Analyze Diet
Veterinary parasitology, regional studies and reports2018; 13; 74-78; doi: 10.1016/j.vprsr.2018.04.004

A survey on parasite control in sport horses of Argentina and other regional countries.

Abstract: Strategies for parasite control have undergone major changes in recent years, especially in Europe and the United States, replacing traditional approaches by schemes based on surveillance and selective therapy. A first step in helminth control planning is to understand and demonstrate how horse owners or trainers currently control nematodes. The aim of this study was to collect information, through a survey, about important aspects of routine anthelmintic strategies in sport horses in Argentina and other regional countries. A total of 100 surveys were sent. Sixty nine were responded, 53% of the surveys were answered by veterinarians and 47% by managers. The majority of the respondents (58%) worked in Thoroughbred studs, followed by Throroughbred farms (23%), Horse Riding Centers (10%) and other types of centers (9%). Most respondents treated horses at fixed time every 3 months (48%). Twenty-two percent of them did it at fixed time every 6 months, 16% at fixed time every 4 months and 6% at fixed time every 12 months; 6% dewormed on individual basis while 4% did not treat at all; 2% dewormed every two months. When asked about the rationale for deworming, the majority (41%) did so based on the time elapsed since the last treatment, followed by the time of the year (22%), according to the age of the animals (15%), according to previous diagnosis (12%), 9% treated for no particular reason and 1% when the horses reached the stud. Almost half of respondents (48%) did not rotate anthelmintic drug on. In a smaller proportion, others did it every 3 months (26%), every 12 months (11%), every 6 months (9%) and finally every 4 months (6%). Half of the respondents (50%) treated horses 4 times a year, 32% did 2 times a year, 15% 3 times and 3% did not deworm at all. Regarding making a diagnosis prior to treatment, 76% of the respondents answered negatively, while 24% did so. Only 20% of respondents performed the anthelmintic efficacy test. It can be concluded that there is little participation and planning of the veterinary professional regarding the control of internal parasites in horses of Argentina. Performing coprologic tests are practices not usual in our region. Practices of parasite management seem to be reduced almost exclusively to the administration of anthelmintic drugs at fixed times, often indiscriminately.
Publication Date: 2018-04-16 PubMed ID: 31014893DOI: 10.1016/j.vprsr.2018.04.004Google Scholar: Lookup
The Equine Research Bank provides access to a large database of publicly available scientific literature. Inclusion in the Research Bank does not imply endorsement of study methods or findings by Mad Barn.
  • Journal Article

Summary

This research summary has been generated with artificial intelligence and may contain errors and omissions. Refer to the original study to confirm details provided. Submit correction.

The research article examines how horse owners and trainers in Argentina and nearby countries manage parasitic infections in sport horses. The findings indicate that there is generally a lack of structured parasitic management practices and depth of veterinary intervention for the same in the studied region, mostly depending on periodic administration of antiparasitic drugs.

Parasite Control Practices Survey

  • The study collected information through a survey about typical anthelmintic approaches in sporting horses, which predominantly targeted veterinarians and horse facility managers. Of the 100 surveys sent out, 69 responses were received. The respondents mostly hailed from Thoroughbred studs, farms, and horse riding centers.

Antiparasitic Treatment Routines

  • The survey found that a majority of respondents treated horses every three months. Other predominant practices included treatment every 6, 4, or 12 months or individual-based treatment when necessary. Only a small fraction of respondents chose not to treat their horses.
  • Regarding the reasoning behind their treatment schedules, 41% of respondents based their decision on the time elapsed since the last treatment. Other prevalent reasons included seasonal timing, the age of the horse, and previous diagnoses. A small percentage did not have any specific rationale for the treatment timetable.

Anthelmintic Drug Rotation and Diagnostic Practice

  • About half of the respondents mentioned that they did not rotate the type of anthelmintic drug used. In contrast, the rest rotated the drug used regularly within fixed intervals, wherein the most common interval was every 3 months.
  • Most respondents administered treatment several times per year, with the majority opting for a quarterly treatment approach.
  • Interestingly, 76% of respondents revealed that they did not conduct diagnoses prior to treatment, highlighting a significant gap in assessing anthelmintic efficacy. Only 20% performed any efficacy tests to determine the effectiveness of their chosen anthelmintic drug.

Conclusion

  • The survey results suggest an inadequate level of professional veterinary planning in Argentina regarding the control of internal parasites in sport horses. It primarily relied on the administration of anthelmintic drugs at fixed times.
  • The use of coprologic tests, instrumental in assessing the presence and type of parasitic infestations, was generally not commonplace in the region.

Cite This Article

APA
Losinno SJ, Aguilar J, Carbonetti L, Ferniot E, San Esteban F, Flores Suares CM. (2018). A survey on parasite control in sport horses of Argentina and other regional countries. Vet Parasitol Reg Stud Reports, 13, 74-78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vprsr.2018.04.004

Publication

ISSN: 2405-9390
NlmUniqueID: 101680410
Country: Netherlands
Language: English
Volume: 13
Pages: 74-78
PII: S2405-9390(17)30203-4

Researcher Affiliations

Losinno, S J
  • Depto. de Clínica Animal, Facultad de Agronomía y Veterinaria, Universidad Nacional de Río Cuarto, Córdoba, Argentina.
Aguilar, J
  • Depto. de Clínica Animal, Facultad de Agronomía y Veterinaria, Universidad Nacional de Río Cuarto, Córdoba, Argentina. Electronic address: jaguilar@ayv.unrc.edu.ar.
Carbonetti, L
  • Depto. de Clínica Animal, Facultad de Agronomía y Veterinaria, Universidad Nacional de Río Cuarto, Córdoba, Argentina.
Ferniot, E
  • Depto. de Clínica Animal, Facultad de Agronomía y Veterinaria, Universidad Nacional de Río Cuarto, Córdoba, Argentina.
San Esteban, F
  • Depto. de Clínica Animal, Facultad de Agronomía y Veterinaria, Universidad Nacional de Río Cuarto, Córdoba, Argentina.
Flores Suares, C M
  • Depto. de Clínica Animal, Facultad de Agronomía y Veterinaria, Universidad Nacional de Río Cuarto, Córdoba, Argentina.

MeSH Terms

  • Animal Husbandry / methods
  • Animal Husbandry / statistics & numerical data
  • Animals
  • Anthelmintics / therapeutic use
  • Argentina
  • Communicable Disease Control / methods
  • Communicable Disease Control / statistics & numerical data
  • Horse Diseases / parasitology
  • Horse Diseases / prevention & control
  • Horses / parasitology
  • Parasite Egg Count
  • Parasites / drug effects
  • Parasitic Diseases, Animal / prevention & control
  • South America
  • Sports
  • Surveys and Questionnaires

Citations

This article has been cited 0 times.