Trypanocidal drug utilization practices in tsetse suppression and non-suppression areas of South Omo Zone, Southwestern Ethiopia

Tegegn Tesfaye, Tekle Olbamo, H. Ashenafi
{"title":"Trypanocidal drug utilization practices in tsetse suppression and non-suppression areas of South Omo Zone, Southwestern Ethiopia","authors":"Tegegn Tesfaye, Tekle Olbamo, H. Ashenafi","doi":"10.4314/evj.v24i2.6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Trypanosomosis control in Ethiopia is largely rely on use of available trypanocidal drugs although there are other options such as vector control and  use of trypanotolerant hosts. A cross-sectional survey aimed at assessing the knowledge, attitude and practices of trypanocidal drug utilization  and constraints of trypanosome infection conducted in tsetse suppression and non-suppression areas of South Omo Zone, Ethiopia. The questionnaire based survey was conducted from November 2018 to May 2019. Descriptive statistics was used to summarize the field data obtained from 184 cattle owners. Sixty (60) of the cattle owners were from suppression area and 124 from tsetse non-suppression area. Accordingly, draft oxen and milking cows respectively from tsetse suppression and non-suppression areas were classes of animals which were given priority in trypanocidal drug treatment. About 79.03% and 81.7% of cattle owners respectively from tsetse suppression and non-suppression areas witnessedthat they treat their sick animals by themselves; indicating that veterinarians and other animal health experts have very little role in medication of sick animals. Diminazine aceturate (DA) was the main trypanocidal drug preferred by cattle owners in tsetse suppression area while both DA and Isometamidium chloride (ISM) were used in non-suppression areas. About 83.1% of the respondents from tsetse suppression areas and 86.7% from non-suppression area reported treatment failures following the use of trypanocidal drugs. Moreover, about 79.61% and 86.53% of respondents respectively from tsetse suppression and non-suppression areas observed that drugs obtained from private drug stores were less effective compared to drugs obtained from governmental veterinary clinics. Furthermore, the respondents disclosed that DA was the most horrible  trypanocidal drug in showing treatment failures despite high preference by cattle owners. It was also noted that treatment frequency was higherin tsetse suppression areas than non-suppression areas regardless of vector suppression campaign. In conclusion, higher dependency of cattle  owners on trypanocidal drugs, limited trypanocidal drug availability in the veterinary pharmaceutical market, frequent trypanocidal drug usage and injection by unskilled herdsmen and owners report on trypanocidal drug treatment failures may point out the issue of trypanocidal drug resistance in the area. Therefore, awareness creation to livestock owners on the effect of misuse of trypanocidal drugs and safe trypanocidal drug usage policy should be put into effect to uphold the effectiveness of currently available trypanocidal drugs. \nKeywords: Trypanosomosis; Trypanocidal Drugs; Tsetse suppression; South Omo Zone; Ethiopia","PeriodicalId":12019,"journal":{"name":"Ethiopian Veterinary Journal","volume":"14 1","pages":"90-111"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-11-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ethiopian Veterinary Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4314/evj.v24i2.6","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Trypanosomosis control in Ethiopia is largely rely on use of available trypanocidal drugs although there are other options such as vector control and  use of trypanotolerant hosts. A cross-sectional survey aimed at assessing the knowledge, attitude and practices of trypanocidal drug utilization  and constraints of trypanosome infection conducted in tsetse suppression and non-suppression areas of South Omo Zone, Ethiopia. The questionnaire based survey was conducted from November 2018 to May 2019. Descriptive statistics was used to summarize the field data obtained from 184 cattle owners. Sixty (60) of the cattle owners were from suppression area and 124 from tsetse non-suppression area. Accordingly, draft oxen and milking cows respectively from tsetse suppression and non-suppression areas were classes of animals which were given priority in trypanocidal drug treatment. About 79.03% and 81.7% of cattle owners respectively from tsetse suppression and non-suppression areas witnessedthat they treat their sick animals by themselves; indicating that veterinarians and other animal health experts have very little role in medication of sick animals. Diminazine aceturate (DA) was the main trypanocidal drug preferred by cattle owners in tsetse suppression area while both DA and Isometamidium chloride (ISM) were used in non-suppression areas. About 83.1% of the respondents from tsetse suppression areas and 86.7% from non-suppression area reported treatment failures following the use of trypanocidal drugs. Moreover, about 79.61% and 86.53% of respondents respectively from tsetse suppression and non-suppression areas observed that drugs obtained from private drug stores were less effective compared to drugs obtained from governmental veterinary clinics. Furthermore, the respondents disclosed that DA was the most horrible  trypanocidal drug in showing treatment failures despite high preference by cattle owners. It was also noted that treatment frequency was higherin tsetse suppression areas than non-suppression areas regardless of vector suppression campaign. In conclusion, higher dependency of cattle  owners on trypanocidal drugs, limited trypanocidal drug availability in the veterinary pharmaceutical market, frequent trypanocidal drug usage and injection by unskilled herdsmen and owners report on trypanocidal drug treatment failures may point out the issue of trypanocidal drug resistance in the area. Therefore, awareness creation to livestock owners on the effect of misuse of trypanocidal drugs and safe trypanocidal drug usage policy should be put into effect to uphold the effectiveness of currently available trypanocidal drugs. Keywords: Trypanosomosis; Trypanocidal Drugs; Tsetse suppression; South Omo Zone; Ethiopia
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
埃塞俄比亚西南部南奥莫区采采蝇抑制区和非采采蝇抑制区锥虫药物使用实践
埃塞俄比亚的锥虫病控制在很大程度上依赖于使用现有的锥虫药物,尽管还有其他选择,如病媒控制和使用锥虫耐药宿主。在埃塞俄比亚南奥莫区采采抑制区和非采采抑制区进行了一项旨在评估锥虫药物使用知识、态度和做法以及锥虫感染限制因素的横断面调查。该问卷调查于2018年11月至2019年5月进行。采用描述性统计方法对184名牛主的现场数据进行了汇总。其中来自采采抑制区60人,来自非采采抑制区124人。因此,采采抑制区和非采采抑制区的役用牛和挤奶牛是首选的锥虫药物治疗动物。在采采抑制区和非采采抑制区,分别有79.03%和81.7%的养牛人亲眼目睹自己对病畜进行治疗;这表明兽医和其他动物健康专家在患病动物的药物治疗中几乎没有作用。在采采蝇抑制区,牛主主要使用醋酸迪米那嗪(DA),而在非采采蝇抑制区,牛主同时使用醋酸迪米那嗪和氯异胺(ISM)。采采抑制区和非抑制区分别有83.1%和86.7%的受访者报告使用锥虫药物后治疗失败。此外,来自采采抑制区和非采采抑制区分别有79.61%和86.53%的受访者认为从私人药店购买的药物效果不如从政府兽医诊所购买的药物。此外,受访者透露,DA是最可怕的治疗失败的锥虫药物,尽管牛主非常喜欢。还注意到,无论媒介抑制运动如何,采采抑制地区的治疗频率高于非抑制地区。综上所述,牛主对锥虫药物的依赖程度较高,兽药市场上锥虫药物供应有限,熟练牧民频繁使用和注射锥虫药物,以及牛主对锥虫药物治疗失败的报告可能指出该地区锥虫耐药性问题。因此,应提高畜主对锥虫药物滥用影响的认识,并制定安全的锥虫药物使用政策,以维护现有锥虫药物的有效性。关键词:锥虫病;Trypanocidal药物;采采蝇抑制;南奥莫区;埃塞俄比亚
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Identification of major protozoal enteropathogens causing calf diarrhea in dairy farms in and around Holeta Town, Oromia Special Zone, Ethiopia Biosecurity level assessment in commercial poultry farms of central Ethiopia Isolation and identification of Brucella abortus and B. melitensis in ruminants with a history of abortion: the first report from Eritrea Assessment of community knowledge, attitude, and practice towards rabies and its determinants in Kersa District, East Hararghe Zone, Oromia Region, Ethiopia Dairy village: the role of veterinary services in unlocking dairy industry potential through assisted reproductive technologies
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1