Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Monitoring the use of antimicrobials and the emergence of resistance in animals and people is important for the control of antimicrobial resistance, and for establishing sustainable and effective disease management practices. In this study, we used Enterococcus spp. and Escherichia coli as indicator species to investigate antimicrobial susceptibility patterns and how these change over time, on ten Swedish pig farms. Indoor environmental sock sampling was performed once a month during the entire production cycle of one batch of pigs on each farm, resulting in 60 samples collected in total. Selective culture for E. coli and Enterococcus spp. resulted in 122 isolates of E. coli, 74 isolates of E. faecium, but no isolates of E. faecalis. Microdilution was used to determine minimum inhibitory concentrations for twelve antimicrobial substances in E. coli and fifteen substances in E. faecium. The overall prevalence of resistance was low. Among the E. coli isolates, the proportions non-wild type (resistant, NWT) isolates were as follows: azithromycin and amikacin 1% (n = 1), trimethoprim and sulfamethoxazole 2% (n = 3), ampicillin 6% (n = 7) and tetracycline 9% (n = 11). Among the E. faecium isolates, the NWT proportions were: teicoplanin, linezolid and gentamicin 1% (n = 1), daptomycin 3% (n = 2), erythromycin 26% (n = 19), tetracycline 27% (n = 20), quinupristin/dalfopristin 58% (n = 42). The resistance patterns differed between the farms, likely due to different antimicrobial use, biosecurity measures and source of the animals. The NWT prevalence among E. coli decreased over time, whereas no similar trend could be observed in E. faecium. The results of the current study illustrate the complex factors affecting the antimicrobial resistance patterns observed on each farm, indicating that specific practices and risk factors have an impact on the prevalence and type of antimicrobial resistance. Further studies of the farm environments in combination with antimicrobial use and other risk factor data are needed to elucidate the multifaceted drivers of antimicrobial resistance development on livestock farms.
Ladyhina et al. (Wed,) studied this question.