4.6 Article

Comparison of Immediate Blanket Treatment versus a Delayed Pathogen-Based Treatment Protocol for Clinical Mastitis Using an On-Farm Culture Test at a Commercial German Dairy Farm

期刊

ANTIBIOTICS-BASEL
卷 11, 期 3, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/antibiotics11030368

关键词

clinical mastitis; selective treatment; Accumast

资金

  1. Tiergyn Berlin e.V. (Berlin, Germany)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study compared immediate intramammary antimicrobial treatment of mild and moderate clinical mastitis with a selective treatment protocol based on on-farm culture results. The results showed that implementing a pathogen-based treatment protocol for these cases can effectively reduce antimicrobial use without negative effects on cow health.
The objective of this study was to compare immediate intramammary antimicrobial treatment of mild and moderate cases of clinical mastitis (CM) with a selective treatment protocol based on on-farm culture results using Accumast(R). The study was conducted at a 2600 cow commercial farm in Northeast Germany. Using a randomized design, mild and moderate clinical mastitis cases were assigned to either the blanket therapy (BT) or pathogen-based therapy (SELECT) group. Overall, 468 cases were used for final analyses (BT = 236; SELECT = 232). The percentage of cases assigned to the blanket and pathogen-based groups that received intramammary therapy were 100 and 69.9%, respectively. Implementation of a pathogen-based treatment protocol for mild and moderate CM cases resulted in no significant difference in post-event milk production, somatic cell count, survival to 30 d, and days spent in the hospital compared with a blanket therapy protocol. Cows in the SELECT group had reduced odds of being culled within 60 d post CM (odds ratio = 0.54; 95% CI = 0.31-0.93; p = 0.027). The use of a pathogen-based treatment protocol using an on-farm culture system has the potential to efficiently reduce antimicrobial use without negative effects on health.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据