Analyze Diet
The Veterinary record2026; 198(12); e514-e516; doi: 10.1002/vetr.70887

Current consensus and controversies in equine parasite control.

Abstract: Julia Shrubb, chair of CANTER - Controlling ANTiparasitic resistance in Equines Responsibly - takes a look at where there is currently agreement on equine parasite control practices and where debate is ongoing.
Publication Date: 2026-06-12 PubMed ID: 42283285DOI: 10.1002/vetr.70887Google 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.

Current approaches to controlling parasites in horses show agreement on some key practices but also reveal ongoing debate regarding the best strategies to prevent drug resistance and effectively manage parasite populations in equines.

Overview of Equine Parasite Control

  • Equine parasite control focuses on reducing parasite burden to maintain horse health and performance.
  • Common parasites include strongyles, tapeworms, and bots, which can cause various health issues.
  • Control generally relies on the use of anthelmintic drugs and pasture management strategies.

Current Consensus in Parasite Control

  • Targeted or strategic deworming is preferred over routine, blanket treatments to reduce the risk of anthelmintic resistance.
  • Regular fecal egg count (FEC) testing is widely supported to monitor parasite levels and guide treatment decisions.
  • Maintaining good pasture hygiene, such as removing feces regularly, is agreed to help reduce parasite contamination.
  • Using appropriate dosage based on accurate bodyweight measurement is emphasized to maximize drug efficacy and limit resistance development.

Controversies and Areas of Debate

  • The frequency and timing of deworming treatments, especially in different climates and management systems, remain under discussion.
  • There is debate over which anthelmintic classes should be used first-line versus reserved for resistant parasite populations.
  • The role and effectiveness of non-chemical parasite control methods, such as biological controls or alternative therapies, are still being evaluated.
  • Concerns remain about how best to implement integrated parasite management plans that balance control and resistance prevention on a population level.

Implications for Practice

  • Equine veterinarians and horse owners are encouraged to adopt evidence-based, individualized parasite control programs.
  • Continued research and surveillance are essential to refine guidelines and address emerging resistance challenges.
  • Educating stakeholders on responsible anthelmintic use and parasite biology can enhance control efforts and prolong drug effectiveness.

Cite This Article

APA
Shrubb J. (2026). Current consensus and controversies in equine parasite control. Vet Rec, 198(12), e514-e516. https://doi.org/10.1002/vetr.70887

Publication

ISSN: 2042-7670
NlmUniqueID: 0031164
Country: England
Language: English
Volume: 198
Issue: 12
Pages: e514-e516

Researcher Affiliations

Shrubb, Julia
  • Three Counties Equine Hospital, Tewkesbury, Gloucestershire.

MeSH Terms

  • Animals
  • Horses
  • Horse Diseases / prevention & control
  • Horse Diseases / parasitology
  • Parasitic Diseases, Animal / prevention & control
  • Consensus
  • United Kingdom

References

This article includes 9 references
  1. Sallé G, Cortet J, Bois I. Risk factor analysis of equine strongyle resistance to anthelmintics. BioRxiv 2017;7:158105.
  2. Nielsen MK. Apparent treatment failure of praziquantel and pyrantel pamoate against anoplocephalid tapeworms. Int J Parasitol Drugs Drug Resist 2023;22:96–101.
  3. Rendle D, Hughes K, Bowen M. BEVA primary care clinical guidelines: equine parasite control. Equine Vet J 2024;56:392–423.
  4. Lightbody KL, Matthews JB, Kemp-Symonds JG. Use of a saliva-based diagnostic test to identify tapeworm infection in horses in the UK. Equine Vet J 2018;50:213–19.
  5. Matthews JB, Lightbody KL, Peczak N, Austin CJ. An update on the use of saliva-based diagnostics for Anoplocephala perfoliata infections in horses. Equine Vet Educ 2024;36:14–15.
  6. Nielsen MK, Sauermann CW, Leathwick DM. The effect of climate, season, and treatment intensity on anthelmintic resistance in cyathostomins: a modelling exercise. Vet Parasitol 2019;269:7–12.
  7. Herd RP. Epidemiology and control of equine strongylosis at Newmarket. Equine Vet J 1986;18:447–52.
  8. Haseler CJ, Shrubb JL, Davies HG. Environmental impacts of equine parasiticide treatment: the UK perspective. Equine Vet Educ 2024;36:381–92.
  9. Nielsen MK, von Samson-Himmelstjerna G, Kuzmina TA. World association for the advancement of veterinary parasitology (WAAVP): third edition of guideline for evaluating the efficacy of equine anthelmintics. Vet Parasitol 2022;303:109676.

Citations

This article has been cited 0 times.