Table 3.
Variables and their level describing antimicrobial treatments
| Variable | Level | Herds per level (%) | Herds per level (n) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Routine antibiotic treatment in suckling pigs |
No |
14.4 |
18 |
| Yes |
85.6 |
107 |
|
| Number of treatments in the first week of life |
0 |
18.4 |
23 |
| 1 |
63.2 |
79 |
|
| 2 |
18.4 |
23 |
|
| Type of drug in the first week |
No treatment |
18.4 |
23 |
| Effective against M. hyopneumoniae* |
18.4 |
23 |
|
| Not effective against M. hyopneumoniae |
63.2 |
79 |
|
| Number of treatments in the second week of life |
0 |
86.4 |
108 |
| 1 |
13.6 |
17 |
|
| Type of drug in the second week |
No treatment |
86.4 |
108 |
| Effective against M. hyopneumoniae* |
5.6 |
7 |
|
| Not effective against M. hyopneumoniae |
8.0 |
10 |
|
| Routine antibiotic treatment in gilts |
No |
83.2 |
104 |
| Yes |
16.8 |
21 |
|
| Routine antibiotic treatment in replacement boars |
No |
98.4 |
123 |
| Yes |
1.6 |
2 |
|
| Routine antibiotic treatment in sows ante-partum |
No |
97.6 |
122 |
| Yes |
2.4 |
3 |
|
| Routine antibiotic treatment in sows post-partum |
No |
93.6 |
117 |
| Yes | 6.4 | 8 |
* Treatments with Amoxicillin, Ampicillin, Colistin and Penicillin were considered being ‘not effective against M. hyopneumoniae’. In contrast to this, all remaining antimicrobials that were used for the treatment of animals enrolled in this study were taken into account as being ‘effective against M. hyopneumoniae’. These antimicrobials namely were Apramycin, Enrofloxacin, Tetracyclin and Tulathromycin.