氟苯尼考与图拉霉素治疗饲养场小牛未分化性发热的比较。

Veterinary Therapeutics Pub Date : 2008-01-01
Tye Perrett, Sameeh M Abutarbush, Brian K Wildman, Maria T Fuchs, Oliver C Schunicht, Colleen M Pollock, R Kent Fenton, G Kee Jim, P Timothy Guichon, Calvin W Booker, Janice Berg, Joe Roder, Mark Spire
{"title":"氟苯尼考与图拉霉素治疗饲养场小牛未分化性发热的比较。","authors":"Tye Perrett,&nbsp;Sameeh M Abutarbush,&nbsp;Brian K Wildman,&nbsp;Maria T Fuchs,&nbsp;Oliver C Schunicht,&nbsp;Colleen M Pollock,&nbsp;R Kent Fenton,&nbsp;G Kee Jim,&nbsp;P Timothy Guichon,&nbsp;Calvin W Booker,&nbsp;Janice Berg,&nbsp;Joe Roder,&nbsp;Mark Spire","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The purpose of this study was to compare the relative cost-effectiveness of florfenicol with that of tulathromycin for treatment of undifferentiated fever (UF) in feedlot calves at ultra-high risk of developing UF that receive metaphylactic tulathromycin on arrival at the feedlot. Calves that received therapeutic florfenicol had lower overall mortality (P=.045) and bovine respiratory disease mortality (P=.050) compared with calves that received therapeutic tulathromycin, but no significant differences were detected in feedlot performance, carcass characteristics, or other animal health variables. There was a net advantage of Can$41.19/treated animal in the florfenicol group versus the tulathromycin group. This study demonstrates that it is more cost-effective to use florfenicol than tulathromycin for the initial treatment of UF in feedlot calves at ultra-high risk of developing UF that receive on-arrival metaphylactic tulathromycin.</p>","PeriodicalId":51211,"journal":{"name":"Veterinary Therapeutics","volume":"9 2","pages":"128-40"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2008-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A comparison of florfenicol and tulathromycine for the treatment of undifferentiated fever in feedlot calves.\",\"authors\":\"Tye Perrett,&nbsp;Sameeh M Abutarbush,&nbsp;Brian K Wildman,&nbsp;Maria T Fuchs,&nbsp;Oliver C Schunicht,&nbsp;Colleen M Pollock,&nbsp;R Kent Fenton,&nbsp;G Kee Jim,&nbsp;P Timothy Guichon,&nbsp;Calvin W Booker,&nbsp;Janice Berg,&nbsp;Joe Roder,&nbsp;Mark Spire\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The purpose of this study was to compare the relative cost-effectiveness of florfenicol with that of tulathromycin for treatment of undifferentiated fever (UF) in feedlot calves at ultra-high risk of developing UF that receive metaphylactic tulathromycin on arrival at the feedlot. Calves that received therapeutic florfenicol had lower overall mortality (P=.045) and bovine respiratory disease mortality (P=.050) compared with calves that received therapeutic tulathromycin, but no significant differences were detected in feedlot performance, carcass characteristics, or other animal health variables. There was a net advantage of Can$41.19/treated animal in the florfenicol group versus the tulathromycin group. This study demonstrates that it is more cost-effective to use florfenicol than tulathromycin for the initial treatment of UF in feedlot calves at ultra-high risk of developing UF that receive on-arrival metaphylactic tulathromycin.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51211,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Veterinary Therapeutics\",\"volume\":\"9 2\",\"pages\":\"128-40\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2008-01-01\",\"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}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本研究的目的是比较氟苯尼考和图拉霉素治疗未分化热(UF)的相对成本效益,这些小牛在到达饲养场时接受超过敏性图拉霉素治疗,发生UF的超高风险。与接受治疗性土拉霉素的犊牛相比,接受治疗性氟苯尼考的犊牛总体死亡率(P= 0.045)和牛呼吸道疾病死亡率(P= 0.050)较低,但在饲养场生产性能、胴体特征或其他动物健康变量方面没有发现显著差异。氟苯尼考组与图拉霉素组相比,每只治疗动物的净收益为41.19加元。本研究表明,在接受超过敏性图拉霉素治疗的患UF的超高风险的饲养场小牛中,使用氟苯尼考比使用图拉霉素更具有成本效益。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A comparison of florfenicol and tulathromycine for the treatment of undifferentiated fever in feedlot calves.

The purpose of this study was to compare the relative cost-effectiveness of florfenicol with that of tulathromycin for treatment of undifferentiated fever (UF) in feedlot calves at ultra-high risk of developing UF that receive metaphylactic tulathromycin on arrival at the feedlot. Calves that received therapeutic florfenicol had lower overall mortality (P=.045) and bovine respiratory disease mortality (P=.050) compared with calves that received therapeutic tulathromycin, but no significant differences were detected in feedlot performance, carcass characteristics, or other animal health variables. There was a net advantage of Can$41.19/treated animal in the florfenicol group versus the tulathromycin group. This study demonstrates that it is more cost-effective to use florfenicol than tulathromycin for the initial treatment of UF in feedlot calves at ultra-high risk of developing UF that receive on-arrival metaphylactic tulathromycin.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信