Antimicrobials Used in Backyard and Commercial Poultry and Swine Farms in the Philippines: A Qualitative Pilot Study

Toni Rose M Barroga; Reildrin G Morales; Carolyn C Benigno; Samuel Joseph M Castro; Mardi M Caniban; Maria Fe B Cabullo; Agnes Agunos; Katinka de Balogh; Alejandro Dorado-Garcia

doi:10.3389/fvets.2020.00329

Antimicrobials Used in Backyard and Commercial Poultry and Swine Farms in the Philippines: A Qualitative Pilot Study

Front Vet Sci. 2020 Jul 8:7:329. doi: 10.3389/fvets.2020.00329. eCollection 2020.

Authors

Affiliations

¹ Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations-Philippine Component on the Global Efforts to Combat Antimicrobial Resistance Using One Health Approach (GCP/GLO/UK/710), Quezon City, Philippines.
² Department of Agriculture, Bureau of Animal Industry, Quezon City, Philippines.
³ Department of Agriculture, National Meat Inspection Service, Quezon City, Philippines.
⁴ Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations Regional Office of Asia and the Pacific, Bangkok, Thailand.
⁵ Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome, Italy.

Abstract

Chicken and pork are the most frequently consumed meat products in the Philippines. Swine and poultry are reared in either commercial farms (CMf) or backyard farms (BYf); the latter production system is relatively common and essential to food security in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) such as the Philippines. Similar to resource-limited LMICs, antimicrobial use (AMU) surveillance has not yet been established; thus, AMU in food animals is a knowledge gap in understanding the emergence of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) in zoonotic foodborne bacteria in the country. This qualitative AMU pilot study aims to describe the antimicrobial active ingredients (AAIs) used and associated AMU practices (e.g., source of AAIs and informed AMU decisions) by poultry and swine CMf and BYf in the Philippines. Ninety-three farms across four regions in the Philippines voluntarily provided AMU information as part of a larger biosecurity and good practices study. The percentage of farms using AAI over the total number of farms was the metric used to describe AMU. In total, there were 30 AAIs used (CMf: n =27 and BYf: n = 13); per farm, the number of AAIs used ranged from 1 to 7. The spectrum of AAIs was more diverse in swine (n = 24) compared to poultry (n = 18). Enrofloxacin was the most frequently reported AAI in poultry (33%) and swine (36%) farms. Respiratory diseases were the most frequently reported reason for AMU in both species. Between production systems, significant differences were observed in the percentage of farms using amoxicillin (27% CMf vs. 3% BYf), colistin (17% CMf vs. 3% BYf), and oxytetracycline (12% CMf vs. 39% BYf). In terms of AMU practices, of important concern was the over-the-counter access of AAIs at retail outlets and the limited veterinary oversight in BYf. Our data indicated that antimicrobials critically important for human medicine are frequently used in poultry and swine farms in the Philippines. This study can inform the development of guidelines for curbing AMR through prudent AMU and serves as a reference point for AMU surveillance capacity development in the Philippines.

Keywords: LMIC; Philippines; antimicrobials; farm level; poultry; surveillance; swine.