Search

Despite common use of oral group medication in pig rearing, the homogeneity, stability and carry-over of frequently used medicinal products in feed and drinking water are largely unknown. Therefore, a field study was performed on 52 Belgian pig farms, characterising preparation and administration of medicinal products via these systems, and farmers' user experiences with medicated feed and medicated drinking water. The study showed that medicated drinking water is more commonly used than medicated feed, since 90.4 per cent of the farms sometimes use medicated drinking water and 69.2 per cent of the farms sometimes use medicated feed. The drinking water quality is evaluated at least once a year on only 30.7 per cent of the farms. Separate pipelines for medicated and non-medicated circuits were not present in any of the farms using medicated feed and in 27.7 per cent of the farms using medicated drinking water. With drinking water medication, 63.5 per cent of the farmers reported encountering practical problems, often related to solubility issues and precipitation of the active compounds. In contrast, medicated feed is bought ready-to-use from the feed manufacturer in 68.2 per cent of the cases, thus reducing the number of practical problems experienced by the farmer. This study shows room for improvement of oral group treatment, developing appropriate pharmaceutical formulations for drinking water medication, quality control of drinking water, using separate pipeline circuits, and cleaning and disinfecting protocols., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© British Veterinary Association 2019. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

The success of the dog as a companion animal has undeniably led to a shift in dog breeding practices. While effects of inbreeding or large-scale breeding have given rise to numerous studies about potentially related health issues, it remains unclear to what extent behavioural development of dogs is influenced. By investigating the environment of puppies while at the breeder, the authors aimed to make an inventory of current practices regarding management, socialisation and environmental learning and subsequently to identify potential differences between breeder types. The cross-sectional study, conducted during 2016, revealed considerable variability in environment among dog breeders. Small-scale breeders, and especially occasional breeders (less than 10 adult dogs on-site) provided most enrichment, both social and non-social, by, for instance, providing more outdoor access for pregnant dams and puppies or by providing access to visitors more freely. Environmental stimuli were less controlled in occasional breeders, raising the debate about quantity versus quality of stimuli at a young age. Large-scale breeders declared to screen potential owners less intensely and time to advise them was limited. To the authors' knowledge, this is the first study that compares a large number of environmental factors between the different dog breeding categories., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© British Veterinary Association 2019. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

To investigate the current management and biosecurity practices and identify possible differences between different types of breeders, a cross-sectional study was carried out in 102 Belgian dog breeding facilities ranging from small (less than 10 dams on site) to large-scale (more than 50 dams on site or at least 500 puppies sold yearly) breeders. Veterinary prophylactic protocols (ie, vaccination, endoparasite control, ectoparasitic treatments) were highly implemented (91.5 per cent, 92.6 per cent, 42.7 per cent, respectively) across all breeder categories. 13.8 per cent of all visited breeders reported to administer antimicrobials to each female post partum and 10.3 per cent reported to treat all puppies, or at least of one breed, systematically with antimicrobials. Large-scale breeders reported to employ staff more frequently (p<0.01), and appeared to be more familiar with the principles of biosecurity. They reported to apply disinfection (p<0.01) and hygienic measures (p=0.03) across all parts of the facility, and to quarantine newly acquired dogs (p<0.01) more often compared with small-scale breeders. Nonetheless, a moderate knowledge of and use of disinfection was recorded, as was the presence of pet dogs, breaking the compartmentalisation. Results of this study indicate that there is substantial room for improvement in hygiene and disease management across all categories of breeders. The characterisation of different types of dog breeders with respect to biosecurity and management practices is a first step towards improvement of dog husbandry and biosecurity measures. Tailored guidelines should permit breeders to further improve the health of breeding animals and puppies while reducing the risk of infectious disease outbreaks and associated expenses., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© British Veterinary Association (unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2018. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted.)

The objective of this study is to survey general prescribing behaviour by Belgian companion animal veterinarians and to assess agreement of these practices with current treatment guidelines. Therefore an online survey was administered with five realistic and frequently occurring first-line cases to primary-care veterinary practitioners. For each case a predefined pattern of questions were asked about whether or not they would prescribe antimicrobials, if they would prescribe a non-antimicrobial treatment and if they would perform additional diagnostic steps. The responses were compared with recommendations in national guidelines and recent literature. The overall most prescribed antimicrobials were potentiated amoxicillin (43.0 per cent), fluoroquinolones (14.7 per cent), third-generation and fourth-generation cephalosporins (10.9 per cent) and tetracyclines (10.9 per cent). Only 48.3 per cent of the veterinarians complied with the guidelines in nearly all of the clinical scenarios (ie, prescribing antimicrobials when indicated, not prescribing antimicrobials when it is not indicated). Moreover, when prescribing highest priority critically important antimicrobials, susceptibility testing on bacterial cultures was performed in only 12.4 per cent of the prescriptions. The results showed that the prescribing behaviour of antimicrobial compounds by primary-care veterinary practitioners in dogs and cats is often not in agreement with national guidelines. Focus in improvement of this prescribing behaviour should be on performing the appropriate diagnostic steps and decreasing the use of highest priority critically important antimicrobials., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© British Veterinary Association (unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2018. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted.)

Pig farmers are strongly encouraged to reduce their antimicrobial usage because of the rising threat from antimicrobial resistance. However, such efforts should not compromise the herd health status and performance. This study aimed to describe the profile of so-called 'top-farms' that managed to combine both high technical performance and low antimicrobial usage. A cross-sectional study was conducted among 227 farrow-to-finish farms in Belgium, France, Germany and Sweden. Among them, 44 farms were allocated to the top-farms group and were compared with the 'regular' farms group in terms of farm characteristics, biosecurity and health status. Top-farms had fewer gastrointestinal symptoms in suckling pigs and fewer respiratory symptoms in fatteners, which could partly explain their reduced need for antimicrobials and higher performance. They also had higher biosecurity and were located in sparsely populated pig areas. However, 14 farms of the top-farms group were located in densely populated pig areas, but still managed to have low usage and high technical performance; they had higher internal biosecurity and more extensive vaccination against respiratory pathogens. These results illustrate that it is possible to control infectious diseases using other approaches than high antimicrobial usage, even in farms with challenging environmental and health conditions., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© British Veterinary Association (unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2017. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted.)

The prudent use of antimicrobials (AMs) should be widened in pig farming to reduce the risk of AM resistance (AMR) in human and veterinary medicine. It is therefore important to understand pig farmers' motivators and the barriers to AM usage (AMU) on their farms. The authors investigated pig farmers' self-estimated levels of AMU, their perceived benefits and risks and the need for AMs in a cross-sectional survey in Belgium, France, Germany and Sweden. The authors also compared these perceptions between the four countries and related them to pig farmers' actual AMU. The results showed that farmers who used more AMs also estimated their own usage as higher. Farmers perceived many benefits but relatively few risks of AMU in pig farming. Some significant cross-country differences in farmers' perceptions were found, but they were relatively small. After controlling for country differences and farm differences, only perceived risks had a significant association with AMU. The authors therefore conclude that in order to promote prudent AMU, it seems most promising to focus on the structural differences in pig farming and veterinary medicine (e.g. legislation, role of the veterinarian) among countries. In addition, interventions which aim at reducing AMU should increase farmers' awareness of the risks of extensive AMU., (British Veterinary Association.)

Sixty-one pigs were housed in an isolation unit with three compartments and five pens. Each compartment had its own ventilation system resulting in air currents flowing from compartment A (pens 1 to 3) towards compartment B (pen 4), but not towards compartment C (pen 5). Classical swine fever virus was introduced by the experimental inoculation of one pig in the middle pen (pen 2) of compartment A. The virus infected the pigs in pen 4, following the prevalent air currents, and the compartmentalisation had only a retarding effect on the transmission of the virus. The absence of infection in the pigs in pen 5, which was not different from pen 4 except for the ventilation system, indicates that the spread of virus was affected by the air currents.