Table 2 Practices of antimicrobial usage in livestock production by Farmers in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania
Practice | Producer categories, n (%) | Â | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
Cattle (65) | Poultry (51) | Overall (116) | Confidence interval (95%) | |
Source of drug information to the farmer | ||||
Veterinarian | 54(83.1) | 42(82.4) | 96(82.8) | 74.9,88.6 |
Household experience | 9(13.8) | 7(13.7) | 16(13.8) | 8.7,21.2 |
Neighbours | 2(3.1) | 2(3.9) | 4(3.5) | 1.4,8.5 |
Purchasing place for antimicrobials | ||||
Veterinary drug shops | 28(43.1) | 23(45.1) | 51(44.0) | 35.3,53.1 |
Veterinary clinic | 13(20.0) | 6(11.8) | 19(16.4) | 10.7,24.2 |
Individual veterinarian | 24(36.9) | 22(43.1) | 46(39.7) | 31.2,48.8 |
Purpose for antimicrobial usage | ||||
Therapeutic | 58(89.2) | 39(76.5) | 97(83.6) | 75.8, 89.3 |
Prophylaxis | 1(1.5) | 1(1.9) | 2(1.7) | 0.5,6.1 |
Therapeutic & Prophylaxis | 6(9.2) | 10(19.6) | 16(13.8) | 8.7,21.2 |
Growth promotion | 0(0.0) | 1(1.9) | 1(0.9) | 0.2,4.7 |
Drug sellers asking for prescriptions | ||||
Yes | 3(4.6) | 2(3.9) | 5(4.3) | 1.9,9.7 |
No | 58(89.2) | 45(88.2) | 103(88.8) | 81.8,93.3 |
Sometimes | 4(6.2) | 4(7.8) | 8(6.9) | 3.5,13.0 |
Administration of drug to livestock | ||||
Veterinarian/Animal health worker | 59(90.8) | 46(90.2) | 105(90.5) | 83.8,94.6 |
Self | 6(9.2) | 5(9.8) | 11(9.5) | 5.4,16.2 |
Route of antimicrobial administration | ||||
Parenteral (Injection) | 65(100) | 0(0.0) | 65(56.0) | 46.9,64.7 |
Water | 0(0.0) | 50(98.0) | 50(43.1) | 34.5,52.2 |
Feeds | 0(0.0) | 1(2.0) | 1(0.9) | 0.2, 4.7 |
Compliance with drug withdrawal period | ||||
Yes | 24(36.9) | 17(33.3) | 41(35.3) | 27.2,44.4 |
No | 41(63.1) | 34(66.7) | 75(64.7) | 55.6,72.8 |
Antimicrobial storage | Â | Â | Â | Â |
Cupboard | 43(66.2) | 34(66.7) | 77 | 57.4,74.3 |
Open shelf indoor | 16(24.6) | 12(23.5) | 28 | 17.3,32.7 |
Shelf direct sunlight | 6(9.2) | 5(9.8) | 11 | 5.4,16.2 |