Relative cost-effectiveness of treatment of feedlot calves with ivermectin versus treatment with a combination of fenbendazole, permethrin, and fenthion.
OBJECTIVE
To compare growth performance, animal health characteristics, and carcass characteristics of feedlot calves treated with ivermectin topically with that of feedlot calves treated with a combination of fenbendazole orally and permethrin and fenthion topically.


METHODS
Clinical trial.


METHODS
14,184 British crossbred steer calves (mean weight, 286 kg [630 lb]) in 30 pens at a commercial feedlot in Nebraska.


METHODS
On arrival at the feedlot, calves were randomly assigned to be treated with ivermectin topically or with a combination of fenbendazole orally and permethrin and fenthion topically (control). At the time of assignment to treatment groups, fecal samples were collected from 5% of the calves. Growth performance, carcass characteristics, and health information were recorded.


RESULTS
Geometric mean fecal egg counts at the time of arrival at the feedlot were not significantly different between groups. Final weight, weight gain, average daily gain, and the dry matter intake-to-gain ratio were significantly improved for calves in the ivermectin group. The percentage of carcasses classified as quality grade choice was higher for the ivermectin group than the control group; however, the percentage of carcasses classified as yield grade 1 and the dressing percentage were higher for the control group than for the ivermectin group.


CONCLUSIONS
Results suggest that topical administration of ivermectin to feedlot calves is relatively more cost-effective than administration of a combination of fenbendazole orally and permethrin and fenthion topically.
Guichon
P T
PT
Feedlot Health Management Services, Okotoks, AB, Canada.
Jim
G K
GK
Booker
C W
CW
Schunicht
O C
OC
Wildman
B K
BK
Brown
J R
JR
D000284:Administration, Oral; D000287:Administration, Topical; D000818:Animals; D000969:Antinematodal Agents / Q000008:administration & dosage / Q000191:economics / Q000627:therapeutic use; D000977:Antiparasitic Agents / Q000008:administration & dosage / Q000191:economics / Q000627:therapeutic use*; D002417:Cattle; D002418:Cattle Diseases / Q000191:economics* / Q000453:epidemiology / Q000517:prevention & control*; D003362:Cost-Benefit Analysis; D004338:Drug Combinations; D005243:Feces / Q000469:parasitology; D005273:Fenbendazole / Q000008:administration & dosage / Q000191:economics / Q000627:therapeutic use; D005284:Fenthion / Q000008:administration & dosage / Q000191:economics / Q000627:therapeutic use; D007306:Insecticides / Q000008:administration & dosage / Q000191:economics / Q000627:therapeutic use; D007559:Ivermectin / Q000008:administration & dosage / Q000191:economics / Q000627:therapeutic use; D008297:Male; D008460:Meat / Q000592:standards; D009329:Nebraska / Q000453:epidemiology; D010270:Parasite Egg Count / Q000662:veterinary; D010273:Parasitic Diseases, Animal / Q000191:economics* / Q000453:epidemiology / Q000517:prevention & control*; D026023:Permethrin; D011722:Pyrethrins / Q000008:administration & dosage / Q000191:economics / Q000627:therapeutic use; D015430:Weight Gain
D000969:Antinematodal Agents; D000977:Antiparasitic Agents; D004338:Drug Combinations; D007306:Insecticides; D011722:Pyrethrins; D026023:Permethrin; D005273:Fenbendazole; D007559:Ivermectin; D005284:Fenthion