Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

Comparative efficacy of teat sealants given prepartum for prevention of intramammary infections and clinical mastitis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

  • C. B. Winder (a1), J. M. Sargeant (a1) (a2), D. Hu (a3), C. Wang (a3), D. F. Kelton (a1), S. J. Leblanc (a1), T. F. Duffield (a1), J. Glanville (a4), H. Wood (a4), K. J. Churchill (a2), J. Dunn (a2), M. D. Bergevin (a2), K. Dawkins (a2), S. Meadows (a2), B. Deb (a2), M. Reist (a2), C. Moody (a2) and A. M. O'Connor (a3)...

Abstract

A systematic review and network meta-analysis were conducted to assess the relative efficacy of internal or external teat sealants given at dry-off in dairy cattle. Controlled trials were eligible if they assessed the use of internal or external teat sealants, with or without concurrent antimicrobial therapy, compared to no treatment or an alternative treatment, and measured one or more of the following outcomes: incidence of intramammary infection (IMI) at calving, IMI during the first 30 days in milk (DIM), or clinical mastitis during the first 30 DIM. Risk of bias was based on the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0 tool with modified signaling questions. From 2280 initially identified records, 32 trials had data extracted for one or more outcomes. Network meta-analysis was conducted for IMI at calving. Use of an internal teat sealant (bismuth subnitrate) significantly reduced the risk of new IMI at calving compared to non-treated controls (RR = 0.36, 95% CI 0.25–0.72). For comparisons between antimicrobial and teat sealant groups, concerns regarding precision were seen. Synthesis of the primary research identified important challenges related to the comparability of outcomes, replication and connection of interventions, and quality of reporting of study conduct.

  • View HTML
    • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

      Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

      Comparative efficacy of teat sealants given prepartum for prevention of intramammary infections and clinical mastitis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis
      Available formats
      ×

      Send article to Dropbox

      To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      Comparative efficacy of teat sealants given prepartum for prevention of intramammary infections and clinical mastitis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis
      Available formats
      ×

      Send article to Google Drive

      To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      Comparative efficacy of teat sealants given prepartum for prevention of intramammary infections and clinical mastitis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis
      Available formats
      ×

Copyright

This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Corresponding author

Author for correspondence: C. B. Winder, Department of Population Medicine, University of Guelph, 50 Stone Road East, Guelph, Ontario, N1G 2W1, Canada. E-mail: winderc@uoguelph.ca

References

Hide All
Brace, S, Taylor, D and O'Connor, AM (2010) The quality of reporting and publication status of vaccines trials presented at veterinary conferences from 1988 to 2003. Vaccine 28, 53065314.
Burns, MJ and O'Connor, AM (2008) Assessment of methodological quality and sources of variation in the magnitude of vaccine efficacy: a systematic review of studies from 1960 to 2005 reporting immunization with Moraxella bovis vaccines in young cattle. Vaccine 26, 144152.
Caldwell, DM, Ades, AE and Higgins, JP (2005) Simultaneous comparison of multiple treatments: combining direct and indirect evidence. BMJ 331, 897900.
Cipriani, A, Higgins, JP, Geddes, JR and Salanti, G (2013) Conceptual and technical challenges in network meta-analysis. Annals of Internal Medicine 159, 130137.
Dias, S, Welton, NJ, Caldwell, DM and Ades, AE (2010) Checking consistency in mixed treatment comparison meta-analysis. Statistics in Medicine 29, 932944.
Dias, S, Welton, NJ, Sutton, AJ and Ades, AE (2011) NICE DSU Technical Support Document 2: A Generalised Linear Modelling Framework for Pairwise and Network Meta-Analysis of Randomised Controlled Trials. Sheffield: Unit NDS.
Dingwell, RT, Kelton, DF and Leslie, KE (2003) Management of the dry cow in control of peripartum disease and mastitis. Veterinary Clinics of North America: Food Animal Practice 19, 235265.
Egan, KJ, Vesterinen, HM, Beglopoulos, V, Sena, ES and Macleod, MR (2016) From a mouse: systematic analysis reveals limitations of experiments testing interventions in Alzheimer's disease mouse models. Evidence-Based Preclinical Medicine 3, e00015.
Enger, BD, White, RR, Nickerson, SC and Fox, LK (2016) Identification of factors influencing teat dip efficacy trial results by meta-analysis. Journal of Dairy Science 99, 99009911.
Halasa, T, Osteras, O, Hogeveen, H, van Werven, T and Nielen, M (2009) Meta-analysis of dry cow management for dairy cattle. Part 1. Protection against new intramammary infections. Journal of Dairy Science 92, 31343149.
Higgins, JPT, Green, S, Chandler, J, Cumpston, M, Li, T, Page, MJ and Welch, VA (eds) (2011) Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions, Version 6 (updated July 2019). Cochrane, 2019. Available from www.training.cochrane.org/handbook.
Higgins, JPT, Sterne, JA, Savovic, J, Page, MJ, Hróbjartsson, A and Boutron, I (2016) A revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomized trials. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 10(Suppl 1), 2931.
Hu, D, Wang, C and O'Connor, M (2019) A method of computing log odds ratio and its standard error from least square means estimates in generalized linear mixed model. bioRxiv 760942; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/760942 (Accessed Dec 18, 2019)
Hutton, B, Salanti, G, Caldwell, DM, Chaimani, A, Schmid, CH, Cameron, C, Ioannidis, JPA, Straus, S, Thorlund, K, Jansen, JP, Mulrow, C, Catala-Lopez, F, Gotzsche, PC, Dickersin, K, Boutron, I, Altman, D and Moher, D (2015) The PRISMA extension statement for reporting systematic reviews incorporating network meta-analyses of health care interventions: checklist and explanations. Annals of Internal Medicine 162, 777784.
Huxley, JN, Greent, MJ, Green, LE and Bradley, AJ (2002) Evaluation of the efficacy of an internal teat sealer during the dry period. Journal of Dairy Science 85, 551561.
Lam, TJGM, van Engelen, E, Scherpenzeel, CGM and Hage, JJ (2012) Strategies to reduce antibiotic usage in dairy cattle in the Netherlands. Cattle Practice 20, 163171.
Macefield, RC, Jacobs, M, Korfage, IJ, Nicklin, J, Whistance, RN, Brookes, ST, Sprangers, MAG, and Blazeby, JM (2014) Developing core outcomes sets: methods for identifying and including patient-reported outcomes (PROs). Trials 14, 49; doi: 10.1186/1745-6215-15-49.
Moher, D, Shamseer, L, Clarke, M, Ghersi, D, Liberati, A, Petticrew, M, Shekelle, P, Stewart, LA, and PRISMA-P Group. (2015) Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement. Systematic Reviews 4, 1.
Moura, CAA, Totton, SC, Sargeant, JM, O'Sullivan, TL, Linhares, DCL and O'Connor, AM (2019) Evidence of improved reporting of swine intervention trials in the post-REFLECT statement publication period. Journal of Swine Health and Production 27, 265277.
Naqvi, SA, Nobrega, DB, Ronksley, PE and Barkema, HW (2018) Invited review: effectiveness of precalving treatment on postcalving udder health in nulliparous dairy heifers: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Dairy Science 101, 47074728.
O'Connor, AM, Sargeant, JM, Gardner, IA, Dickson, JS, Torrence, ME, Dewey, CE, Dohoo, I, Evans, R, Gray, J, Greiner, M, Keefe, G, Lefebvre, S, Morley, P, Ramirez, A, Sischo, W, Smith, D, Snedeker, K, Sofos, J, Ward, M and Wills, R (2010) The REFLECT statement: methods and processes of creating reporting guidelines for randomized controlled trials for livestock and food safety. Journal of Veterinary Internal Medicine 24, 5764.
O'Connor, AM, Coetzee, JF, da Silva, N and Wang, C (2013) A mixed treatment comparison meta-analysis of antibiotic treatments for bovine respiratory disease. Preventative Veterinary Medicine 110, 7787.
O'Connor, AM, Anderson, KM, Goodell, CK and Sargeant, JM (2014 a) Conducting systematic reviews of intervention questions I: writing the review protocol, formulating the question and searching the literature. Zoonoses and Public Health 61(Suppl 1), 2838.
O'Connor, AM, Sargeant, JM and Wang, C (2014 b) Conducting systematic reviews of intervention questions III: synthesizing data from intervention studies using meta-analysis. Zoonoses and Public Health 61(Suppl 1), 5263.
Pereira, UP, Oliveira, DG, Mesquita, LR, Costa, GM and Pereira, LJ (2011) Efficacy of staphylococcus aureus vaccines for bovine mastitis: a systematic review. Veterinary Microbiology 148, 117124.
Piepers, S, De Vliegher, S, de Kruif, A, Opsomer, G and Barkema, HW (2009) Impact of intramammary infections in dairy heifers on future udder health, milk production, and culling. Veterinary Microbiology 134, 113120.
Plummer, M (2015) Rjags: Bayesian Graphical Models using MCMC. R package version 3–15. 855. Available at http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=rjags (Accessed 28 November 2019).
R Core Team (2018) R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Worldwide: The R foundation for statistical computing. Vienna: Austria, Available at https://www.r-project.org/ (Accessed 18 April 2019).
Rabiee, AR and Lean, IJ (2013) The effect of internal teat sealant products (teatseal and orbeseal) on intramammary infection, clinical mastitis, and somatic cell counts in lactating dairy cows: a meta-analysis. Journal of Dairy Science 96, 69156931.
Reyher, KK, Haine, D, Dohoo, IR and Revie, CW (2012) Examining the effect of intramammary infections with minor mastitis pathogens on the acquisition of new intramammary infections with major mastitis pathogens-a systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Dairy Science 95, 64836502.
Robert, A, Seegers, H and Bareille, N (2006) Incidence of intramammary infections during the dry period without or with antibiotic treatment in dairy cows – a quantitative analysis of published data. Veterinary Research 37, 2548.
Roy, JP and Keefe, G (2012) Systematic review: what is the best antibiotic treatment for staphylococcus aureus intramammary infection of lactating cows in North America? Veterinary Clinics of North America: Food Animal Practice 28, 3950.
Sargeant, JM and O'Connor, AM (2014 a) Introduction to systematic reviews in animal agriculture and veterinary medicine. Zoonoses and Public Health 61(Suppl 1), 39.
Sargeant, JM and O'Connor, AM (2014 b) Conducting systematic reviews of intervention questions II: relevance screening, data extraction, assessing risk of bias, presenting the results and interpreting the findings. Zoonoses and Public Health 61(Suppl 1), 3951.
Sargeant, JM, Elgie, R, Valcour, J, Saint-Onge, J, Thompson, A, Marcynuk, P and Snedeker, K (2009) Methodological quality and completeness of reporting in clinical trials conducted in livestock species. Preventative Veterinary Medicine 91, 107115.
Sargeant, JM, O'Connor, AM, Gardner, IA, Dickson, JS, Torrence, ME and Consensus Meeting Participants (2010). The REFLECT statement: reporting guidelines for randomized controlled trials in livestock and food safety: explanation and elaboration. Zoonoses and Public Health 57, 105136.
Sargeant, JM, Kelton, DF and O'Connor, AM (2014) Study designs and systematic reviews of interventions: building evidence across study designs. Zoonoses and Public Health 61(Suppl 1), 1017.
Sterne, JAC, Gavaghan, D and Egger, M (2000) Publication and related bias in meta-analysis: power of statistical tests and prevalence in the literature. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 53, 11191129.
Totton, SC, Cullen, JN, Sargeant, JM and O'Connor, AM (2018) The reporting characteristics of bovine respiratory disease clinical intervention trials published prior to and following publication of the REFLECT statement. Preventative Veterinary Medicine 150, 117125.
United States Department of Agriculture (2008) Antibiotic use on U.S. Dairy Operations, 2002 and 2007. Riverdale: United States Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service. Available at https://www.aphis.usda.gov/animal_health/nahms/dairy/downloads/dairy07/Dairy07_is_AntibioticUse.pdf (Accessed 18 April 2019).
van Knegsel, AT, van der Drift, SG, Cermakova, J and Kemp, B (2013) Effects of shortening the dry period of dairy cows on milk production, energy balance, health, and fertility: a systematic review. The Veterinary Journal 198, 707713.
Viechtbauer, W (2010) Conducting meta-analyses in R with the metafor package. Journal of Statistical Software 36, 148.
Williamson, PR, Altman, DG, Blazeby, JM, Clarke, M, Devane, D, Gargon, E, et al. (2012) Developing core outcome sets for clinical trials: issues to consider. Trials 13, 132; doi: 10.1186/1745-6215-13-132.
Winder, CB, Churchill, KJ, Sargeant, JM, LeBlanc, SJ, O'Connor, AM and Renaud, DL (2019) Invited review: completeness of reporting of experiments: reflecting on a year of animal trials in the journal of dairy science. Journal of Dairy Science 102, 47594771.
World Health Organisation (2015). Global Action Plan on Antimicrobial Resistance. Geneva: World Health Organisation. Available at http://www.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/193736/1/9789241509763_eng.pdf?ua= (Accessed 18 April 2019).
World Organization for Animal Health (2007). OIE list of Antimicrobials of Veterinary Importance. Paris: World Organisation for Animal Health. Available at https://www.oie.int/scientific-expertise/veterinary-products/antimicrobials/ (Accessed 18 April 2019).

Keywords

Type Description Title
UNKNOWN
Supplementary materials

Winder et al. supplementary material
Winder et al. supplementary material

 Unknown (481 KB)
481 KB

Comparative efficacy of teat sealants given prepartum for prevention of intramammary infections and clinical mastitis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

  • C. B. Winder (a1), J. M. Sargeant (a1) (a2), D. Hu (a3), C. Wang (a3), D. F. Kelton (a1), S. J. Leblanc (a1), T. F. Duffield (a1), J. Glanville (a4), H. Wood (a4), K. J. Churchill (a2), J. Dunn (a2), M. D. Bergevin (a2), K. Dawkins (a2), S. Meadows (a2), B. Deb (a2), M. Reist (a2), C. Moody (a2) and A. M. O'Connor (a3)...

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed