Antibacterial treatment for exotic species, backyard ruminants and small flocks: a narrative review highlighting barriers to effective and appropriate antimicrobial treatment
| dc.contributor.author | Jelinski, Dana C. | |
| dc.contributor.author | Orsel, Karin | |
| dc.contributor.author | Weese, J. S. | |
| dc.contributor.author | Conly, John M. | |
| dc.contributor.author | Julien, Danielle A. | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2022-06-12T00:03:28Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2022-06-12T00:03:28Z | |
| dc.date.issued | 2022-06-10 | |
| dc.date.updated | 2022-06-12T00:03:28Z | |
| dc.description.abstract | Abstract Antimicrobial resistance is a complex One Health issue that exists in both human and veterinary medicine. To mitigate this ever-growing problem, efforts have been made to develop guidelines for appropriate antimicrobial use (AMU) across sectors. In veterinary medicine, there are notable literature gaps for proper AMU in minor species. We conducted a structured narrative review covering the years of July 2006 – July 2021 to find antimicrobial treatments for common bacterial infections in exotic (birds, rodents, reptiles, and others), small flock (chickens, turkeys, and other fowl), and backyard small ruminant (sheep and goats) species. We retrieved a total of 4728 articles, of which 21 articles met the criteria for our review. Studies were grouped according to species, syndrome, and body system affected. Other data extracted included the bacterial pathogen(s), treatment (active ingredient), and geographical origin. Body systems reported included: intra-oral (n = 4), gastrointestinal (n = 1), respiratory (n = 2), reproductive (n = 1), skin (n = 3), aural (n = 1), ocular (n = 4), and other/multisystem (n = 5). By species, our search resulted in: rabbit (n = 5), rat (n = 2), guinea pig (n = 1), chinchilla (n = 1), guinea pig and chinchilla (n = 1), avian species (n = 1), psittacine birds (n = 2), loris and lorikeets (n = 1), turtles (n = 2), lizards (n = 1), goats (n = 2) and sheep (n = 2). The results of our findings identified a distinct gap in consistent antimicrobial treatment information for commonly encountered bacterial conditions within these species. There is a persisting need for clinical trials that focus on antibacterial treatment to strengthen the evidence base for AMU within exotic, small flock, and backyard small ruminant species. | |
| dc.identifier.citation | BMC Veterinary Research. 2022 Jun 10;18(1):220 | |
| dc.identifier.doi | https://doi.org/10.1186/s12917-022-03305-5 | |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/1880/114723 | |
| dc.identifier.uri | https://doi.org/10.11575/PRISM/45210 | |
| dc.language.rfc3066 | en | |
| dc.rights.holder | The Author(s) | |
| dc.title | Antibacterial treatment for exotic species, backyard ruminants and small flocks: a narrative review highlighting barriers to effective and appropriate antimicrobial treatment | |
| dc.type | Journal Article |