Antibacterial prescribing patterns in small animal veterinary practice identified via SAVSNET: the small animal veterinary surveillance network

In this study, data from veterinary clinical records were collected via the small animal veterinary surveillance network (SAVSNET). Over a three-month period, data were obtained from 22,859 consultations at 16 small animal practices in England and Wales: 69 per cent from dogs, 24 per cent from cats,...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inVeterinary record Vol. 169; no. 12; p. 310
Main Authors Radford, A. D., Noble, P. J., Coyne, K. P., Gaskell, R. M., Jones, P. H., Bryan, J. G. E., Setzkorn, C., Tierney, Á., Dawson, S.
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published England BMJ Publishing Group Limited 17.09.2011
Blackwell Publishing Ltd
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:In this study, data from veterinary clinical records were collected via the small animal veterinary surveillance network (SAVSNET). Over a three-month period, data were obtained from 22,859 consultations at 16 small animal practices in England and Wales: 69 per cent from dogs, 24 per cent from cats, 3 per cent from rabbits and 4 per cent from miscellaneous species. The proportion of consults where prescribing of antibacterials was identified was 35.1 per cent for dogs, 48.5 per cent for cats and 36.6 per cent for rabbits. Within this population, 76 per cent of antibacterials prescribed were β-lactams, including the most common group of clavulanic acid-potentiated amoxicillin making up 36 per cent of the antibacterials prescribed. Other classes included lincosamides (9 per cent), fluoroquinolones and quinolones (6 per cent) and nitroimidazoles (4 per cent). Vancomycin and teicoplanin (glycopeptide class), and imipenem and meropenem (β-lactam class) prescribing was not identified. Prescribing behaviour varied between practices. For dogs and cats, the proportion of consults associated with the prescription of antibacterials ranged from 0.26 to 0.55 and 0.41 to 0.73, respectively.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
ObjectType-Article-2
ObjectType-Feature-1
ISSN:0042-4900
2042-7670
DOI:10.1136/vr.d5062