Identifying veterinary surgeons' barriers to, and potential solutions for, improving antimicrobial stewardship among sheep farmers in Northern Ireland.

Background: In order to improve antimicrobial stewardship (AMS), including changes in antimicrobial prescribing and use, an enhanced understanding is needed of the barriers that veterinary surgeons (vets) encounter to institute such change. Methods: A qualitative approach, using grounded theory, was followed. Interviews and discussion groups, with vets and farm industry stakeholders in Northern Ireland (NI), were undertaken to identify and explore attitudes and behaviours surrounding AMS, with a particular emphasis on the barriers vets encountered and the context within which they were working. Results: Seven inter-related themes associated with improving AMS among their sheep farming clients were identified. The first six addressed barriers were working under commercial and practical constraints, farmer behaviour, multiple medicine sources, poor prescribing practice, a perceived lack of incentive or facilitation to improve AMS and a perceived lack of action by regulators to challenge poor AMS. The seventh theme revealed suggestions vets considered that may improve AMS in NI, including greater state intervention in recording and regulating medicine sales. Conclusions: Improving AMS will require vets and their client farmers to change behaviour. This will involve concerted effort over an extended period of time to enact and embed change. Veterinary surgeons believe that further action by the industry and state to develop centralised antimicrobial sales recording and by the state to enforce prescribing regulations will aid their efforts. However, critical to achieving this is the development of a sustainable and funded mechanism to create more meaningful farmer-vet consultation around flock health prior to every prescription to improve AMS and sheep welfare.

Antibiotic use in the Northern Irish sheep flock: What lessons can be learnt from medicine records and farmer attitudes to improve stewardship of these essential medicines?

Stewardship of antibiotics used in livestock production has come under increasing scrutiny, from both the animal welfare point of view and due to concerns that antibiotic use in livestock may pose a risk to human health through selection pressure to drive development of antibiotic resistant strains of bacteria. Despite this concern, however, antibiotic consumption in the sheep sector is currently poorly described. This study determines the range and quantities of antibiotics used in the Northern Irish (NI) sheep flock as well as exploring drivers for their use. A mixed-methods approach was utilised, with an anonymous online scoping survey, analysis of the medicine records from 52 NI sheep farms and semi-structured interviews undertaken with 27 farmers. Eighteen farmers contributed both records and participated in interviews. Veterinary medicine records were derived from two sources: on-farm medicine books (seven) or veterinary practice sales data (51). As six of these farmers provided information from both sources a total of 52 unique farms participated. Overall, antibiotic use in sheep on the 52 farms sampled was low, with a median value of 11.35 mgPCU-1 (mean 13.63 mgPCU-1, sd 10.7; range 0-45.29 mgPCU-1), with all farms below 50 mgkg-1. Critically important antibiotics accounted for 0.21% of all antibiotics purchased. Lameness was the main driver of antibiotic use identified by this study. Others included a range of prophylactic treatments such as oral antibiotics to prevent watery mouth, injectable antibiotics to prevent abortion and following assisted lambing. Farmers acknowledged some of these uses had become habitual over time. The veterinary medicine sales records demonstrated significant sales of antibiotics not authorised for use in sheep, on an ongoing, rather than case-by-case, basis. Farmers were positive about their veterinarian's ability and knowledge to improve flock welfare and productivity, but were unwilling to pay for this advice. However, veterinarians may have facilitated weak medicine stewardship through a failure to adequately challenge farmers seeking antibiotics. Farmers did not maintain accurate or up-to-date on farm medicine or production records in the majority of cases. Despite this lack of on-farm recording, veterinary sales records can be studied in consultation with farmers to provide veterinarians with a farm-specific insight into antibiotic use and related attitudes and behaviours. Farmers and veterinarians can then identify areas and behaviours to target collaboratively, improving antibiotic and wider medicine stewardship, whilst simultaneously improving flock health and productivity.

Improving analgesia provision for sheep: An analysis of farm medicine records and attitudes towards pain relief on sheep farms in Northern Ireland.

Background: Management of pain is critical to improve the welfare of farmed livestock and meet consumer expectations. There is limited published information about the use of analgesic drugs in the sheep sector. Methods: A mixed-method approach was followed. The range of analgesic drugs used on 52 Northern Irish sheep farms was determined through analysis of medicine purchase records. Through interview and discussion groups, with both farmer and veterinarian participants, attitudes towards the use and adoption of such medicines were explored. Results: The use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) was widespread and highly variable. One-third of farmers in the sample did not purchase any NSAID. Meloxicam was the most commonly purchased NSAID by mass (72%) and standardised dose (73%). During interviews and discussions, farmers outlined the benefits they saw in using NSAIDs and how veterinarians influenced their uptake of these medicines. Use of corticosteroid was evidenced on 50% of the farms that supplied medicine records for analysis. Conclusions: Veterinarians can influence farmers to adopt NSAIDs for the provision of analgesia in their sheep and farmers observed the benefits they delivered. However, many farmers are still to be reached with this message, perhaps due to being largely self-sufficient and rarely engaging with veterinarians. Veterinarians have the opportunity to challenge farmers about the provision of analgesia, especially when farmers seek antibiotics for painful conditions such as lameness. Currently, the lack of an authorised product in the UK, with associated treatment guidance and industry promotion, may limit veterinarians' confidence in prescribing drugs for pain control in sheep.

Sheep scab in Northern Ireland: Its distribution, costs and farmer knowledge about prevention and control.

Sheep scab (psoroptic mange), which is endemic in the United Kingdom (UK) flock, has a significant, negative impact on sheep welfare. Nothing has previously been published about the distribution of sheep scab in Northern Ireland (NI), nor about Northern Irish farmers' knowledge and behaviours relating to the disease, its treatment, prevention and control. Between March and June 2021 an online questionnaire on the disease was completed by sheep farmers in NI. Forty-four respondents out of a total of 122 valid returns (36%) indicated that they had at least one outbreak of sheep scab in their flock within the previous five years. These flocks were spread throughout NI and included flocks grazing on common land. Farmers reporting sheep scab in their flock considered movements of sheep between flocks to be the main cause of flock infestation. Respondents demonstrated knowledge gaps in relation to the parasite biology, disease transmission, prevention and treatment options, as well as a lack of awareness of some of the relevant industry guidelines. We highlight that some farmers rely on clinical signs alone to rule out the possibility that newly purchased sheep are infested with sheep scab before mixing them with their flock. This activity poses a high risk for the introduction of sheep scab into previously uninfested flocks. The inadequacy of some farmers' quarantine rules, or their inability to follow them, was also reported by farmers as being the cause of their flock infestation. Sheep scab outbreaks were shown to result in significant financial cost, with some farmers reporting their most recent outbreak had cost over £2500 ($3329). The paper also highlights that in addition to the animal health and welfare impact and financial cost, sheep scab was reported to have a social cost: 94 respondents (79%) agreed that a sheep scab outbreak caused emotional stress to affected farmers. These findings have provided evidence of the widespread nature of sheep scab in the NI flock, and of the knowledge gaps and behaviours which need to be addressed to improve sheep scab control. This will require a combination of focused research, knowledge exchange between farmers, advisors, policy makers and regulators, and co-developed disease control plans at a flock and national level.