Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Prev Vet Med. 1997 Jul;31(1-2):133-46.

Associations between off-label feed additives and farm size, veterinary consultant use, and animal age.

Author information

1
Great Plains Veterinary Educational Center, University of Nebraska, Clay Center 68933, USA.

Abstract

Data from the United States National Swine Survey collected by the National Animal Health Monitoring System were used to describe the use of feed additives in swine feeds. Data were collected from 710 farms. The concentration of feed additives expressed in grams per ton of complete feed was described by stage of production, and the use of feed additives above the labeled treatment levels (i.e. off-label) was identified. Of the 3328 feeds, about 79% contained feed additives used in the labeled manner. For all classes of pigs, the prevalence of labeled feed additive use was greater than 75%. Penicillin was used according to its label most often, followed by apramycin, bacitracin, tetracyclines, lincomycin, and tylosin. Carbadox had the highest prevalence of off-label use. Of the 699 feeds that included feed additives in an off-label manner, about 57% included additives at greater than the recommended concentrations or were fed to an incorrect class of pig. About 56% of the feeds had off-label combinations of additives. Small farms were more likely to use rations with no feed additives than intermediate or large farms (P < 0.001). Of those farms using feed additives, the odds of a small farm using all feed additives in the labeled manner was 7.7 times that of an intermediate or large farm (P < 0.0001). After controlling for herd size, producers who used a veterinary consultant were 2.1 times more likely to use feeds with feed additives (P < 0.0001).

PMID:
9234432
[Indexed for MEDLINE]

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Elsevier Science
Loading ...
Support Center