Abstract: : A mandatory monitoring of the use of antibiotics in horses in the European Union will come into force from 2027 on. The aim of the study was to explore the potential implementation of a monitoring system and to provide an overview of antibiotic use in horses in Germany. : Data on all consultations from 57 German practices between 2018 and 2023 were obtained. The dataset included basic data about the horse, free-text diagnoses (allocated to one of 20 categories), and treatments. Information on the administered or dispensed pharmaceutical product was recorded for antibiotic treatment consultations. : This study analyzed 225,622 consultations with more than 50,000 horses. Antibiotics were administered in around 7% of consultations, but practice-specific rates varied considerably. Treatment was most frequent in ophthalmology cases. The most commonly used drug classes were sulfonamides combined with trimethoprim and aminopenicillins. Horses receiving antibiotics required follow-up visits more often than untreated animals, and changes in antibiotic substance occurred occasionally. : Routine practice data provide valuable insights into antibiotic use in equine medicine. While incomplete entries and imprecise details (e.g., missing concentrations or diagnoses) remain a limitation, the approach offers clear advantages: it is cost-effective, allows large-scale data collection, and supports continuous monitoring over time. Such systems can be used to evaluate the effects of upcoming EU regulations and to identify priorities for antibiotic stewardship in equine practice.
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.
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.
Overview
This study analyzed antibiotic use in horses across 57 German veterinary practices from 2018 to 2023 to assess patterns of use and explore the feasibility of a monitoring system in anticipation of upcoming EU regulations.
It provides insights into how frequently antibiotics are used, which drugs are most common, and highlights variability between practices, offering important information to guide antibiotic stewardship efforts.
Purpose and Background
The European Union will mandate monitoring antibiotic use in horses starting in 2027 to combat antibiotic resistance.
The study aimed to understand how such a monitoring system might be implemented effectively in Germany by analyzing real-world veterinary consultation data.
It also aimed to create an overview of current antibiotic usage patterns in equine medicine to inform future regulations and stewardship priorities.
Data Collection and Methodology
Data were collected from 57 veterinary practices across Germany spanning January 2018 to mid-2023.
The dataset included:
Basic horse information (such as identification and potentially age or breed).
Free-text diagnoses from consultations, which were categorized into 20 diagnostic groups.
Treatment details including what pharmaceutical products were administered or dispensed, focusing particularly on antibiotics.
A total of 225,622 veterinary consultations involving over 50,000 horses were analyzed, providing a large-scale, real-world dataset.
Key Findings
Antibiotics were used in approximately 7% of all consultations, though there was significant variation in antibiotic use rates across individual veterinary practices.
The highest frequency of antibiotic treatment was found in cases related to ophthalmology, indicating eye infections are a common reason for antibiotic use in horses.
The most commonly administered antibiotic classes were:
Sulfonamides combined with trimethoprim (a commonly used broad-spectrum antibiotic combination).
Aminopenicillins (beta-lactam antibiotics effective against many bacteria).
Horses treated with antibiotics often required more follow-up visits compared to untreated horses, suggesting either more severe illness or need for treatment adjustments.
In some cases, changes were made to the prescribed antibiotic substances during treatment, indicating adjustments possibly due to response or side effects.
Implications and Benefits of the Monitoring Approach
Utilizing routine practice data for antibiotic monitoring is cost-effective and can support wide-scale and long-term data collection across many practices.
The approach allows for continuous surveillance to identify trends in antibiotic usage patterns in equine veterinary medicine.
Such data can help evaluate the impact of forthcoming EU regulations on antibiotic use in horses.
Data can also guide targeted antibiotic stewardship interventions to reduce inappropriate use and combat antibiotic resistance.
Limitations
Incomplete or imprecise data entries were noted, including missing concentrations of antibiotics or less specific diagnostic information.
Free-text diagnoses required categorization, which could introduce some variability in classification accuracy.
The analysis focused on data from recorded treatments only and may miss treatments administered outside of the documented consultations.
Conclusions
The study demonstrates that monitoring antibiotic use through routine veterinary practice data is feasible and valuable for understanding equine antibiotic prescribing behavior.
There is considerable variability in antibiotic use between practices, highlighting opportunities for harmonization and stewardship.
The findings support the development of monitoring systems ahead of EU mandates and provide key data to inform efforts aimed at responsible antibiotic use in horse medicine.
Cite This Article
APA
Merle R, Feuer L, Frenzer K, Plenio JL, Bethe A, Sarnino N, Lübke-Becker A, Bäumer W.
(2025).
Antibiotic Use in Horses: Analysis of 57 German Veterinary Practices (2018-2023).
Antibiotics (Basel), 14(9), 953.
https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics14090953
Argudín MA, Deplano A, Meghraoui A, Dodémont M, Heinrichs A, Denis O, Nonhoff C, Roisin S. Bacteria from Animals as a Pool of Antimicrobial Resistance Genes. Antibiotics 2017;6:12.
World Health Organization. WHO List of Medically Important Antimicrobials: A Risk Management Tool for Mitigating Antimicrobial Resistance Due to Non-Human Use. World Health Organization; Geneva, Switzerland: 2024.
European Medicines Agency. Categorisation of Antibiotics in the European Union: Answer to the Request from the European Commission for Updating the Scientific Advice on the Impact on Public Health and Animal Health of the use of Antibiotics in Animals. European Medicines Agency; Amsterdam, The Netherlands: 2019.
Sinclair C, Schofield I, Mair T. Antibiotic use in first opinion equine practice in the United Kingdom: Serial point prevalence surveys in 17 practices. Equine Vet. Educ. 2025;37:68–75.
European Parliament and Council of the European Union. Regulation (EU) 2019/6 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2018 on Veterinary Medicinal Products and Repealing Directive 2001/82/EC. Off. J. Eur. Union 2019;4:43–167.
Federal Ministry of Food, Nutrition and Homeland. Viehbestände nach der Erhebung zum 1. März 2020: Fachserie 3, Reihe 2.1.3 [Livestock Numbers After the Survey on 1 March 2020]. [(accessed on 15 August 2025)]; Available online: https://www.bmel-statistik.de/landwirtschaft/tierhaltung/viehbestand.
Teschner D., Barton A.K., Klaus C., Gehlen H.. Antibiotikaeinsatz bei operierten Kolikpferden in Deutschland [Antibiotic use in colic horses that underwent surgery in Germany]. Pferdeheilkunde 2015;31:235–240.
Federal Ministry of Food and Agriculture (BMEL). German Regulation on Equine Passports (Equidenpass-Verordnung—EQPassV). Federal Law Gazette (Bundesgesetzblatt) I 2000, 166; Last Amended by Article 5 of the Regulation of 14 December 2020 (BGBl. I, 2987).
Schneider S.T., Meemken D., Gehlen H., Merle R., Langkabel N.. A comparative survey of veterinarians, equine owners, and equine keepers regarding the knowledge and implementation of legal requirements in Germany for the use and documentation of veterinary medicine in equines intended for slaughter. PLoS ONE 2023;18:e0283371.
Hardefeldt L.Y., Bailey K.E., Slater J.. Overview of the use of antimicrobial drugs for the treatment of bacterial infections in horses. Equine Vet. Educ. 2021;33:602–611.
Federal Ministry of Food and Agriculture (BMEL). Verordnung über Tierärztliche Hausapotheken: TÄHAV [23rd Ordinance on Veterinary Dispensaries]. Bundesanzeiger Verlag Bonn, Germany: 2024.
Altermatt N., Dolf G., Ramseyer A., Burger D., Gerber V.. Auftreten gesundheitlicher Probleme beim Schweizer Warmblutpferd mittleren Alters [Occurrence of health problems in middle-aged Swiss warmblood horses]. Schweiz Arch Tierheilkd 2021;163:339–350.
Merle R., Feuer L., Frenzer K., Plenio J.-L., Bethe A., Sarnino N., Lübke-Becker A., Bäumer W.. Use of Antibiotics in Companion Animals from 133 German Practices from 2018 to 2023. Antibiotics 2025;14:58.
Farrell S, McKernan C, Benson T, Elliott C, Dean M. Understanding farmers’ and veterinarians’ behavior in relation to antimicrobial use and resistance in dairy cattle: A systematic review.. J. Dairy Sci. 2021;104:4584–4603.
Gohrbandt S. Erarbeitung eines Diagnoseschlüssels in der Veterinärmedizin.. Ph.D. Dissertation. Freie Universität Berlin; Berlin, Germany: 2019.
Allenspach K, Burgener, Dahlem D, Gerber B, Glanemann, Glaus T, Griebsch C, Hazuchova K, Hildebrandt N, Kandel-Tschiederer B. Differenzialdiagnosen Innere Medizin bei Hund und Katze: Vom Leitsymptom zur Diagnose [Differential Diagnoses of Internal Medicine in Dogs and Cats: From the Main Symptom to the Diagnosis]. 3rd ed. Georg Thieme Verlag; Stuttgart, Germany: 2020.
Pedregosa F, Varoquaux G, Gramfort A, Michel V, Thirion B, Grisel O, Blondel M, Prettenhofer P, Weiss R, Dubourg V. Scikit-learn: Machine Learning in Python.. J. Mach. Learn. Res. 2011;12:2825–2830.
Veterinärmedizinischer Informationsdienst für Arzneimittelanwendung, Toxikologie und Arzneimittelrecht. VETIDATA; University of Leipzig. [(accessed on 25 February 2025)]. Available online: www.vetidata.de.
Landschneider C. ROTE LISTE® 2011.. Pharm. unserer Zeit. 2011;40:286.
Wickham H. Ggplot2: Elegant Graphics for Data Analysis.. Springer; New York, NY, USA: 2016.
Wickham H, Averick M, Bryan J, Chang W, McGowan L, François R, Grolemund G, Hayes A, Henry L, Hester J. Welcome to the tidyverse.. J. Open Source Softw. 2019;4:1686.