title: Feasibility study of veterinary antibiotic consumption in Germany--comparison of ADDs and UDDs by animal production type, antimicrobial class and indication.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Within a feasibility study the use of antibiotics in pigs and cattle was determined in 24 veterinary practices in Lower Saxony and on 66 farms in North Rhine-Westphalia in Germany. Focus was laid on the comparison of the Used Daily Doses (UDD) (dose per animal and day prescribed by the veterinarians) with the Defined Animal Daily Doses (ADD) (dose per animal and day calculated by means of recommended dosages and estimated live weights).
  
  
  RESULTS
  For piglets and calves most of the UDD (50% and 46% of nUDD, respectively) were above the ADD (i.e. UDD/ADD-ratio above 1.25). Regarding sows, fattening pigs, dairy and beef cattle, most of the UDDs (49% to 65% of nUDD) were lower than the respective ADD (i.e. UDD/ADD-ratio below 0.8). In pigs, the UDDs of beta-lactams, fluoroquinolones and cephalosporins, and in cattle, those of macrolides and beta-lactams were often below the ADDs. Tetracyclines were frequently used above the recommended dose.Enteric diseases were more often treated below the recommended dose than respiratory diseases, possibly due to overestimation of the live weight (diarrhea in young animals, respiratory diseases in elder animals) and consequently overestimation of the recommended dose.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Comparisons between UDD and ADD can be used to observe differences between antimicrobials and trends in the usage of antibiotics. But individual treatment comparisons of UDD and ADD must be interpreted carefully, because they may be due to lower live weights than estimated. Correlating such data with data on the occurrence of resistant bacteria in future may help to improve resistance prevention and control.
authors.affiliation: Department of Biometry, Epidemiology and Information Processing, University of Veterinary Medicine Hannover, WHO-Centre Veterinary Public Health, Bünteweg 2, Hannover D-30559, Germany. roswitha.merle@gmail.com.
authors.forename: Roswitha
authors.initials: R
authors.lastname: Merle
authors.forename: Matthias
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Robanus
authors.forename: Christine
authors.initials: C
authors.lastname: Hegger-Gravenhorst
authors.forename: Yvonne
authors.initials: Y
authors.lastname: Mollenhauer
authors.forename: Peter
authors.initials: P
authors.lastname: Hajek
authors.forename: Annemarie
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Käsbohrer
authors.forename: Walther
authors.initials: W
authors.lastname: Honscha
authors.forename: Lothar
authors.initials: L
authors.lastname: Kreienbrock
mesh_terms: D000822:Animal Husbandry / Q000592:standards; D000818:Animals; D000900:Anti-Bacterial Agents / Q000145:classification*; D002417:Cattle; D002418:Cattle Diseases / Q000188:drug therapy; D016208:Databases, Factual; D004363:Drug Utilization; D005240:Feasibility Studies; D005858:Germany; D013552:Swine; D013553:Swine Diseases / Q000188:drug therapy; D019155:Veterinary Drugs
chemical_list: D000900:Anti-Bacterial Agents; D019155:Veterinary Drugs