D L Step, Terry Engelken, Cristina Romano, Ben Holland, Clint Krehbiel, John C Johnson, W Lawrence Bryson, Cassius M Tucker, Edward J Robb
{"title":"评估三种抗菌方案作为过敏反应在高风险的牛呼吸道疾病的储存小牛。","authors":"D L Step, Terry Engelken, Cristina Romano, Ben Holland, Clint Krehbiel, John C Johnson, W Lawrence Bryson, Cassius M Tucker, Edward J Robb","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>A total of 894 calves at high risk for bovine respiratory disease were processed at two sites and randomly assigned to receive one of three antimicrobial metaphylactic regimens to determine if a two-drug regimen offered any advantage over the more conventional one-course regimens. On arrival, calves received either a two-course regimen of ceftiofur crystalline free acid (CCFA) followed by tulathromycin 8 days later (Group 1) or a one-course regiment of CCFA (Group 2) or tilmicosin (Group 3). At Site A, morbidity was significantly lower (52%) in Group 1 than in Group 2 (76.3%) and Group 3 (78.4%). At Site B, morbidity was significantly lower in Group 1 (2.6%) than in Group 2 (9.4%) and Group 3 (7.2%).</p>","PeriodicalId":51211,"journal":{"name":"Veterinary Therapeutics","volume":"8 2","pages":"136-47"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2007-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluation of three antimicrobial regimens used as metaphylaxis in stocker calves at high risk of developing bovine respiratory disease.\",\"authors\":\"D L Step, Terry Engelken, Cristina Romano, Ben Holland, Clint Krehbiel, John C Johnson, W Lawrence Bryson, Cassius M Tucker, Edward J Robb\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>A total of 894 calves at high risk for bovine respiratory disease were processed at two sites and randomly assigned to receive one of three antimicrobial metaphylactic regimens to determine if a two-drug regimen offered any advantage over the more conventional one-course regimens. On arrival, calves received either a two-course regimen of ceftiofur crystalline free acid (CCFA) followed by tulathromycin 8 days later (Group 1) or a one-course regiment of CCFA (Group 2) or tilmicosin (Group 3). At Site A, morbidity was significantly lower (52%) in Group 1 than in Group 2 (76.3%) and Group 3 (78.4%). At Site B, morbidity was significantly lower in Group 1 (2.6%) than in Group 2 (9.4%) and Group 3 (7.2%).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51211,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Veterinary Therapeutics\",\"volume\":\"8 2\",\"pages\":\"136-47\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2007-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Veterinary Therapeutics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Veterinary Therapeutics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Evaluation of three antimicrobial regimens used as metaphylaxis in stocker calves at high risk of developing bovine respiratory disease.
A total of 894 calves at high risk for bovine respiratory disease were processed at two sites and randomly assigned to receive one of three antimicrobial metaphylactic regimens to determine if a two-drug regimen offered any advantage over the more conventional one-course regimens. On arrival, calves received either a two-course regimen of ceftiofur crystalline free acid (CCFA) followed by tulathromycin 8 days later (Group 1) or a one-course regiment of CCFA (Group 2) or tilmicosin (Group 3). At Site A, morbidity was significantly lower (52%) in Group 1 than in Group 2 (76.3%) and Group 3 (78.4%). At Site B, morbidity was significantly lower in Group 1 (2.6%) than in Group 2 (9.4%) and Group 3 (7.2%).