Understanding veterinarians' prescribing decisions on antibiotic dry cow therapy.

In the United Kingdom, blanket antibiotic dry cow therapy (BDCT) is commonly prescribed. An alternate strategy is selective dry cow therapy (SDCT) whereby a teat sealant is given instead of an antibiotic to cows with a low probability of infection. Switching from BDCT to SDCT can significantly reduce antibiotic use. The aims of this study were to explore how veterinarians (vets) rationalized their prescribing decisions for mammary treatments at drying off, and the barriers and motivators they perceived to implementing SDCT. Face-to-face interviews were conducted with 20 purposively recruited vets from 6 practices in England, United Kingdom. The data were analyzed qualitatively using an inductive thematic analysis. The majority of participants stated a personal preference for SDCT because it constitutes more responsible antibiotic use. On the majority of farms, the prescribing decision was taken by a senior veterinarian and BDCT was prescribed. Less experienced vets expressed a desire to be more involved in the decision-making process. The first theme, prioritizing responsible antimicrobial prescribing, encapsulated the difficulties vets expressed engaging with farmers, conflicts of interest, and vets' determination to take action. The second theme, the effect of a vet's experience on their ability to influence farmers, focused on the specific challenges faced by less experienced vets and the importance of vets being both trusted by farmers and being knowledgeable. The third theme, vets' perceptions about the risk and complexity of implementing SDCT, revealed markedly different levels of concern and fears about adverse outcomes with teat sealants versus antibiotics. The results also showed differences in perceptions about how difficult SDCT is to implement in practice. The last theme, vets' suggestions for facilitating the introduction of SDCT, was wide ranging and provided useful insight from a veterinary perspective into ways to facilitate SDCT. Initiatives that seek to alter vets' perceptions of the risks associated with switching to using SDCT are likely to prove useful in facilitating change. Our results also suggest that it is vital for senior vets to take a leading role in facilitating farms to implement SDCT. Less experienced colleagues may benefit from more help from senior vets to gain the trust of farmers and to become involved more quickly in herd-level preventive medicine. Vets must work together and take a united approach to reduce antimicrobial use.

Quantifying veterinarians' beliefs on disease control and exploring the effect of new evidence: a Bayesian approach.

The clinical beliefs (expectations and demands) of veterinarians regarding herd-level strategies to control mastitis, lameness, and Johne's disease were quantified in a numerical format; 94 veterinarians working in England (UK) were randomly selected and, during interviews, a statistical technique called probabilistic elicitation was used to capture their clinical expectations as probability distributions. The results revealed that markedly different clinical expectations existed for all 3 diseases, and many pairs of veterinarians had expectations with nonoverlapping 95% Bayesian credible intervals. For example, for a 3-yr lameness intervention, the most pessimistic veterinarian was centered at an 11% population mean reduction in lameness prevalence (95% credible interval: 0-21%); the most enthusiastic veterinarian was centered at a 58% reduction (95% credible interval: 38-78%). This suggests that a major change in beliefs would be required to achieve clinical agreement. Veterinarians' clinical expectations were used as priors in Bayesian models where they were combined with synthetic data (from randomized clinical trials of different sizes) to explore the effect of new evidence on current clinical opinion. The mathematical models make predictions based on the assumption that veterinarians will update their beliefs logically. For example, for the lameness intervention, a 200-farm clinical trial that estimated a 30% mean reduction in lameness prevalence was predicted to be reasonably convincing to the most pessimist veterinarian; that is, in light of this data, they were predicted to believe there would be a 0.92 probability of exceeding the median clinical demand of this sample of veterinarians, which was a 20% mean reduction in lameness. Currently, controversy exists over the extent to which veterinarians update their beliefs logically, and further research on this is needed. This study has demonstrated that probabilistic elicitation and a Bayesian framework are useful for evaluating the diversity and strength of veterinarians' clinical beliefs. The wide variations observed have implications for designing future projects. Although many factors influence disease control, nonetheless the heterogeneity in beliefs also raises concern over the extent to which a broadly consistent approach is currently being achieved; it supports the argument for more randomized clinical trials and for national programs to control nonstatutory endemic diseases.

The interpretation of serial Johne's disease milk antibody results is affected by test characteristics, pattern of test results and parallel bovine tuberculosis testing.

BACKGROUND: In the UK, quarterly Johne's disease milk antibody ELISAs (JD-mELISAs) are commonly used to classify animals which are likely to be infectious, termed "red cows". "Red cows" are classified following two positive results from the previous four tests (e.g. + - - +). All cattle are also regularly screened for bovine tuberculosis using intradermal avian and bovine tuberculin, and it is advised to maintain a 60 day interval between a tuberculosis test and JD-mELISA. AIMS: To evaluate the impact of bovine tuberculosis testing on JD-mELISAs, and to quantify the impact of test specificity and "red cow" classification test pattern on the probability of infection. METHODS: Four years of individual cow milk records with JD-mELISA results were collated from 735 dairy farms and matched to tuberculosis testing records. A two-level multivariable logistic regression model quantified the effect of tuberculosis testing on JD-mELISA result. The specificity and age-dependent sensitivity of a single JD-mELISA were estimated and used to calculate likelihood ratios following each test. Using Bayes' theorem, the posterior probability of infection with Johne's disease was calculated for different specificities, ages of cow, and patterns of test results. RESULTS: There were increased odds of a positive JD-mELISA if it was ≤30 days (OR: 2.1) or 31-60 days (OR: 1.2) after a tuberculosis test, compared to >90 days. A larger avian skin reaction at the tuberculosis test was also associated with increased odds of a positive JD-mELISA. The proportion of cows which tested exclusively negative after their first positive JD-mELISA was higher if that JD-mELISA was ≤30 days after a tuberculosis test compared to >90 days. The posterior probability of infection reduced substantially when the test specificity was slightly reduced. In "red cows" classified following two consecutive positive tests, if the test specificity was reduced to 0.95, then the posterior probability of infection was only >95 % if the prior probability was >13 %. If the "red cow" classification was due to two non-consecutive positive tests (+ - - +), the posterior probability of infection was only >95 % if the prior probability was >43 %. CONCLUSIONS: Testing for Johne's disease within 60 days of a tuberculosis test is associated with a higher chance of a positive JD-mELISA and this may reflect a reduction in the ELISA specificity. Relatively small reductions in JD-mELISA specificity can markedly reduce the posterior probability of infection which also depends on the pattern of test results which classifies "red cows".

Understanding how new evidence influences practitioners' beliefs regarding dry cow therapy: A Bayesian approach using probabilistic elicitation.

This study used probabilistic elicitation and a Bayesian framework to quantitatively explore how logically practitioners' update their clinical beliefs after exposure to new data. The clinical context was the efficacy of antibiotics versus teat sealants for preventing mammary infections during the dry period. While most practitioners updated their clinical expectations logically, the majority failed to draw sufficient strength from the new data so that their clinical confidence afterwards was lower than merited. This study provides quantitative insight into how practitioners' update their beliefs. We discuss some of the psychological issues that may be faced by practitioners when interpreting new data. The results have important implications for evidence-based practice and clinical research in terms of the impact that new data may bring to the clinical community.

Proactive dairy cattle disease control in the UK: veterinary surgeons' involvement and associated characteristics.

Characteristics of 94 veterinary surgeons associated with delivering preventive herd-level strategies to control mastitis, lameness and Johne's disease were investigated using two multinomial models. The response variables were 'Gold Standard Monitoring' (including on-going data analysis, risk assessments and laboratory testing), and a lower level of involvement called 'Regular Control Advice'. Although the sample was biased towards those who spend the majority of their time with dairy cows, 69 per cent currently had no involvement in Gold Standard Monitoring for lameness, 60 per cent no involvement with Johne's, and 52 per cent no involvement with mastitis. The final model predicted that an assistant without a postgraduate cattle qualification, who had spent no time on dairy cattle continuous professional development (CPD) in the last year, had an 88 per cent chance of having no involvement with Gold Standard Monitoring for any disease, versus <5 per cent chance for a CPD 'enriched' partner with a postgraduate cattle qualification; there was <1 per cent chance this assistant would be involved with Gold Standard Monitoring of all three diseases on one or more farms, versus a 58 per cent chance for this partner. CPD and employment status were also associated with markedly different probabilities for delivering Regular Control Advice. Increased postgraduate education may further veterinary involvement of this nature.

A Bayesian elicitation of veterinary beliefs regarding systemic dry cow therapy: variation and importance for clinical trial design.

The two key aims of this research were: (i) to conduct a probabilistic elicitation to quantify the variation in veterinarians' beliefs regarding the efficacy of systemic antibiotics when used as an adjunct to intra-mammary dry cow therapy and (ii) to investigate (in a Bayesian statistical framework) the strength of future research evidence required (in theory) to change the beliefs of practising veterinary surgeons regarding the efficacy of systemic antibiotics, given their current clinical beliefs. The beliefs of 24 veterinarians in 5 practices in England were quantified as probability density functions. Classic multidimensional scaling revealed major variations in beliefs both within and between veterinary practices which included: confident optimism, confident pessimism and considerable uncertainty. Of the 9 veterinarians interviewed holding further cattle qualifications, 6 shared a confidently pessimistic belief in the efficacy of systemic therapy and whilst 2 were more optimistic, they were also more uncertain. A Bayesian model based on a synthetic dataset from a randomised clinical trial (showing no benefit with systemic therapy) predicted how each of the 24 veterinarians' prior beliefs would alter as the size of the clinical trial increased, assuming that practitioners would update their beliefs rationally in accordance with Bayes' theorem. The study demonstrated the usefulness of probabilistic elicitation for evaluating the diversity and strength of practitioners' beliefs. The major variation in beliefs observed raises interest in the veterinary profession's approach to prescribing essential medicines. Results illustrate the importance of eliciting prior beliefs when designing clinical trials in order to increase the chance that trial data are of sufficient strength to alter the clinical beliefs of practitioners and do not merely serve to satisfy researchers.