Opportunities and challenges to improving antibiotic prescribing practices through a One Health approach: Results of a comparative survey of doctors, dentists and veterinarians in Australia

© 2018 Article author(s). Objectives To explore and compare the knowledge, attitudes and experiences of doctors, dentists and veterinarians (as prescribers) in relation to antibiotic use and antibiotic resistance (AbR), and to consider the implications of these for policy-making that support a One Health approach. Design A cross-sectional survey conducted online. Setting Doctors, dentists and veterinarians practising in primary, secondary or tertiary care in Australia. Participants 547 doctors, 380 dentists and 403 veterinarians completed the survey. Main outcome measures Prescribers' knowledge, attitudes and perceptions of AbR, the extent to which a range of factors are perceived as barriers to appropriate prescribing practices, and perceived helpfulness of potential strategies to improve antibiotic prescribing in practice. Results There was substantial agreement across prescriber groups that action on AbR is required by multiple sectors and stakeholders. However, prescribers externalised responsibility to some extent by seeing the roles of others as more important than their own in relation to AbR. There were common and context-specific barriers to optimal prescribing across the prescriber groups. Prescriber groups generally perceived restrictive policies as unhelpful to supporting appropriate prescribing in their practice. Conclusions The results have implications for implementing a One Health approach that involves doctors, dentists and veterinarians as key players to tackling the crisis of AbR. The findings are that (1) prescribers understand and are likely receptive to a One Health policy approach to AbR, (2) policy development should be sensitive to barriers that are specific to individual prescriber groups and (3) the development and introduction of interventions that might be perceived as reducing prescriber autonomy will need to be carefully designed and implemented

Antiepileptic drugs’ tolerability and safety – a systematic review and meta-analysis of adverse effects in dogs

<p>Various anti-epileptic drugs (AEDs) are used for the management of idiopathic epilepsy (IE) in dogs. Their safety profile is an important consideration for regulatory bodies, owners and prescribing clinicians. However, information on their adverse effects still remains limited with most of it derived from non-blinded non-randomized uncontrolled trials and case reports.</p><p><span>This poster won third place, which was presented at the Veterinary Evidence Today conference, Edinburgh November 1-3, 2016. </span></p><br /> <img src="https://www.veterinaryevidence.org/rcvskmod/icons/oa-icon.jpg" alt="Open Access" /

International Veterinary Epilepsy Task Force consensus proposal: Medical treatment of canine epilepsy in Europe

In Europe, the number of antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) licensed for dogs has grown considerably over the last years. Nevertheless, the same questions remain, which include, 1) when to start treatment, 2) which drug is best used initially, 3) which adjunctive AED can be advised if treatment with the initial drug is unsatisfactory, and 4) when treatment changes should be considered. In this consensus proposal, an overview is given on the aim of AED treatment, when to start long-term treatment in canine epilepsy and which veterinary AEDs are currently in use for dogs. The consensus proposal for drug treatment protocols, 1) is based on current published evidence-based literature, 2) considers the current legal framework of the cascade regulation for the prescription of veterinary drugs in Europe, and 3) reflects the authors’ experience. With this paper it is aimed to provide a consensus for the management of canine idiopathic epilepsy. Furthermore, for the management of structural epilepsy AEDs are inevitable in addition to treating the underlying cause, if possible

Adaptation and conservation insights from the koala genome

The koala, the only extant species of the marsupial family Phascolarctidae, is classified as ‘vulnerable’ due to habitat loss and widespread disease. We sequenced the koala genome, producing a complete and contiguous marsupial reference genome, including centromeres. We reveal that the koala’s ability to detoxify eucalypt foliage may be due to expansions within a cytochrome P450 gene family, and its ability to smell, taste and moderate ingestion of plant secondary metabolites may be due to expansions in the vomeronasal and taste receptors. We characterized novel lactation proteins that protect young in the pouch and annotated immune genes important for response to chlamydial disease. Historical demography showed a substantial population crash coincident with the decline of Australian megafauna, while contemporary populations had biogeographic boundaries and increased inbreeding in populations affected by historic translocations. We identified genetically diverse populations that require habitat corridors and instituting of translocation programs to aid the koala’s survival in the wild

Current incidence, treatment costs and seasonality of pinkeye in Australian cattle estimated from sales of three popular medications

Pinkeye is an economically important ocular disease occurring in all cattle producing areas of Australia. This study was undertaken to estimate the frequency of occurrence of the disease in Australia and treatment costs of the disease to the cattle industry using the sales of popular pinkeye medications as a surrogate indicator. Monthly sales data for Orbenin® Eye Ointment, Opticlox® Eye Ointment and Terramycin® Pinkeye Aerosol were analysed. We first estimated the number of cattle that can be treated with a syringe or a can and then using the data of sales of these pinkeye medications and the total cattle population of Australia, estimated the incidence of pinkeye. Probability distributions were used to include uncertainty around the estimates. Costs to producers were estimated based on retail prices of these medications. The results indicated that 732,864 syringes of Orbenin® Eye Ointment, 134,800 syringes of Opticlox® Eye Ointment and 27,755 cans of Terramycin® Pinkeye Aerosol are sold in Australia per year. Based on some assumptions of the number of cases treated by these drugs and number of cases left untreated, the number of cattle affected by pinkeye each year in Australia was estimated to be 2.80 million (95 % PI: 1.76, 4.65) or 10.25 % (95 % PI: 6.43, 16.97) of the entire Australian cattle herd. The cattle industry is expected to lose AU$ 9.67 million (95 % PI: 8.56, 13.11) each year just considering the cost of these three drugs. The results suggest that losses due to pinkeye in the Australian cattle industry are considerably higher than previously thought and should be used to inform the development of disease prevention and control policies

Risk factors associated with pinkeye in Australian cattle

Pinkeye is the most important bovine ocular disease worldwide and a major welfare and economic concern to the Australian cattle industry. Pinkeye can occur in epidemic proportions, but severity and susceptibility vary within and between herds, indicating that the disease is multifactorial. This study was conducted to identify the on-farm risk factors associated with pinkeye disease in Australian cattle. Data were gathered from cattle farmers using a custom designed online questionnaire. Farmer responses suitable for assessment (n = 999) were analysed with descriptive, univariable and multivariable logistic regression to evaluate the association of 26 explanatory variables with pinkeye within-herd prevalence. Results revealed that farm location, farm grazing area, farmer-reported dust levels, fly levels, rain levels, animal zebu content and cattle age were significantly associated with pinkeye prevalence. More specifically, having a farm located in southern Australia, of smaller grazing area with cattle ≤ 2 years of age, was associated with a higher pinkeye prevalence. Pinkeye prevalence was also greater if respondents ranked their farms as having high fly levels compared to moderate and low fly levels, respectively and on farms ranked low for rainfall compared to moderate and high rainfall, respectively. Those that ranked their farms as having high dust levels had more pinkeye compared to moderate and low dust levels, but moderate dust levels were protective compared to low dust levels. The results confirm that pinkeye disease is multifactorial and is associated with a range of host and environmental factors. These findings should be used to assist in the control of the disease and improve pinkeye outcomes in Australian cattle

Is there an association between Vice-Chancellors’ compensation and external performance measures?

© 2019 Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand We provide evidence on the pay for performance relation between Australian university Vice Chancellors’ compensation and independent measures of university teaching, research and other performance indicators provided by external ranking bodies. Our results show limited association between university rankings and Vice Chancellors’ compensation, but confirm that Vice Chancellors’ compensation is predominantly driven by size measures based on the different components of revenue. Further, we find that few universities offer performance-based bonus payments. Our results are robust with respect to a number of sensitivity tests

Perceptions and practices of Australian cattle farmers for the treatment of pinkeye (infectious bovine keratoconjunctivitis)

Pinkeye or infectious bovine keratoconjunctivitis is a globally significant disease and occurs in every state of Australia. Economic loss due to pinkeye can be considerable and it is a major welfare concern, but not all cattle with the disease are treated by farmers. This study was conducted to understand the perceptions and practices of Australian farmers regarding the treatment of pinkeye: factors influencing when farmers treat pinkeye, treatments used and considered effective, and reasons for not treating. Data were gathered using a custom designed online questionnaire. Farmer responses suitable for assessment (n = 985) were analysed using descriptive analyses along with univariable and multivariable ordinal logistic regression models to evaluate the association of 15 explanatory variables with the outcome “when do you treat pinkeye?”. Results revealed three variables, farm size, times yarded and ranking of the pain caused by pinkeye, were significantly associated with the frequency of pinkeye treatment. Specifically, farmers with smaller farm sizes were more likely to treat their cattle for pinkeye more frequently. So too were those who yarded their cattle more, and those that rated pinkeye as highly painful. The most used treatments for pinkeye in Australia were pinkeye ointments (n = 861), followed by eye patches (n = 637), pinkeye spray (n = 623), fly control (n = 507), and pinkeye powder (n = 408). Over half of those who had used subconjunctival injection, pinkeye ointments, eye patches, injectable antibiotics and veterinarians rated them as highly effective treatments. Kerosene is still used by some farmers (n = 106). The most common reason for not treating pinkeye was that it was ‘too difficult to treat individuals’. These findings provide insight into the attitudes of Australian farmers to the treatment of pinkeye and should be used to improve pinkeye outcomes in cattle