Antibacterial treatment for exotic species, backyard ruminants and small flocks: a narrative review highlighting barriers to effective and appropriate antimicrobial treatment.

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.

Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) in COVID-19 patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis (November 2019-June 2021).

BACKGROUND: Pneumonia from SARS-CoV-2 is difficult to distinguish from other viral and bacterial etiologies. Broad-spectrum antimicrobials are frequently prescribed to patients hospitalized with COVID-19 which potentially acts as a catalyst for the development of antimicrobial resistance (AMR). OBJECTIVES: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis during the first 18 months of the pandemic to quantify the prevalence and types of resistant co-infecting organisms in patients with COVID-19 and explore differences across hospital and geographic settings. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science (BioSIS), and Scopus from November 1, 2019 to May 28, 2021 to identify relevant articles pertaining to resistant co-infections in patients with laboratory confirmed SARS-CoV-2. Patient- and study-level analyses were conducted. We calculated pooled prevalence estimates of co-infection with resistant bacterial or fungal organisms using random effects models. Stratified meta-analysis by hospital and geographic setting was also performed to elucidate any differences. RESULTS: Of 1331 articles identified, 38 met inclusion criteria. A total of 1959 unique isolates were identified with 29% (569) resistant organisms identified. Co-infection with resistant bacterial or fungal organisms ranged from 0.2 to 100% among included studies. Pooled prevalence of co-infection with resistant bacterial and fungal organisms was 24% (95% CI 8-40%; n = 25 studies: I2 = 99%) and 0.3% (95% CI 0.1-0.6%; n = 8 studies: I2 = 78%), respectively. Among multi-drug resistant organisms, methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, carbapenem-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii, Klebsiella pneumoniae, Pseudomonas aeruginosa and multi-drug resistant Candida auris were most commonly reported. Stratified analyses found higher proportions of AMR outside of Europe and in ICU settings, though these results were not statistically significant. Patient-level analysis demonstrated > 50% (n = 58) mortality, whereby all but 6 patients were infected with a resistant organism. CONCLUSIONS: During the first 18 months of the pandemic, AMR prevalence was high in COVID-19 patients and varied by hospital and geography although there was substantial heterogeneity. Given the variation in patient populations within these studies, clinical settings, practice patterns, and definitions of AMR, further research is warranted to quantify AMR in COVID-19 patients to improve surveillance programs, infection prevention and control practices and antimicrobial stewardship programs globally.

Who let the dogs In? An epidemiological study quantifying domestically sourced and imported dogs in Southern Ontario, Canada.

Dogs are reservoirs for many zoonoses. In southern Ontario, Canada, minimal data exist on the sources from which domestic dogs are acquired (i.e., domestic or imported). The objectives of this study were to (1) describe the proportions of domestically sourced and imported dogs in southern Ontario, Canada, (2) describe the characteristics of newly acquired dogs including their province/country of origin, accompanying health documentation and respondent opinion regarding disease risks from different sources, and (3) determine whether a difference in the proportion of imported dogs exists between rural and urban households in southern Ontario, Canada. We conducted a cross-sectional observational study using an online questionnaire. A total of 2,006 respondents (1,002 rural and 1,004 urban), each representing one household, participated. Over the previous seven-year period, 731 (36.44%, (731/2,006)) respondents domestically sourced at least one dog, with 684 providing information regarding 962 dogs. Domestically sourced dogs were frequently puppies three to five-month-old (25.05%, (241/962)), male (51.87%, (499/962)), from a breeder (30.98%, (298/962)), and sourced from within Ontario (92.93%, (894/962)). As self-reported by respondents, 63.52% (484/762) of domestically sourced dogs greater than 3 months were vaccinated against rabies. Over the same period, individuals from 55 of 2,006 households (2.74%) imported at least one dog. Imported dogs were frequently under three months of age (29.09%, 16/55)), male (58.18%, (32/55)), and found via a breeder (32.73%, (18/55)). Most imported dogs originated from the USA (52.73%, (29/55)). Rabies vaccination in dogs three months and older is provincially required in Ontario and is also required for canine importation into Canada; however, some imported dogs over three months were unvaccinated (7.69%, (3/39)). The odds ratio for importing at least one dog in urban households compared with rural households was 1.93 (95% CI: 1.03-3.62) when controlling for number of household occupants and gross household income.

Unleashing the literature: a scoping review of canine zoonotic and vectorborne disease research in Canis familiaris in North America.

Domestic dogs (Canis familiaris) provide important benefits to human beings but can also transmit pathogens. Information on the breadth of canine zoonoses and vectorborne research in North America is scarce. A scoping review was conducted to examine (1) the number and type of canine zoonoses and vectorborne studies in domestic dogs conducted in North America since the start of the 21st century; (2) the main research methods reported; (3) the Inequality-adjusted Human Development Index (IHDI) countries in which research was conducted; and (4) whether collaborative integrated terminology was reported in objectives or methods sections. Title/abstract screening, full-text screening, and data-charting were completed by two reviewers. We identified 507 publications evaluating 43 zoonotic or vectorborne pathogens in domestic dogs. Most studies (n = 391 of 512 (76.37%)) were conducted in the USA. The five most frequently researched pathogens were Ehrlichia spp. (n = 81 of 507 (15.98%)), Borrelia burgdorferi (n = 64 of 507 (12.62%)), Leptospira spp. (n = 54 of 507 (10.65%)), Rabies virus (n = 42 of 507 (8.28%)), and Influenza viruses (n = 41 of 507 (8.09%)). These pathogens can cause moderate to severe health outcomes in human beings and in dogs irrespective of IHDI ranking; our review highlights important counts of research conduct among North American countries.

Ouch! A cross-sectional study investigating self-reported human exposure to dog bites in rural and urban households in southern Ontario, Canada.

This study investigated self-reported dog bites in humans in rural and urban households in southern Ontario, Canada. Our objectives were to determine, and compare, the incidence of dog bites in rural and urban households, and to describe the profile of bite victims, biting dogs, and the proportion of biting dogs that respondents self-reported as being not up to date on rabies vaccination. We conducted a cross-sectional observational study using an online questionnaire. The 2,006 respondents, each representing one household, included 1,002 rural and 1,004 urban residences. The incidence risk of at least one person in the household being bitten over the previous year in rural households (6.09% per year) was less than in urban households (10.76% per year). In 53.20% of households from which at least one person had been bitten within the past year, only a single person had been bitten. Mostly, victims were 25 to 34 years old (21.67%), male (54.19%), and playing with or interacting with the biting dog at the time of the incident (59.11%). Most biting dogs were 3 to 5 years old (32.02%), males (53.69%), and unleashed (76.85%). Based on self-reporting by respondents, 83.33% of respondent-owned biting dogs were vaccinated against rabies at the time of the biting incident. Irrespective of dog ownership, the odds of an individual in a rural household being bitten by a dog were 0.53 (95% CI: 0.38-0.73) the odds for an individual in an urban household. Dog bites constitute a serious, yet preventable, public health concern that requires targeted, community-specific efforts. Public health organizations could consider findings in developing messaging, particularly as we highlight biting dogs reported by their owners as not up to date on rabies vaccination.

Prevalence and genetic characterization of Giardia spp. and Cryptosporidium spp. in dogs in Iqaluit, Nunavut, Canada.

There are few epidemiologic studies on the role of dogs in zoonotic parasitic transmission in the Circumpolar North. The objectives of this study were to: (a) estimate the faecal prevalence of Giardia spp. and Cryptosporidium spp. in dogs; (b) investigate potential associations between the type of dog population and the faecal presence of Giardia spp. and Cryptosporidium spp.; and (c) describe the molecular characteristics of Giardia spp. and Cryptosporidium spp. in dogs in Iqaluit, Nunavut. We conducted two cross-sectional studies in July and September 2016. In July, the team collected daily faecal samples for 3 days from each of 20 sled dogs. In September, the team collected three faecal samples from each of 59 sled dogs, 111 samples from shelter dogs and 104 from community dogs. We analysed faecal samples for the presence of Giardia spp. and Cryptosporidium spp. using rapid immunoassay and flotation techniques. Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and sequencing of target genes were performed on positive faecal samples. Overall, the faecal prevalence of at least one of the target parasites, when one faecal sample was chosen at random for all dogs, was 8.16% (CI: 5.52-11.92), and for Giardia spp. and Cryptosporidium spp., prevalence was 4.42% (CI: 2.58-7.49) and 6.12% (CI: 3.88-9.53), respectively. The odds of faecal Giardia spp. in sled dogs were significantly higher than those in shelter and community dogs (OR 10.19 [CI: 1.16-89.35]). Sequence analysis revealed that 6 faecal samples were Giardia intestinalis, zoonotic assemblage B (n = 2) and species-specific assemblages D (n = 3) and E (n = 1), and five faecal samples were Cryptosporidium canis. Giardia intestinalis is zoonotic; however, Cryptosporidium canis is rare in humans and, when present, usually occurs in immunosuppressed individuals. Dogs may be a potential source of zoonotic Giardia intestinalis assemblage B infections in residents in Iqaluit, Nunavut, Canada; however, the direction of transmission is unclear.