Exploring the Socioeconomic Importance of Antimicrobial Use in the Small-Scale Pig Sector in Vietnam
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Results
2.1. Demographic Farm Information
2.2. Routine Antimicrobial Use
2.3. Defining Responsible Antimicrobial Use
2.4. The Economics of Antimicrobial Use
3. Discussion
4. Materials and Methods
4.1. Study Design and Setting
4.2. Data Collection
4.3. Questionnaire Design
- Demographic farm and respondent information.Demographic information on the type of pig production, the workers employed on the farm, the herd size, the economic importance of pigs for the farm, the location of the farm, feeding practices, management practices, and productivity data on the pig production enterprise.
- Antimicrobial use on farm.Information on antimicrobials routinely used on the pig farm; formulation, active ingredient, pack size, the disease indication for use, whether use was preventative or therapeutic, course and duration. For the purposes of the study, the WHO definition of the high-priority critically importance antibiotics (HP-CIAs) was adopted which refers to the macrolides, fluoroquinolones, third and fourth generation cephalosporins and polymixins (colistin) with regards to use in livestock.
- Attitudes to responsible antimicrobial use.Attitudes to the responsibility of antimicrobial use, knowledge and awareness of antimicrobial use policy.
- The economics of antimicrobial use.The economic questions explored the profitability of the pig enterprise, antimicrobial costs, feed costs, prices obtained for selling pigs, average bodyweight at slaughter, weight at point of sale, mortality rates and other medicine management costs.
4.4. Questionnaire Data Analysis
4.5. Economic Analysis
4.6. Ethical Approval
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- O’Neill, J. Tackling Drug-Resistant Infections Globally: Final Report and Recommendations. The Review on Antimicrobial Resistance. 2016. Available online: https://amr-review.org/sites/default/files/160525_Final paper_with cover.pdf (accessed on 12 January 2020).
- Queenan, K.; Häsler, B.; Rushton, J. A One Health approach to antimicrobial resistance surveillance: Is there a business case for it? Int. J. Antimicrob. Agents. 2016, 48, 422–427. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Holmes, A.H.; Moore , J.; Rushton, L.S.P.; Sundsfjord, A.; Steinbakk, M.; Regmi, S.; Karkey, A.; Karkey, P.J.; Piddock, L.J.V. Understanding the mechanisms and drivers of antimicrobial resistance. Lancet 2016, 387, 176–187. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- O’Neill, J. Antimicrobial Resistance: Tackling a Crisis for the Health and Wealth of Nations. Rev. Antimicrob. Resist 2014, 20, 1–16. [Google Scholar]
- Van Nguyen, K.; Do, N.T.T.; Chandna, A.; Nguyen, T.; Van Pham, C.; Doan, P.M.; Olowokure, B. Antibiotic use and resistance in emerging economies: A situation analysis for Viet Nam. BMC Public Health 2013, 10, 1158. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- World Health Organization. Global Action Plan on Antimicrobial Resistance; World Health Organization Press: Geneva, Switzerland, 2015; ISBN 978-92-4-150976-3. [Google Scholar]
- MARD. National Action Plan. for Management of Antibiotic Use Ad Control. of Antibiotic Resistance in Livestock Production and Aquaculture. Issued in Accordance with Decision No. 2625/QĐ-BNN-TY Dated 21/6/2017 by the Vice Minister of Ministry of MARD; Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development: Hanoi, Vietnam, 2017.
- CDDEP. The State of the World’s Antibiotics; The Center For Disease Dynamics, Economics and Policy: Washington, DC, USA, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Nguyen, N.T.T.; Chuc, N.T.K.; Hoa, N.P.; Loan, H.; Toan, T.K.; Wertheim, H.F. Antibiotic sales in rural and urban pharmacies in northern Vietnam: An observational study. BMC Pharmacol. Toxicol. 2014, 15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Carrique-Mas, J.J.; Trung, N.V.; Nguyen, N.T.T.; Hoa, N.T.; Mai, H.H.; Thanh, T.H.; Campbell, J.I.; Schultsz, C. Antimicrobial usage in chicken production in the Mekong Delta of Vietnam. Zoonoses Public Health 2015, 62 (Suppl. 1), 70–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nguyen, N.T.; Nguyen, H.M.; Nguyen, C.V.; Nguyen, T.V.; Nguyen, M.T.; Thai, H.Q.; Ho, M.H.; Thwaites, G.; Ngo, H.T.; Baker, S.; et al. Use of colistin and other critical antimicrobials on pig and chicken farms in southern Vietnam and its association with resistance in commensal Escherichia coli bacteria. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2016, 82, 3727–3735. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Thi Kim Chi, T.; Clausen, J.; Van, P.; Tersbøl, B.; Dalsgaard, A. Use practices of antimicrobials and other compounds by shrimp and fish farmers in Northern Vietnam. Aquac. Rep. 2017, 7, 40–47. [Google Scholar]
- Van Cuong, N.; Nhung, N.T.; Nghia, N.H.; Mai Hao, N.T.; Trung, N.V.; Thwaites, G.; Carrique-Mas, J. Antimicrobial Consumption in Medicated Feeds in Vietnamese Pig and Poultry Production. Ecohealth 2016, 13, 490–498. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Dang, P.K.; Saegerman, C.; Douny, C.; Dinh, T.V.; Xuan, B.H.; Vu, B.D.; Hong, N.P.; Scippo, M.-L. First survey on the use of antibiotics in pig and poultry production in the Red River Delta region of Vietnam. Food Public Health 2013, 3, 247–256. [Google Scholar]
- Carrique-Mas, J.; Bryant, J.; Cuong, N.; Hoang, N.V.M.; Campbell, J.; Hoang, N.V.; Dung, T.T.N.; Duy, D.T.; Hoa, N.T.; Thompson, C.; et al. An epidemiological investigation of Campylobacter in pig and poultry farms in the Mekong delta of Vietnam. Epidemiol. Infect. 2014, 142, 1425–1436. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Thai, T.H.; Hirai, T.; Lan, N.T.; Yamaguchi, R. Antibiotic resistance profiles of Salmonella serovars isolated from retail pork and chicken meat in North Vietnam. Int. J. Food Microbiol. 2012, 156, 147–151. [Google Scholar]
- Kiratisin, P.; Chongthaleong, A.; Tan, T.Y.; Lagamayo, E.; Roberts, S.; Garcia, J.; Davies, T. Comparative in vitro activity of carbapenems against major Gram-negative pathogens: Results of Asia-Pacific surveillance from the COMPACT II study. Int. J. Antimicrob. Agents. 2012, 39, 311–316. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- IMF. Vietnam: Total Population from 2010 to 2022 (in Million Inhabitants); Statista, International Monetary Fund: Hamburg, Germany, 2020. [Google Scholar]
- The World Bank. The World Bank in Vietnam; The World Bank: Washington, DC, USA, 2020. [Google Scholar]
- Nguyen, D.; Ngo, K. Vietnam Meat Market; Ipsos Business Consulting: Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Son, D.K.; Que, N.N.; Dieu, P.Q.; Trang, T.T.T.; Beresford, M. Policy Reform and the Transformation of Vietnamese Agriculture; Vol Rapid Grow; Food and Agriculture Organization: Rome, Italy, 2006. [Google Scholar]
- Tisdell, C. An Economic Study of Small Pigholders in Vietnam: Some Insights Gained and the Scope for Further Research; Working Paper No. 61; The University of Queensland: Brisbane, Australia, 2010. [Google Scholar]
- Pan, C. Pork Quarterly Q4 Steady Growth in Production Brings Trade into Sharper Focus; Rabobank: Utrecht, The Netherlands, 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Gilleski, S.; Bui, N.; Hanson, R. Voluntary Report—Voluntary—Public Distribution. Vietnam African Swine Fever Update; Report Number: VM2019; United States Department of Agriculture: Washington DC, USA, 2019. [Google Scholar]
- McCracken, C. Pork Quarterly Q2 Uncertainties Threaten Optimism in Global Pork Trade; Rabobank: Utrecht, The Netherlands, 2018. [Google Scholar]
- Coyne, L.; Arief, R.; Benigno, C.; Giang, V.N.; Huong, L.Q.; Jeamsripong, S.; Kalpravidh, W.; McGrane, J.; Padungtod, P.; Patrick, I.; et al. Characterizing Antimicrobial Use in the Livestock Sector in Three South East Asian Countries (Indonesia, Thailand, and Vietnam). Antibiot 2019, 8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Sader, H.S.; Rhomberg, P.R.; Farrell, D.J.; Jones, R.N. Arbekacin activity against contemporary clinical bacteria isolated from patients hospitalized with pneumonia. Antimicrob. Agents. Chemother. 2015, 59, 3263–3270. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Baudon, E.; Fournié, G.; Hiep, D.T.; Pham, T.T.; Duboz, R.; Gély, M.; Peiris, M.; Cowling, B.J.; Ton, V.D.; Peyre, M. Analysis of Swine Movements in a Province in Northern Vietnam and Application in the Design of Surveillance Strategies for Infectious Diseases. Transbound Emerg. Dis. 2017, 64, 411–424. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Tilman, D.; Balzer, C.; Hill, J.; Befort, B.L. Global food demand and the sustainable intensification of agriculture. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2011, 108, 20260–20264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Dzung, N.M.; TuLiem, T.P. Pig Production and Marketing in Vietnam; National Institute of Animal Science: Hanoi, Vietnam, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Que, N.N.; Phong, N.A.; Thiep, D.H.; Rich, K.; Minot, N.; Lapar, L. Future Scenarios for Pig Sector Development in Vietnam: Results from an Updated Policy Simulation Model; Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research: Montpellier, France, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- O’Neill, J. Antimicrobials in Agriculture and the Environment: Reducing Unnecessary Use and Waste. 2015. Available online: https://amr-review.org/sites/default/files/Antimicrobials%20in%20agriculture%20and%20the%20environment%20-%20Reducing%20unnecessary%20use%20and%20waste.pdf (accessed on 10 April 2020).
- Sommanustweechai, A.; Chanvatik, S.; Sermsinsiri, V.; Sivilaikul, S.; Patcharanarumol, W.; Yeung, S.; Tangcharoensathien, V. Antibiotic distribution channels in Thailand: Results of key-informant interviews, reviews of drug regulations and database searches. Bull. World Health Organ. 2018, 92, 101–109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lekagul, A.; Tangcharoensathien, V.; Yeung, S. The use of antimicrobials in global pig production: A systematic review of methods for quantification. Prev. Vet. Med. 2018, 160, 85–98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Goutard, F.L.; Bordier, M.; Calba, C.; Erlacher-Vindel, E.; Góchez, D.; de Balogh, K.; Benigno, C.; Kalpravidh, W.; Roger, W.; Vong, S. Antimicrobial policy interventions in food animal production in South East Asia. BMJ 2017, 358. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- PVS. Pig Veterinary Society: Prescribing Principles for Antimicrobials. 2014. Available online: https://www.pigvetsoc.org.uk//files/document/92/1401 PIG VETERINARY SOCIETY-PP final.pdf (accessed on 12 February 2020).
- Paskovaty, A.; Pflomm, J.M.; Myke, N.; Seo, S.K. A multidisciplinary approach to antimicrobial stewardship: Evolution into the 21st century. Int. J. Antimicrob. Agents. 2005, 25, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- OIE. Terrestrial Animal Health Code. Chapter 6. Responsible and Prudent Use of Antimicrobial Agents in Veterinary Medicine; World Organisation for Animal Health: Paris, France, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Aidara-Kane, A.; Angulo, F.J.; Conly, J.M.; Minato, Y.; Silbergeld, E.K.; McEwen, S.A.; Collignon , P.J. World Health Organization (WHO) guidelines on use of medically important antimicrobials in food-producing animals. Antimicrob. Resist. Infect. Control 2018, 7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Tang, K.L.; Caffrey, N.P.; Nóbrega, D.B.; Cork, S.C.; Ronksley, P.E.; Barkema, H.W.; Polachek, A.J.; Ganshorn, H.; Sharma, N.; Kellner, J.D.; et al. Restricting the use of antibiotics in food-producing animals and its associations with antibiotic resistance in food-producing animals and human beings: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Planet. Health 2017, 1, e316–e327. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- The Vietnamese Government. Decree Elaboration of the Law on Animal Husbandry; No. 13/2020/ND-CP; Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development: Hanoi, Vietnam, 2020.
- Coyne, L.A.; Latham, S.M.; Williams, N.J.; Dawson, S.; Donald, I.J.; Pearson, R.B.; Smith, R.F.; Pinchbeck, G.L. Understanding the culture of antimicrobial prescribing in agriculture: A qualitative study of UK pig veterinary surgeons. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 2016, 71, 3300–3312. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Buller, H.; Hinchcliffe, S.; Hockenhull, J.; Barrett, D.; Reyher, K.; Butterworth, A.; Heath, C. Systematic Review and Social Research to Further Understanding of Current Practice in the Context of Using Antimicrobials in Livestock Farming and to Inform. Appropriate Interventions to Reduce Antimicrobial Resistance within the Livestock Sector. 2015. Available online: http://randd.defra.gov.uk/Document.aspx?Document=12817_ReportO00558Final.pdf (accessed on 4 March 2020).
- Mitchell, M.E.V.; Alders, R.; Unger, F.; Nguyen-Viet, H.; Le, T.T.H.; Toribio, J.A. The challenges of investigating antimicrobial resistance in Vietnam—What benefits does a One Health approach offer the animal and human health sectors? BMC Public Health 2020, 20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Ben Lagha, A.; Haas, B.; Gottschalk, M.; Grenier, D. Antimicrobial potential of bacteriocins in poultry and swine production. Vet. Res. 2017, 48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Nhung, N.T.; Cuong, N.V.; Thwaites, G.; Carrique-Mas, J. Antimicrobial Usage and Antimicrobial Resistance in Animal Production in Southeast Asia: A Review. Antibiotics 2016, 5, 37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
All Farms (n = 36) | Dong Nai (Southern) (n = 19) | Nam Dinh (Northern) (n = 17) | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Information on farm size and productivity data recording | ||||
Median number of pigs on farm at time of survey (Minimum–maximum, IQ range *) | Sows 5.5 (1–40, 7.5) Piglets 20 (7–80, 39) Fatteners 41 (1–250, 76.25) | Sows 10 (1–40, 20) Piglets 45 (10–80, 30) Fatteners 85 (10–250, 125) | Sows 4 (1–11, 4) Piglets 17 (7–50, 17.25) Fatteners 20 (1–60, 31.5) | |
Proportion of farms with productivity data recorded | Number of pigs | 75% | 100% | 47% |
Health status | 67% | 84% | 47% | |
Profit | 28% | 42% | 12% | |
Information on farm workers | ||||
Number of farm workers across the farms | 56 | 28 | 28 | |
Proportion of farm workers where pigs are their main occupation | 75% | 89% | 61% | |
Gender | Female | 37% | 25% | 50% |
Male | 63% | 75% | 50% | |
Main role | Farm manager/owner | 80% | 82% | 79% |
Veterinarian | 7% | 14% | 0% | |
Other farm workers | 13% | 4% | 21% | |
Median number of hours each worker spent with pigs (Minimum–Maximum, IQ range *) | 35 (3–56, 35) | 48 (21–56, 19.25) | 22 (3–56, 16.5) |
Farmers shared the opinion that disease problems had a negative effect on the profitability of the farm | “We must pay for treatment; pig grow slowly, and can transmit diseases to healthy pigs.” “It causes losses of pigs, reduced weight gain and then causes economic losses for the family.” “We have to pay for medicines, effects on productivity, we have to feed longer.” |
Farmer perceptions of whether there is an economic advantage to the use of antimicrobials in pigs | Economic advantage to antimicrobial use in pigs: “Pigs are healthy after treatment so I can sell it as planned.” “We can prevent diseases, pigs can grow quickly, farmer feels able to do their job.” “Yes, because it decreases outbreak of diseases.” No economic advantage of antimicrobial use in pigs: “Good prevention makes healthy pigs, so that saves money. When pigs are ill, we must spend money for treatment, so that we lose money.” “No. We have to pay for antibiotics for treatment.” |
All Farms (n = 36) | Dong Nai (Southern) (n = 19) | Nam Dinh (Northern) (n = 17) | |
---|---|---|---|
Average number of pigs sold per month | 18.3 pigs (2–60) | 25.8 pigs (2–60) | 9.9 pigs (2–50) |
Average proportion of annual income from pig production | 63.3% (20–100%) | 74.7% (20–100%) | 50.6% (30–100%) |
Average annual income from pigs ($) | 16,000 (0–64,000) | 28,500 (2100–64,000) | 2000 (0–6900) |
Average cost of medicines per pig per cycle ($) | |||
Adult pigs | 5.91 | 6.64 | 3.14 |
Piglets | 4.89 | 5.15 | 4.17 |
Fatteners | 6.12 | 6.64 | 5.29 |
Average feed cost per month ($) | 1355 | 2100 | 350 |
Scenario | Item | Unit | Number | Price Per Unit ($) | Total Per ($) | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Farm | Fattened Pig | |||||
Income | ||||||
Scenario 1: | Fattener price—Prod survey | Pig | 168.40 | 109.62 | 18,462 | 109.63 |
Scenario 2: | High price fatteners | Pig | 33.70 | 191.35 | 21,214 | 125.97 |
Low price fatteners | Pig | 134.70 | 109.62 | |||
Scenario 3: | Fattener price—Survey 1 | Unit | 1 | 28,507 | 28,507 | 169.28 |
Costs | ||||||
All scenarios treated the same | Feed | Unit | 1 | 25,176 | 25,176 | 149.50 |
Medicine | Unit | 1 | 55 | 55 | 0.33 | |
Routine AMs | Unit | 1 | 414 | 414 | 2.46 | |
Total Cost | 25,645 | 152.29 | ||||
Gross Margin | ||||||
Scenario 1: | −7183 | −42.65 | ||||
Scenario 2: | −4431 | −26.31 | ||||
Scenario 3: | 2862 | 17.00 |
© 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Coyne, L.; Benigno, C.; Giang, V.N.; Huong, L.Q.; Kalprividh, W.; Padungtod, P.; Patrick, I.; Ngoc, P.T.; Rushton, J. Exploring the Socioeconomic Importance of Antimicrobial Use in the Small-Scale Pig Sector in Vietnam. Antibiotics 2020, 9, 299. https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics9060299
Coyne L, Benigno C, Giang VN, Huong LQ, Kalprividh W, Padungtod P, Patrick I, Ngoc PT, Rushton J. Exploring the Socioeconomic Importance of Antimicrobial Use in the Small-Scale Pig Sector in Vietnam. Antibiotics. 2020; 9(6):299. https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics9060299
Chicago/Turabian StyleCoyne, Lucy, Carolyn Benigno, Vo Ngan Giang, Luu Quynh Huong, Wantanee Kalprividh, Pawin Padungtod, Ian Patrick, Pham Thi Ngoc, and Jonathan Rushton. 2020. "Exploring the Socioeconomic Importance of Antimicrobial Use in the Small-Scale Pig Sector in Vietnam" Antibiotics 9, no. 6: 299. https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics9060299
APA StyleCoyne, L., Benigno, C., Giang, V. N., Huong, L. Q., Kalprividh, W., Padungtod, P., Patrick, I., Ngoc, P. T., & Rushton, J. (2020). Exploring the Socioeconomic Importance of Antimicrobial Use in the Small-Scale Pig Sector in Vietnam. Antibiotics, 9(6), 299. https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics9060299