4.1 Article

Risk factors for carriage of antimicrobial-resistant Salmonella spp and Escherichia coli in pet dogs from volunteer households in Ontario, Canada, in 2005 and 2006

Journal

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF VETERINARY RESEARCH
Volume 76, Issue 11, Pages 959-968

Publisher

AMER VETERINARY MEDICAL ASSOC
DOI: 10.2460/ajvr.76.11.959

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Canada Foundation for Innovation
  2. Ontario Research Fund
  3. Blake Graham Fellowship from Ontario Veterinary College

Ask authors/readers for more resources

OBJECTIVE To determine pet-related management factors associated with the carriage of antimicrobial-resistant Salmonella spp and Escherichia coli in a population of pet dogs. SAMPLE 138 dogs from 84 households in Ontario, Canada. PROCEDURES From October 2005 through May 2006, dogs and households in Ontario, Canada, were recruited to participate in a cross-sectional study. Fecal samples were submitted for culture of Salmonella spp and E coli, which provided 515 bacterial isolates for antimicrobial susceptibility testing. Multilevel logistic regression models with random effects for household and dog were created to identify pet-related management factors associated with antimicrobial resistance. RESULTS Bacterial species, feeding a homemade diet or adding homemade food to the diet, feeding a raw diet or adding anything raw to the diet, feeding a homemade raw food diet, and feeding raw chicken in the past week were significant risk factors for antimicrobial resistance in this population of dogs. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE In this study, several potentially important pet-related risk factors for the carriage of antimicrobial-resistant Salmonella spp and E coli in pet dogs were identified. Further evaluation of risk factors for antimicrobial resistance in dogs may lead to development of evidence-based guidelines for safe and responsible dog ownership and management to protect the public, especially pet owners who are immunocompromised.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available