Background: Antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) programs are yet to be widely implemented in veterinary practice and medical programs are unlikely to be directly applicable to veterinary settings. Objective: To gain an in-depth understanding of the factors that influence effective AMS in veterinary practices in Australia. Methods: A concurrent explanatory mixed methods design was used. The quantitative phase of the study consisted of an online questionnaire to assess veterinarians’ attitudes to antimicrobial resistance (AMR) and antimicrobial use in animals, and the extent to which AMS currently is implemented (knowingly or unknowingly). The qualitative phase used semi-structured interviews to gain an understanding of the barriers to and enablers of AMS in veterinary practices. Data were collected and entered into NVivo v.11, openly coded and analyzed according to mixed methods data analysis principles. Results: Companion animal, equine, and bovine veterinarians participated in the study. Veterinary practices rarely had antimicrobial prescribing policies. The key barriers were a lack of AMS governance structures, client expectations and competition between practices, cost of microbiological testing, and lack of access to education, training and AMS resources. The enablers were concern for the role of veterinary antimicrobial use in development of AMR in humans, a sense of pride in the service provided, and preparedness to change prescribing practices. Conclusion and Clinical Importance: Our study can guide development and establishment of AMS programs in veterinary practices by defining the major issues that influence the prescribing behavior of veterinarians.

Background: Investigations of antimicrobial use in companion animals are limited. With the growing recognition of the need for improved antimicrobial stewardship, there is urgent need for more detailed understanding of the patterns of antimicrobial use in this sector. Objectives: To investigate antimicrobial use for medical and surgical conditions in dogs and cats by Australian veterinarians. Methods: A cross-sectional study was performed over 4 months in 2011. Respondents were asked about their choices of antimicrobials for empirical therapy of diseases in dogs and cats, duration of therapy, and selection based on culture and susceptibility testing, for common conditions framed as case scenarios: 11 medical, 2 surgical, and 8 dermatological. Results: A total of 892 of the 1,029 members of the Australian veterinary profession that completed the survey satisfied the selection criteria. Empirical antimicrobial therapy was more common for acute conditions (76%) than chronic conditions (24%). Overall, the most common antimicrobial classes were potentiated aminopenicillins (36%), fluoroquinolones (15%), first- and second-generation cephalosporins (14%), and tetracyclines (11%). Third-generation cephalosporins were more frequently used in cats (16%) compared to dogs (2%). Agreement with Australasian Infectious Disease Advisory Panel (AIDAP) guidelines (generated subsequently) was variable ranging from 0 to 69% between conditions. Conclusions and Clinical Importance: Choice of antimicrobials by Australian veterinary practitioners was generally appropriate, with relatively low use of drugs of high importance, except for the empirical use of fluoroquinolones in dogs, particularly for otitis externa and 3rd-generation cephalosporins in cats. Future surveys will determine whether introduction of the 2013 AIDAP therapeutic guidelines has influenced prescribing habits.

A better understanding of veterinary students’ perceptions, attitudes, and knowledge about antimicrobial stewardship and biosecurity could facilitate more effective education of future veterinarians about these important issues. A multicenter cross-sectional study was performed by administering a questionnaire to veterinary students expected to graduate in 2017 or 2018 in all Australian veterinary schools. Four hundred and seventy-six of 1246 students (38%) completed the survey. Many students were unaware of the high importance of some veterinary drugs to human medicine, specifically enrofloxacin and cefovecin (59% and 47% of responses, respectively). Fewer than 10% of students would use appropriate personal protective equipment in scenarios suggestive of Q fever or psittacosis. Students expected to graduate in 2018 were more likely to select culture and susceptibility testing in companion animal cases (OR 1.89, 95% CI 1.33–2.69, p < 0.001), and were more likely to appropriately avoid antimicrobials in large animal cases (OR 1.75, 95% CI 1.26–2.44, p = 0.001) than those expected to graduate in 2017. However, 2018 graduates were less likely to correctly identify the importance rating of veterinary antimicrobials for human health (OR 0.48, 95% CI 0.34–0.67, p < 0.001) than 2017 graduates. Students reported having a good knowledge of antimicrobial resistance, and combating resistance, but only 34% thought pharmacology teaching was adequate and only 20% said that teaching in lectures matched clinical teaching. Efforts need to be made to harmonize preclinical and clinical teaching, and greater emphasis is needed on appropriate biosecurity and antimicrobial stewardship.

Despite the important role of antimicrobial use in companion animals in the global challenge presented by antimicrobial resistance (AMR), very few studies have quantified pet owner factors that can contribute to suboptimal veterinary antimicrobial use. We conducted an online survey of pet owners, asking about their experiences with veterinarians, their opinions on antibiotic use and knowledge of antibiotics, and their communication preferences regarding judicious prescribing. Just over half (54%) of the 558 pet owners had received antibiotics for their pet at their last non-routine veterinary consultation and most owners were happy (83%) with the antibiotic prescribing decision of their veterinarian. A quarter (25%) indicated that they had been surprised, disappointed or frustrated when a veterinarian had not given their pet antibiotics; 15% had explicitly requested them. Owners placed a higher priority on their pet receiving the most effective treatment than on treatment being cheap or convenient. Most respondents recognized the limitations of antibiotic therapy and the risks associated with antibiotic use, but 50% believed the risks were confined to the treated animal; only a minority was aware of inter-species transfer of bacteria. Pet owners indicated that they would find judicious prescribing messages focused on the direct risks of antibiotics to their pet more compelling than those about public health. Our findings suggest that veterinary communications about responsible antibiotic use should focus on pet owners’ priorities and address or bypass their gaps in understanding regarding antibiotic resistance.