Biosecurity and antimicrobial use in broiler farms across nine European countries: toward identifying farm-specific options for reducing antimicrobial usage
Broiler chickens are among the main livestock sectors worldwide. With individual treatments being inapplicable, contrary to many other animal species, the need for antimicrobial use (AMU) is relatively high. AMU in animals is known to drive the emergence and spread of antimicrobial resistance (AMR)....
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Epidemiology and infection 2022-12, Vol.151, p.e13, Article e13 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | |
---|---|
container_issue | |
container_start_page | e13 |
container_title | Epidemiology and infection |
container_volume | 151 |
creator | Mallioris, Panagiotis Teunis, Gijs Lagerweij, Giske Joosten, Philip Dewulf, Jeroen Wagenaar, Jaap A. Stegeman, Arjan Mughini-Gras, Lapo |
description | Broiler chickens are among the main livestock sectors worldwide. With individual treatments being inapplicable, contrary to many other animal species, the need for antimicrobial use (AMU) is relatively high. AMU in animals is known to drive the emergence and spread of antimicrobial resistance (AMR). High farm biosecurity is a cornerstone for animal health and welfare, as well as food safety, as it protects animals from the introduction and spread of pathogens and therefore the need for AMU. The goal of this study was to identify the main biosecurity practices associated with AMU in broiler farms and to develop a statistical model that produces customised recommendations as to which biosecurity measures could be implemented on a farm to reduce its AMU, including a cost-effectiveness analysis of the recommended measures. AMU and biosecurity data were obtained cross-sectionally in 2014 from 181 broiler farms across nine European countries (Belgium, Bulgaria, Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Poland and Spain). Using mixed-effects random forest analysis (Mix-RF), recursive feature elimination was implemented to determine the biosecurity measures that best predicted AMU at the farm level. Subsequently, an algorithm was developed to generate AMU reduction scenarios based on the implementation of these measures. In the final Mix-RF model, 21 factors were present: 10 about internal biosecurity, 8 about external biosecurity and 3 about farm size and productivity, with the latter showing the largest (Gini) importance. Other AMU predictors, in order of importance, were the number of depopulation steps, compliance with a vaccination protocol for non-officially controlled diseases, and requiring visitors to check in before entering the farm. K-means clustering on the proximity matrix of the final Mix-RF model revealed that several measures interacted with each other, indicating that high AMU levels can arise for various reasons depending on the situation. The algorithm utilised the AMU predictive power of biosecurity measures while accounting also for their interactions, representing a first step toward aiding the decision-making process of veterinarians and farmers who are in need of implementing on-farm biosecurity measures to reduce their AMU. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1017/S0950268822001960 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_9990406</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><cupid>10_1017_S0950268822001960</cupid><sourcerecordid>2768628913</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c507t-8815bb3bcd6e1b65cfb1f68e4eab8eb78143f6d019b7a2b5fbdfb812eb45b0e23</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1ks1u1DAUhSMEokPhAdggS2yQUMBO4j8WSKUqFGkkFsDasp3rqavEHuykaN6Fh8XpDAUGsbC8ON859_r6VtVTgl8RTPjrz1hS3DAhmgZjIhm-V61Ix2TddVjer1aLXC_6SfUo52uMsWwEf1idtIzytqVsVf1452MGOyc_7ZAOfTmTH71N0Xg9oDkD8gGZFP0ACTmdxox0UXNGwQdAF3OKW9AB2TiHKXnIb9AUv-vUI99DyXI7Hza3xjpvwXrnLYrbyceQkYsJJehnuyDHhfUGHlcPnB4yPDncp9XX9xdfzi_r9acPH8_P1rWlmE-1EIQa0xrbMyCGUesMcUxAB9oIMFyQrnWsLxMyXDeGOtM7I0gDpqMGQ9OeVm_3udvZjNDb0nfSg9omP-q0U1F79bcS_JXaxBslpcQdZiXg5T7g6sh2ebZWOmTICnfL0Dt-Qwr94lAuxW8z5EmNPlsYBh0gzlk1nArKuZSioM-P0Os4p1CGUSgmWCMkaQtF9tTtxyRwdz0QrJZNUf9sSvE8-_PNd45fq1GA9hCqR5N8v4Hftf8f-xM1282r</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2768628913</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Biosecurity and antimicrobial use in broiler farms across nine European countries: toward identifying farm-specific options for reducing antimicrobial usage</title><source>Cambridge University Press Wholly Gold Open Access Journals</source><source>MEDLINE</source><source>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</source><source>PubMed Central</source><creator>Mallioris, Panagiotis ; Teunis, Gijs ; Lagerweij, Giske ; Joosten, Philip ; Dewulf, Jeroen ; Wagenaar, Jaap A. ; Stegeman, Arjan ; Mughini-Gras, Lapo</creator><creatorcontrib>Mallioris, Panagiotis ; Teunis, Gijs ; Lagerweij, Giske ; Joosten, Philip ; Dewulf, Jeroen ; Wagenaar, Jaap A. ; Stegeman, Arjan ; Mughini-Gras, Lapo ; EFFORT consortium ; the EFFORT consortium</creatorcontrib><description>Broiler chickens are among the main livestock sectors worldwide. With individual treatments being inapplicable, contrary to many other animal species, the need for antimicrobial use (AMU) is relatively high. AMU in animals is known to drive the emergence and spread of antimicrobial resistance (AMR). High farm biosecurity is a cornerstone for animal health and welfare, as well as food safety, as it protects animals from the introduction and spread of pathogens and therefore the need for AMU. The goal of this study was to identify the main biosecurity practices associated with AMU in broiler farms and to develop a statistical model that produces customised recommendations as to which biosecurity measures could be implemented on a farm to reduce its AMU, including a cost-effectiveness analysis of the recommended measures. AMU and biosecurity data were obtained cross-sectionally in 2014 from 181 broiler farms across nine European countries (Belgium, Bulgaria, Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Poland and Spain). Using mixed-effects random forest analysis (Mix-RF), recursive feature elimination was implemented to determine the biosecurity measures that best predicted AMU at the farm level. Subsequently, an algorithm was developed to generate AMU reduction scenarios based on the implementation of these measures. In the final Mix-RF model, 21 factors were present: 10 about internal biosecurity, 8 about external biosecurity and 3 about farm size and productivity, with the latter showing the largest (Gini) importance. Other AMU predictors, in order of importance, were the number of depopulation steps, compliance with a vaccination protocol for non-officially controlled diseases, and requiring visitors to check in before entering the farm. K-means clustering on the proximity matrix of the final Mix-RF model revealed that several measures interacted with each other, indicating that high AMU levels can arise for various reasons depending on the situation. The algorithm utilised the AMU predictive power of biosecurity measures while accounting also for their interactions, representing a first step toward aiding the decision-making process of veterinarians and farmers who are in need of implementing on-farm biosecurity measures to reduce their AMU.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0950-2688</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 1469-4409</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1469-4409</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1017/S0950268822001960</identifier><identifier>PMID: 36573356</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press</publisher><subject>Algorithms ; Animal biology ; Animal health ; Animal Husbandry ; Animal Husbandry - methods ; Animal species ; Animal welfare ; Animals ; Anti-Infective Agents ; Antibiotics ; Antimicrobial agents ; Antimicrobial resistance ; Biosecurity ; Chickens ; Cluster analysis ; Clustering ; Cost analysis ; Data collection ; Decision making ; Decision trees ; Disease control ; Europe ; Farms ; Food safety ; Life Sciences ; Livestock ; Mathematical models ; Original Paper ; Poultry ; Statistical models ; Vaccination ; Vector quantization ; Veterinary medicine and animal Health</subject><ispartof>Epidemiology and infection, 2022-12, Vol.151, p.e13, Article e13</ispartof><rights>Copyright © The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press</rights><rights>Copyright © The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution License http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><rights>Attribution</rights><rights>The Author(s) 2022 2022 The Author(s)</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c507t-8815bb3bcd6e1b65cfb1f68e4eab8eb78143f6d019b7a2b5fbdfb812eb45b0e23</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c507t-8815bb3bcd6e1b65cfb1f68e4eab8eb78143f6d019b7a2b5fbdfb812eb45b0e23</cites><orcidid>0000-0003-1620-3200 ; 0000-0001-5420-949X</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9990406/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0950268822001960/type/journal_article$$EHTML$$P50$$Gcambridge$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,723,776,780,860,881,23297,27901,27902,53766,53768,55779</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36573356$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://anses.hal.science/anses-04365747$$DView record in HAL$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Mallioris, Panagiotis</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Teunis, Gijs</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lagerweij, Giske</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Joosten, Philip</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dewulf, Jeroen</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wagenaar, Jaap A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stegeman, Arjan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mughini-Gras, Lapo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>EFFORT consortium</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>the EFFORT consortium</creatorcontrib><title>Biosecurity and antimicrobial use in broiler farms across nine European countries: toward identifying farm-specific options for reducing antimicrobial usage</title><title>Epidemiology and infection</title><addtitle>Epidemiol. Infect</addtitle><description>Broiler chickens are among the main livestock sectors worldwide. With individual treatments being inapplicable, contrary to many other animal species, the need for antimicrobial use (AMU) is relatively high. AMU in animals is known to drive the emergence and spread of antimicrobial resistance (AMR). High farm biosecurity is a cornerstone for animal health and welfare, as well as food safety, as it protects animals from the introduction and spread of pathogens and therefore the need for AMU. The goal of this study was to identify the main biosecurity practices associated with AMU in broiler farms and to develop a statistical model that produces customised recommendations as to which biosecurity measures could be implemented on a farm to reduce its AMU, including a cost-effectiveness analysis of the recommended measures. AMU and biosecurity data were obtained cross-sectionally in 2014 from 181 broiler farms across nine European countries (Belgium, Bulgaria, Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Poland and Spain). Using mixed-effects random forest analysis (Mix-RF), recursive feature elimination was implemented to determine the biosecurity measures that best predicted AMU at the farm level. Subsequently, an algorithm was developed to generate AMU reduction scenarios based on the implementation of these measures. In the final Mix-RF model, 21 factors were present: 10 about internal biosecurity, 8 about external biosecurity and 3 about farm size and productivity, with the latter showing the largest (Gini) importance. Other AMU predictors, in order of importance, were the number of depopulation steps, compliance with a vaccination protocol for non-officially controlled diseases, and requiring visitors to check in before entering the farm. K-means clustering on the proximity matrix of the final Mix-RF model revealed that several measures interacted with each other, indicating that high AMU levels can arise for various reasons depending on the situation. The algorithm utilised the AMU predictive power of biosecurity measures while accounting also for their interactions, representing a first step toward aiding the decision-making process of veterinarians and farmers who are in need of implementing on-farm biosecurity measures to reduce their AMU.</description><subject>Algorithms</subject><subject>Animal biology</subject><subject>Animal health</subject><subject>Animal Husbandry</subject><subject>Animal Husbandry - methods</subject><subject>Animal species</subject><subject>Animal welfare</subject><subject>Animals</subject><subject>Anti-Infective Agents</subject><subject>Antibiotics</subject><subject>Antimicrobial agents</subject><subject>Antimicrobial resistance</subject><subject>Biosecurity</subject><subject>Chickens</subject><subject>Cluster analysis</subject><subject>Clustering</subject><subject>Cost analysis</subject><subject>Data collection</subject><subject>Decision making</subject><subject>Decision trees</subject><subject>Disease control</subject><subject>Europe</subject><subject>Farms</subject><subject>Food safety</subject><subject>Life Sciences</subject><subject>Livestock</subject><subject>Mathematical models</subject><subject>Original Paper</subject><subject>Poultry</subject><subject>Statistical models</subject><subject>Vaccination</subject><subject>Vector quantization</subject><subject>Veterinary medicine and animal Health</subject><issn>0950-2688</issn><issn>1469-4409</issn><issn>1469-4409</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2022</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>IKXGN</sourceid><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><recordid>eNp1ks1u1DAUhSMEokPhAdggS2yQUMBO4j8WSKUqFGkkFsDasp3rqavEHuykaN6Fh8XpDAUGsbC8ON859_r6VtVTgl8RTPjrz1hS3DAhmgZjIhm-V61Ix2TddVjer1aLXC_6SfUo52uMsWwEf1idtIzytqVsVf1452MGOyc_7ZAOfTmTH71N0Xg9oDkD8gGZFP0ACTmdxox0UXNGwQdAF3OKW9AB2TiHKXnIb9AUv-vUI99DyXI7Hza3xjpvwXrnLYrbyceQkYsJJehnuyDHhfUGHlcPnB4yPDncp9XX9xdfzi_r9acPH8_P1rWlmE-1EIQa0xrbMyCGUesMcUxAB9oIMFyQrnWsLxMyXDeGOtM7I0gDpqMGQ9OeVm_3udvZjNDb0nfSg9omP-q0U1F79bcS_JXaxBslpcQdZiXg5T7g6sh2ebZWOmTICnfL0Dt-Qwr94lAuxW8z5EmNPlsYBh0gzlk1nArKuZSioM-P0Os4p1CGUSgmWCMkaQtF9tTtxyRwdz0QrJZNUf9sSvE8-_PNd45fq1GA9hCqR5N8v4Hftf8f-xM1282r</recordid><startdate>20221227</startdate><enddate>20221227</enddate><creator>Mallioris, Panagiotis</creator><creator>Teunis, Gijs</creator><creator>Lagerweij, Giske</creator><creator>Joosten, Philip</creator><creator>Dewulf, Jeroen</creator><creator>Wagenaar, Jaap A.</creator><creator>Stegeman, Arjan</creator><creator>Mughini-Gras, Lapo</creator><general>Cambridge University Press</general><general>Cambridge University Press (CUP)</general><scope>IKXGN</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7QL</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7T2</scope><scope>7U9</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88A</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8C1</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AEUYN</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AN0</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M7N</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>1XC</scope><scope>5PM</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1620-3200</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5420-949X</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20221227</creationdate><title>Biosecurity and antimicrobial use in broiler farms across nine European countries: toward identifying farm-specific options for reducing antimicrobial usage</title><author>Mallioris, Panagiotis ; Teunis, Gijs ; Lagerweij, Giske ; Joosten, Philip ; Dewulf, Jeroen ; Wagenaar, Jaap A. ; Stegeman, Arjan ; Mughini-Gras, Lapo</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c507t-8815bb3bcd6e1b65cfb1f68e4eab8eb78143f6d019b7a2b5fbdfb812eb45b0e23</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2022</creationdate><topic>Algorithms</topic><topic>Animal biology</topic><topic>Animal health</topic><topic>Animal Husbandry</topic><topic>Animal Husbandry - methods</topic><topic>Animal species</topic><topic>Animal welfare</topic><topic>Animals</topic><topic>Anti-Infective Agents</topic><topic>Antibiotics</topic><topic>Antimicrobial agents</topic><topic>Antimicrobial resistance</topic><topic>Biosecurity</topic><topic>Chickens</topic><topic>Cluster analysis</topic><topic>Clustering</topic><topic>Cost analysis</topic><topic>Data collection</topic><topic>Decision making</topic><topic>Decision trees</topic><topic>Disease control</topic><topic>Europe</topic><topic>Farms</topic><topic>Food safety</topic><topic>Life Sciences</topic><topic>Livestock</topic><topic>Mathematical models</topic><topic>Original Paper</topic><topic>Poultry</topic><topic>Statistical models</topic><topic>Vaccination</topic><topic>Vector quantization</topic><topic>Veterinary medicine and animal Health</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Mallioris, Panagiotis</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Teunis, Gijs</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lagerweij, Giske</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Joosten, Philip</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dewulf, Jeroen</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wagenaar, Jaap A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stegeman, Arjan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mughini-Gras, Lapo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>EFFORT consortium</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>the EFFORT consortium</creatorcontrib><collection>Cambridge University Press Wholly Gold Open Access Journals</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Bacteriology Abstracts (Microbiology B)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database</collection><collection>Health and Safety Science Abstracts (Full archive)</collection><collection>Virology and AIDS Abstracts</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Biology Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Public Health Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Sustainability</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>British Nursing Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C)</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>Hyper Article en Ligne (HAL)</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Epidemiology and infection</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Mallioris, Panagiotis</au><au>Teunis, Gijs</au><au>Lagerweij, Giske</au><au>Joosten, Philip</au><au>Dewulf, Jeroen</au><au>Wagenaar, Jaap A.</au><au>Stegeman, Arjan</au><au>Mughini-Gras, Lapo</au><aucorp>EFFORT consortium</aucorp><aucorp>the EFFORT consortium</aucorp><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Biosecurity and antimicrobial use in broiler farms across nine European countries: toward identifying farm-specific options for reducing antimicrobial usage</atitle><jtitle>Epidemiology and infection</jtitle><addtitle>Epidemiol. Infect</addtitle><date>2022-12-27</date><risdate>2022</risdate><volume>151</volume><spage>e13</spage><pages>e13-</pages><artnum>e13</artnum><issn>0950-2688</issn><issn>1469-4409</issn><eissn>1469-4409</eissn><abstract>Broiler chickens are among the main livestock sectors worldwide. With individual treatments being inapplicable, contrary to many other animal species, the need for antimicrobial use (AMU) is relatively high. AMU in animals is known to drive the emergence and spread of antimicrobial resistance (AMR). High farm biosecurity is a cornerstone for animal health and welfare, as well as food safety, as it protects animals from the introduction and spread of pathogens and therefore the need for AMU. The goal of this study was to identify the main biosecurity practices associated with AMU in broiler farms and to develop a statistical model that produces customised recommendations as to which biosecurity measures could be implemented on a farm to reduce its AMU, including a cost-effectiveness analysis of the recommended measures. AMU and biosecurity data were obtained cross-sectionally in 2014 from 181 broiler farms across nine European countries (Belgium, Bulgaria, Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Poland and Spain). Using mixed-effects random forest analysis (Mix-RF), recursive feature elimination was implemented to determine the biosecurity measures that best predicted AMU at the farm level. Subsequently, an algorithm was developed to generate AMU reduction scenarios based on the implementation of these measures. In the final Mix-RF model, 21 factors were present: 10 about internal biosecurity, 8 about external biosecurity and 3 about farm size and productivity, with the latter showing the largest (Gini) importance. Other AMU predictors, in order of importance, were the number of depopulation steps, compliance with a vaccination protocol for non-officially controlled diseases, and requiring visitors to check in before entering the farm. K-means clustering on the proximity matrix of the final Mix-RF model revealed that several measures interacted with each other, indicating that high AMU levels can arise for various reasons depending on the situation. The algorithm utilised the AMU predictive power of biosecurity measures while accounting also for their interactions, representing a first step toward aiding the decision-making process of veterinarians and farmers who are in need of implementing on-farm biosecurity measures to reduce their AMU.</abstract><cop>Cambridge, UK</cop><pub>Cambridge University Press</pub><pmid>36573356</pmid><doi>10.1017/S0950268822001960</doi><tpages>16</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1620-3200</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5420-949X</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0950-2688 |
ispartof | Epidemiology and infection, 2022-12, Vol.151, p.e13, Article e13 |
issn | 0950-2688 1469-4409 1469-4409 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_9990406 |
source | Cambridge University Press Wholly Gold Open Access Journals; MEDLINE; DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals; PubMed Central |
subjects | Algorithms Animal biology Animal health Animal Husbandry Animal Husbandry - methods Animal species Animal welfare Animals Anti-Infective Agents Antibiotics Antimicrobial agents Antimicrobial resistance Biosecurity Chickens Cluster analysis Clustering Cost analysis Data collection Decision making Decision trees Disease control Europe Farms Food safety Life Sciences Livestock Mathematical models Original Paper Poultry Statistical models Vaccination Vector quantization Veterinary medicine and animal Health |
title | Biosecurity and antimicrobial use in broiler farms across nine European countries: toward identifying farm-specific options for reducing antimicrobial usage |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-07T21%3A46%3A36IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Biosecurity%20and%20antimicrobial%20use%20in%20broiler%20farms%20across%20nine%20European%20countries:%20toward%20identifying%20farm-specific%20options%20for%20reducing%20antimicrobial%20usage&rft.jtitle=Epidemiology%20and%20infection&rft.au=Mallioris,%20Panagiotis&rft.aucorp=EFFORT%20consortium&rft.date=2022-12-27&rft.volume=151&rft.spage=e13&rft.pages=e13-&rft.artnum=e13&rft.issn=0950-2688&rft.eissn=1469-4409&rft_id=info:doi/10.1017/S0950268822001960&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E2768628913%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2768628913&rft_id=info:pmid/36573356&rft_cupid=10_1017_S0950268822001960&rfr_iscdi=true |