Skip to main content
Log in

Knowledge and practice of antimicrobial usage and resistance among poultry farmers: A systematic review, meta-analysis, and meta-regression

  • Review
  • Published:
Veterinary Research Communications Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

A systematic review was conducted to summarize and synthesize the existing research on poultry farmers' knowledge, practices, and awareness regarding antimicrobial use (AMU) and antimicrobial resistance (AMR). It was undertaken by systematically searching databases, screening and characterizing relevant studies, extracting data, and evaluating the risk of bias. The outcomes were stratified into several subgroups, and pooled prevalence of each subgroup was calculated using a random-effect meta-analysis. Meta-regression was used for selected outcomes to further investigate the potential sources of heterogeneity across studies. Poultry farmers had knowledge and practice gaps on antimicrobial use. While most (65%; 95% CI: 50%-80%) used antimicrobials on poultry for therapeutic purposes, a portion used them to prevent disease (45%; 95% CI: 34%-55%) or boost growth (29%; 95% CI: 13%-46%) and productivity (20%; 95% CI: 6%-34%). 60% (95% CI: 50%–69%) of farmers approached veterinarians for antimicrobial advice, although many consulted drug sellers and fellow farmers. Insufficient antimicrobial residue knowledge (45%; 95% CI: 29%-62%), as well as inadequate awareness and faulty practice on withdrawal periods, were identified. Only 43% (95% CI: 34%-53%) were knowledgeable about AMR. Around half of farmers understood AMR's impacts on poultry, human health, and the environment. Meta-regression demonstrated that the source of heterogeneity for therapeutic antimicrobial use was the type of poultry farmers sampled and their educational qualifications; geographical region was significantly associated with antimicrobial usage based on farmers' experience; and the country's economic state was correlated with farmers' understanding of antimicrobial residue. This study recommends implementing legislation for judicious antimicrobial use, and farmer awareness campaigns to reinforce knowledge about prudent AMU and AMR.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

Research data is available upon receipt of a reasonable request.

References

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

AAS: conceptualization, protocol development, literature search and data curation, data analysis, original manuscript drafting. NNC: data analysis, manuscript review. NI: manuscript review. MHU: manuscript review. FMYH: literature search and data curation, manuscript drafting and review. MAH: conceptualization, supervision, manuscript drafting and review. All authors approved the final version of the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Md. Ahasanul Hoque.

Ethics declarations

Ethical approval

Not applicable.

Conflicts of interest

The authors declare they have no conflicting interests.

Additional information

Publisher's note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Al Sattar, A., Chisty, N.N., Irin, N. et al. Knowledge and practice of antimicrobial usage and resistance among poultry farmers: A systematic review, meta-analysis, and meta-regression. Vet Res Commun 47, 1047–1066 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11259-023-10082-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11259-023-10082-5

Keywords

Navigation