Search

Despite the important role of antimicrobial use in companion animals in the global challenge presented by antimicrobial resistance (AMR), very few studies have quantified pet owner factors that can contribute to suboptimal veterinary antimicrobial use. We conducted an online survey of pet owners, asking about their experiences with veterinarians, their opinions on antibiotic use and knowledge of antibiotics, and their communication preferences regarding judicious prescribing. Just over half (54%) of the 558 pet owners had received antibiotics for their pet at their last non-routine veterinary consultation and most owners were happy (83%) with the antibiotic prescribing decision of their veterinarian. A quarter (25%) indicated that they had been surprised, disappointed or frustrated when a veterinarian had not given their pet antibiotics, 15% had explicitly requested them. Owners placed a higher priority on their pet receiving the most effective treatment than on treatment being cheap or convenient. Most respondents recognized the limitations of antibiotic therapy and the risks associated with antibiotic use, but 50% believed the risks were confined to the treated animal, only a minority was aware of inter-species transfer of bacteria. Pet owners indicated that they would find judicious prescribing messages focused on the direct risks of antibiotics to their pet more compelling than those about public health. Our findings suggest that veterinary communications about responsible antibiotic use should focus on pet owners’ priorities and address or bypass their gaps in understanding regarding antibiotic resistance.

BackgroundThe 12-item Short-Form Health Survey version 2 (SF-12v2), a widely used, generic patient-reported measure of health status that provides summary scores of physical and mental health. No study to date has examined the measurement properties of the SF-12v2 in patients with lung cancer using Rasch analysis. The aim of this study was to extend the psychometric evaluations of the SF-12 within the lung cancer population to ensure its validity and reliability to assess the health status in this population.MethodsParticipants in the Victorian Lung Cancer Registry (VLCR) who completed the SF-12v2 between 2012 and 2016 were included in this study. The structural validity of the SF-12v2 was assessed using Rasch analysis. Overall fit to the Rasch measurement model was examined as well as five key measurement properties: uni-dimensionality, response thresholds, internal consistency, measurement invariance and targeting.ResultsA total of 342 participants completed the SF-12v2 three months following their lung cancer diagnosis. The SF-12 Physical Component Score (PCS-12) did not fit the overall Rasch measurement model (χ2107.0;p 235.1;p = 0.07), reasonable targeting and good internal consistency (PSI 0.81).ConclusionsRasch analysis suggests that there is general support for the reliability of the SF-12v2 as a measure of physical and mental health in people with lung cancer. However, the appropriateness of some items (e.g. pain) in the PCS-12 is questionable and further refinement of the scale including changing the response options may be required to improve the ability of the SF-12v2 to more appropriately assess the health status of this population.

Background Cefovecin is a long-acting third-generation cephalosporin commonly used in veterinary medicine. Third-generation cephalosporins are critically important antimicrobials that should only be used after culture and susceptibility testing. The authors describe the common indications for cefovecin use in dogs and cats, and the frequency of culture and susceptibility testing. Materials and methods A cross-sectional study was performed using clinical records extracted from VetCompass Australia. A previously described method was used to identify records containing cefovecin. The reason for cefovecin use was annotated in situ in each consultation text. Results Over a six-month period (February and September 2018), 5180 (0.4 per cent) consultations involved cefovecin administration, of which 151 were excluded. Cats were administered cefovecin more frequently than dogs (1.9 per cent of cat consultations and 0.1 per cent of dog consultations). The most common reasons for cefovecin administration to cats were cat fight injuries and abscesses (28 per cent) and dermatitis (13 per cent). For dogs, the most common reasons for cefovecin administration were surgical prophylaxis (24 per cent) and dermatitis (19 per cent). Culture and susceptibility testing were reported in 16 cases (0.3 per cent). Conclusion Cefovecin is used in many scenarios in dogs and cats where antimicrobials may be either not indicated or where an antimicrobial of lower importance to human health is recommended.

PurposeThe Upper Gastrointestinal Cancer Registry (UGICR) was developed to monitor and improve the quality of care provided to patients with upper gastrointestinal cancers in Australia.ParticipantsIt supports four cancer modules: pancreatic, oesophagogastric, biliary and primary liver cancer. The pancreatic cancer (PC) module was the first module to be implemented, with others being established in a staged approach. Individuals are recruited to the registry if they are aged 18 years or older, have received care for their cancer at a participating public/private hospital or private clinic in Australia and do not opt out of participation.Findings to dateThe UGICR is governed by a multidisciplinary steering committee that provides clinical governance and oversees clinical working parties. The role of the working parties is to develop quality indicators based on best practice for each registry module, develop the minimum datasets and provide guidance in analysing and reporting of results. Data are captured from existing data sources (population-based cancer incidence registries, pathology databases and hospital-coded data) and manually from clinical records. Data collectors directly enter information into a secure web-based Research Electronic Data Capture (REDCap) data collection platform. The PC module began with a pilot phase, and subsequently, we used a formal modified Delphi consensus process to establish a core set of quality indicators for PC. The second module developed was the oesophagogastric cancer (OGC) module. Results of the 1 year pilot phases for PC and OGC modules are included in this cohort profile.Future plansThe UGICR will provide regular reports of risk-adjusted, benchmarked performance on a range of quality indicators that will highlight variations in care and clinical outcomes at a health service level. The registry has also been developed with the view to collect patient-reported outcomes (PROs), which will further add to our understanding of the care of patients with these cancers.