Antimicrobial Use Study

Phase Two - Reporting and Monitoring

In late 2012, the Sustainable Poultry Farming Group (SPFG) received funding from the Agriculture

Environment Initiative to conduct Phase Two of the AMU Project. The ultimate goal of the project was to

develop data collecting process and analysis system that would facilitate antimicrobial monitoring or

reporting mechanism for the poultry industry that would be simple and practical; yet allows producers

to quantify industry drug use and measure improvements in the stewardship of these important

products. The project started in January 2013 and was completed in December 2013. Dr Carl Ribble,

with the Centre for Coastal Health was the project lead.

 

The project had six main tasks:

  1. Data selection - Data samples were collected from several of the producers to gain a broader understanding of the potential AMU changes that can occur across a flock cycle, and to further explore differences among the feather groups. Literature review was used to develop a document on the categories of antimicrobials used in the poultry industry, as well as the specific antimicrobials found within those categories, and their indications for use.
  2. Technology options - A paper-based, spreadsheet, and database options was developed for participating auditors or producers to use for data entry. On-line data-entry options were also developed.
  3. Database development - A Microsoft Access-based AMU database containing data entry shells specific to each feather group was completed for all four feather groups.
  4. Test analysis - Mock analysis and creation of reports was completed all groups.
  5. Program trial - The trial showed that the system allows auditors to extract antimicrobial usage data from poultry farms, to enter that data into the database, to code the identity of farms in the database, and to send a coded file securely to the Centre for Coastal Health. The data was exported into the Excel analysis file and Statistical Analysis Software (SAS) for analysis, and to produce appropriate reports.
  6. Assess and report - Reports showed summaries by antimicrobial class to enable one to easily see Class 1 to 4 use; reports also provided specific antimicrobial use to enable further investigation. The reports also allowed producers to do research on the nature of their antimicrobial use.

 

Overall Project Conclusions

This project developed the program for and showed the feasibility of extracting antimicrobial usage data from poultry farms in BC, entering that data into the constructed database, analysing the data, and creating appropriate reports for participating producers in order to meet the objectives identified at the workshop. The project also showed that the data cannot be collected solely by auditors for some poultry sectors. The average extra time the data collection took was fifteen minutes. With six flocks per year for broiler operations, the data collection would add an hour and a half per farm. In addition, the auditors only visit each individual farm every three years. Census data from across the poultry sector is needed for benchmarking and any subsequent analysis, so alternative data collection mechanisms are needed.

Considerations for Possible Next Steps

A Phase Three project would test and verify the possible approaches to data collection developed in Phase Two with the intent of developing a sustainable system over time. The goal would be to provide a baseline of AMU in the industry and to establish the first year of benchmarking for all individual producers against the industry average/metrics.

To be most effective at achieving these objectives will require collecting AMU data from all farms in the industry over a one year time period. However, a key finding of the feasibility trial in Phase Two was that collecting AMU data from all farms during the annual cycle of OFFSAP audits by auditors will be difficult because of the time and effort required to organize and gather all of the feed tag data for each flock from the flock files. Solutions to the data collection problem needs to be explored. Partial sampling strategies may be a solution to this problem. Another option would be to ask the feed companies to provide a summary of feed and antimicrobial use for all the feed they sell rather than searching through the feed tags in individual flock files.

Phase Three results may be able to provide the first data points for looking at annual trends in AMU; the farm and industry reports would be useful for exploring why farms differ in their AMU (research); and project outputs could be used to generate educational material for use within the industry and for public health and other potential audiences. The project may also be able to assess the ways to assist auditors with data collection and data entry; an important part of identifying the longer term strategy for implementing the program across the industry in a way that achieves the objectives of benchmarking, trending, and providing for education and research in a sustainable manner.

At this point it is uncertain how the project will move forward.