The objective of the study was to compare three quantification methods to a "garbage can audit" (reference method, REF) for monitoring antimicrobial usage (AMU) from products other than medicated feed over one year in 101 Québec dairy farms. Data were collected from veterinary invoices (VET method), from the "Amélioration de la Santé Animale au Québec" provincial program (GOV method), and from farm treatment records (FARM method). The AMU rate was reported in a number of Canadian Defined Course Doses for cattle (DCDbovCA) per 100 cow-years. Electronic veterinary sales data were obtained for all farms for VET and GOV methods. For the FARM method, a herd management software was used by 68% of producers whereas farm treatment records were handwritten for the others; records could not be retrieved in 4% of farms. Overall, agreement was almost perfect between REF and VET methods (concordance correlation coefficient (CCC) = 0.83), but moderate between REF and GOV (CCC = 0.44), and between REF and FARM (CCC = 0.51). Only a fair or slight agreement was obtained between any alternative method of quantification and REF for oral and intrauterine routes. The billing software used by most of Québec's dairy veterinary practitioners seems promising in terms of surveillance and benchmarking of AMU in the province.
Keywords: animal health record; antibiotic; antimicrobial; antimicrobial use; dairy cattle; farm-level; herd management software; monitoring; quantification method; veterinary invoice.