point-of-care tests in particular in the context of their relationship to antibiotic use.…”

Evaluation of residues of β-lactam, sulfonamide, tetracycline, quinolone, fluoroquinolone e pyrimidine in raw milk

“…Dairy herds are often affected with mastitis, causing losses of financial resources and reduction of the quality of milk and dairy products (Bezman et al, 2015;Down et al, 2017;Machado & Bicalho, 2018). To prevent and combat this disease, antimicrobials are administered, but, during the grace period reported by the manufacturer, milk should be discarded, since antimicrobial residues are present and are not removed in their entirety by processing this raw material in industry (Calbert, 1951;Gajda et al, 2017;Poonia et al, 2017;Rossi et al, 2018;Tempini et al, 2018).…”

Amoxicillin‐induced gut dysbiosis influences estrous cycle in mice and cytokine expression in the ovary and the caecum

“…The systemic effects of microbiome disturbance are related to a range of diseases such as small intestine bowel overgrowth, 6 gastroenteritis and inflammatory bowel disease, 7 obesity 8 and sepsis 9 among others. Additionally, the most common changes in intestinal microbiota are mediated using antibiotics not only to fight against bacterial infections, but in farms that focus on production, altering animal microbiota and the environment 10‐12 …”