FREE SHIPPING over $40
OVER 9000 FIVE-STAR REVIEWS
5% OFF ALL SUBSCRIPTIONS
100% HAPPINESS GUARANTEE
Analyze Diet
0
Home / Equine Research Bank / Equine Vet J / Understanding antimicrobial use by equine owners in Wales: U...
Equine veterinary journal2025; doi: 10.1111/evj.14522

Understanding antimicrobial use by equine owners in Wales: Using cross-sectional survey and semi-structured interviews.

Abstract: Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is an increasingly serious threat to human and animal health. Antimicrobial use (AMU) in horses is gathering research interest, although there remain significant evidence gaps. Currently, there is scant qualitative research into equine owners' use of antimicrobials, specifically antibiotics, hindering the design of evidence-based stewardship interventions and policies. Objective: To understand Welsh equine owners' views and behaviours relating to antimicrobial usage. Methods: Cross sectional survey and qualitative data collection and analysis. Methods: An online survey (n = 319) and semi-structured interviews (n = 21) were conducted with Welsh equine owners. The survey examined participant knowledge of and relationship with their horse(s), sourcing of antibiotics, owner-vet interactions on antibiotic prescribing, antibiotic usage, and their understanding of AMR. Semi-structured in-depth interviews further explored horse owner perspectives, experiences, and decision-making relating to these areas, to add nuance and depth to quantitative data. Survey data were descriptively analysed, and interview data were coded and qualitatively analysed using a thematic approach. Results: Welsh equine owners regarded their horses as members of the family (84.8%). Most sourced antibiotics from their vet (68.9%) with a minority (5.1%) never having done so or having used antibiotics left over (16.6%) and 13.6% would consider changing veterinary practice if they did not receive antibiotics when they requested them. Interview data suggest that antibiotic use was shaped by (i) key relationships of care (human-animal and owner-vet); (ii) competing priorities (treatment need versus ease of administration); and (iii) imperfect comprehension (education, information, AMU/AMR knowledge). Conclusions: Potential self-selection bias of respondents due to the voluntary nature of participation. Conclusions: This study highlights variations in the horse-owner relationship, conflicting priorities involved in horse ownership, and the quality of vet-client relationships which may influence treatment decision-making. It raises some concerns about the sourcing of antibiotics and variable understanding of AMR, with important implications for antimicrobial stewardship and educational priorities.
© 2025 The Author(s). Equine Veterinary Journal published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of EVJ Ltd.
Get Full Text
Publication Date: 2025-05-20 PubMed ID: 40394995DOI: 10.1111/evj.14522Google 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.
LinkedInCopy
  • 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.

This research study focuses on understanding antimicrobial use (AMU) and related behaviors among horse owners in Wales. It uncovers how factors like the horse-owner relationship, interactions with vets, and understanding of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) can influence the use of antibiotics in horses.

Research Methodology

  • The research involved a mix of quantitative and qualitative data collection methods, specifically an online survey and semi-structured interviews.
  • The online survey was completed by 319 equine owners and encompassed questions to gauge the participants’ understanding of AMR and their use of antibiotics in horses. It also explored how they source these antibiotics, their interactions with vets about antibiotic prescriptions, and their relationship with their horses.
  • The semi-structured interviews, conducted with 21 horse owners, allowed a deeper exploration into these areas, allowing participants to share their experiences and decision-making processes.
  • Data from the survey was analyzed descriptively, while interview data was coded and underwent a qualitative thematic analysis.

Key Findings

  • A significant majority of horse owners view their horses as part of their family (84.8%) and most source antibiotics for their horses from their vets (68.9%).
  • A small percentage had never sourced antibiotics or used leftover antibiotics (5.1%), and 16.6% had used leftover antibiotics. Some horse owners (13.6%) mentioned that they would consider changing their veterinary practice if their requests for antibiotics were not met.
  • Interview results suggested that antibiotic use was influenced by the horse-owner and owner-vet relationship, competing priorities (like the need for treatment vs. the ease of administering it), and a lack of complete understanding about AMU/AMR.

Conclusions

  • The study notes a potential self-selection bias due to the voluntary nature of the participation.
  • It concludes by highlighting the variation in the horse-owner relationship, the conflicting priorities in horse ownership, and uneven vet-client relationships, all of which may have an impact on treatment decision-making.
  • It also raised concerns about sourcing of antibiotics and the inconsistent understanding of AMR, which have significant implications for antimicrobial stewardship and education priorities.

Cite This Article

APA
Stuart RB, Miles-Farrier F, Bard AM, Rees G. (2025). Understanding antimicrobial use by equine owners in Wales: Using cross-sectional survey and semi-structured interviews. Equine Vet J. https://doi.org/10.1111/evj.14522

Publication

Equine veterinary journal
ISSN: 2042-3306
NlmUniqueID: 0173320
Country: United States
Language: English

Researcher Affiliations

Stuart, Rebekah B
  • School of Veterinary Science, Aberystwyth University, Penglais Hill, UK.
Miles-Farrier, Fleur
  • School of Veterinary Science, Aberystwyth University, Penglais Hill, UK.
Bard, Alison M
  • Bristol Vet School, University of Bristol, Langford, UK.
Rees, Gwen
  • School of Veterinary Science, Aberystwyth University, Penglais Hill, UK.
  • Arwain DGC, Mentera, Aberystwyth, UK.

Grant Funding

  • Welsh Government Rural Communities-Rural Development Programme 2014-2020
  • Welsh Government

References

This article includes 36 references
  1. Price R. O'Neill report on antimicrobial resistance: funding for antimicrobial specialists should be improved.. Eur J Hosp Pharm 2016;23(4):245–247.
    doi: 10.1136/ejhpharm-2016-001013google scholar: lookup
  2. UK Government. Confronting antimicrobial resistance 2024 to 2029. 2024 [cited 2024 Nov 29]. Available from: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/uk‐5‐year‐action‐plan‐for‐antimicrobial‐resistance‐2024‐to‐2029/confronting‐antimicrobial‐resistance‐2024‐to‐2029
  3. Wilson A, Mair T, Williams N, McGowan C, Pinchbeck G. Antimicrobial prescribing and antimicrobial resistance surveillance in equine practice.. Equine Vet J 2023;55(3):494–505.
    doi: 10.1111/evj.13587google scholar: lookup
  4. UK veterinary antibiotic resistance and sales surveillance report. 2023. Available from: www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3/
  5. 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(2):68–75.
    doi: 10.1111/eve.13945google scholar: lookup
  6. Allen SE, Verheyen KLP, O'Neill DG, Brodbelt DC. Use of antimicrobials licensed for systemic administration in UK equine practice.. Equine Vet J 2023;55(5):808–819.
    doi: 10.1111/evj.13878google scholar: lookup
  7. Rees GM, Bard A, Reyher KK. Designing a national veterinary prescribing champion programme for welsh veterinary practices: the Arwain Vet Cymru project.. Antibiotics 2021;10(3):1–18.
    doi: 10.3390/antibiotics10030253google scholar: lookup
  8. BEVA. Protect ME tool kit. Available from: www.beva.org.uk/protectme
  9. Bowen M. Antimicrobial stewardship: time for change.. Equine Vet J 2013;45(2):127–129.
    doi: 10.1111/evj.12041google scholar: lookup
  10. Chambers JA, Crumlish M, Comerford DA, O'Carroll RE. Antimicrobial resistance in humans and animals: rapid review of psychological and behavioral determinants.. Antibiotics 2020;9(6):285.
    doi: 10.3390/antibiotics9060285google scholar: lookup
  11. McKernan C, Benson T, Farrell S, Dean M. Antimicrobial use in agriculture: critical review of the factors influencing behaviour.. JAC Antimicrob Resist 2021;3(4):dlab178.
    doi: 10.1093/jacamr/dlab178google scholar: lookup
  12. Gilson L. Qualitative research synthesis for health policy analysis: what does it entail and what does it offer?. Health Policy Plan 2014;29:iii1–iii5.
    doi: 10.1093/heapol/czu121google scholar: lookup
  13. Yardley L, Bradbury K, Morrison L. Using qualitative research for intervention development and evaluation.. 2021;p. 263–282.
    doi: 10.1037/0000252-013google scholar: lookup
  14. Arwain DGC. [cited 2024 Nov 29]. Available from: https://rhaglenni.mentera.cymru/arwaindgc/en/our-activities/
  15. Hsieh HF, Shannon SE. Three approaches to qualitative content analysis.. Qual Health Res 2005;15(9):1277–1288.
    doi: 10.1177/1049732305276687google scholar: lookup
  16. Kondracki NL, Wellman NS, Amundson DR. Content analysis: review of methods and their applications in nutrition education.. J Nutr Educ Behav 2002;34(4):224–230.
    doi: 10.1016/s1499-4046(06)60097-3google scholar: lookup
  17. Braun V, Clarke V. Using thematic analysis in psychology.. Qual Res Psychol 2006;3(2):77–101.
    doi: 10.1191/1478088706qp063oagoogle scholar: lookup
  18. Clough H, Roshier M, England G, Burford J, Freeman S. Qualitative study of the influence of horse‐owner relationship during some key events within a horse's lifetime.. Vet Rec 2021;188(6):e79.
    doi: 10.1002/vetr.79google scholar: lookup
  19. Lucas PJ, Cabral C, Hay AD, Horwood J. A systematic review of parent and clinician views and perceptions that influence prescribing decisions in relation to acute childhood infections in primary care.. Scand J Prim Health Care 2015;33(1):11–20.
    doi: 10.3109/02813432.2015.1001942google scholar: lookup
  20. Whaley LE, Businger AC, Dempsey PP, Linder JA. Visit complexity, diagnostic uncertainty, and antibiotic prescribing for acute cough in primary care: a retrospective study.. BMC Fam Pract 2013;14:120.
    doi: 10.1186/1471-2296-14-120google scholar: lookup
  21. Scarborough R, Hardefeldt L, Browning G, Bailey K. Pet owners and antibiotics: knowledge, opinions, expectations, and communication preferences.. Antibiotics 2021;10(11):1326.
    doi: 10.3390/antibiotics10111326google scholar: lookup
  22. Rees GM, Reyher KK, Barrett DC, Buller H. ‘It's cheaper than a dead cow’: understanding veterinary medicine use on dairy farms.. J Rural Stud 2021;86:587–598.
    doi: 10.1016/j.jrurstud.2021.07.020google scholar: lookup
  23. Rather IA, Kim BC, Bajpai VK, Park YH. Self‐medication and antibiotic resistance: crisis, current challenges, and prevention.. Saudi J Biol Sci 2017;24(4):808–812.
    doi: 10.1016/j.sjbs.2017.01.004google scholar: lookup
  24. Sachdev C, Anjankar A, Agrawal J. Self‐medication with antibiotics: an element increasing resistance.. Cureus 2022;14(10):e30844.
    doi: 10.7759/cureus.30844google scholar: lookup
  25. Grigoryan L, Burgerhof JGM, Haaijer-Ruskamp FM, Burgerhof JG, Degener JE, Deschepper R. Is self‐medication with antibiotics in Europe driven by prescribed use?. J Antimicrob Chemother 2007;59(1):152–156.
    doi: 10.1093/jac/dkl457google scholar: lookup
  26. Whitaker TC, Goupil X, Roy O, Marciat D, McGahie D. Evaluation and comparison under field conditions of the stress response induced in horses when administered endoparasiticides in tablet or paste formulations.. J Appl Res Vet Med 2011;9(1):6–14.
  27. Cazer CL, Lawless JW, Frye A, Gonzalez L, Safi AG. Divergent veterinarian and cat owner perspectives are barriers to reducing the use of cefovecin in cats.. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2023;261(12):1810–1819.
    doi: 10.2460/javma.23.08.0487google scholar: lookup
  28. Kanara EW, Werner HW. Improving your equine practice by enhancing the veterinary‐client‐patient relationship.. Proc Am Assoc Equine Practnrs 2012;58:317–319.
  29. Elte Y, Wolframm I, Nielen M, van Weeren R. Client satisfaction in equine veterinary practice: a structured review and qualitative synthesis.. Vet Rec 2021;189(10):e640.
    doi: 10.1002/vetr.640google scholar: lookup
  30. UK Government. The veterinary medicines regulations. 2013 [cited 2024 Nov 29]. Available from: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2013/2033/contents
  31. Smith M, King C, Davis M, Dickson A, Park J, Smith F. Pet owner and vet interactions: exploring the drivers of AMR.. Antimicrob Resist Infect Control 2018;7(1):46.
    doi: 10.1186/s13756-018-0341-1google scholar: lookup
  32. Van Der Zande MM, Dembinsky M, Aresi G, Van Staa TP. General practitioners' accounts of negotiating antibiotic prescribing decisions with patients: a qualitative study on what influences antibiotic prescribing in low, medium and high prescribing practices.. BMC Fam Pract 2019;20(1):172.
    doi: 10.1186/s12875-019-1065-xgoogle scholar: lookup
  33. Currie K, King C, Nuttall T, Smith M, Flowers P. Expert consensus regarding drivers of antimicrobial stewardship in companion animal veterinary practice: a Delphi study.. Vet Rec 2018;182(24):691.
    doi: 10.1136/vr.104639google scholar: lookup
  34. Scarborough RO, Sri AE, Browning GF, Hardefeldt LY, Bailey KE. ‘Brave enough’: a qualitative study of veterinary decisions to withhold or delay antimicrobial treatment in pets.. Antibiotics 2023;12(3):540.
    doi: 10.3390/antibiotics12030540google scholar: lookup
  35. McCullough AR, Parekh S, Rathbone J, Del Mar CB, Hoffmann TC. A systematic review of the public's knowledge and beliefs about antibiotic resistance.. J Antimicrob Chemother 2016;71(1):27–33.
    doi: 10.1093/jac/dkv310google scholar: lookup
  36. British Equestrian. State of the nation report. 2023 [cited 2024 Nov 29]. Available from: https://www.britishequestrian.org.uk/assets/EXTRA_Docs/Short%20State%20of%20the%20Nation.pdf
Subscribe to our newsletter
Join 99,383 horse owners like you who receive our email updates on horse health and nutrition.