A systematic review of the efficacy of antibiotics for the prevention of swine respiratory disease. (December 2019)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Sargeant, Jan M.; Bergevin, Michele D.; Churchill, Katheryn; Dawkins, Kaitlyn; Deb, Bhumika; Dunn, Jennifer; Hu, Dapeng; Moody, Carly; O'Connor, Annette M.; O'Sullivan, Terri L.; Reist, Mark; Wang, Chong; Wilhelm, Barbara; Winder, Charlotte B.
• Is Part Of: Animal health research reviews. Volume 20:Number 2(2019)
• Page Start: 291
• Page End: 304
• Publication Date: 2019-12
• Subjects: Preventive antibiotics, -- respiratory disease, -- swine, -- systematic review; Animal health -- Periodicals; Veterinary medicine -- Periodicals; 636.089
• DOI: 10.1017/S1466252319000185
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1466-2523

Abstract

Abstract: Prevention and control of respiratory disease is a major contributor to antibiotic use in swine. A systematic review was conducted to address the question, 'What is the comparative efficacy of antimicrobials for the prevention of swine respiratory disease?' Eligible studies were controlled trials published in English evaluating prophylactic antibiotics in swine, where clinical morbidity, mortality, or total antibiotic use was assessed. Four databases and the gray literature were searched for relevant articles. Two reviewers working independently screened titles and abstracts for eligibility followed by full-text articles, and then extracted data and evaluated risk of bias for eligible trials. There were 44 eligible trials from 36 publications. Clinical morbidity was evaluated in eight trials where antibiotics were used in nursery pigs and 10 trials where antibiotics were used in grower pigs. Mortality was measured in 22 trials in nursery pigs and 12 trials in grower pigs. There was heterogeneity in the antibiotic interventions and comparisons published in the literature; thus, there was insufficient evidence to allow quantification of the efficacy, or relative efficacy, of antibiotic interventions. Concerns related to statistical non-independence and quality of reporting were noted in the included trials.