IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0087147.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Sampling Strategies in Antimicrobial Resistance Monitoring: Evaluating How Precision and Sensitivity Vary with the Number of Animals Sampled per Farm

Author

Listed:
  • Takehisa Yamamoto
  • Yoko Hayama
  • Arata Hidano
  • Sota Kobayashi
  • Norihiko Muroga
  • Kiyoyasu Ishikawa
  • Aki Ogura
  • Toshiyuki Tsutsui

Abstract

Because antimicrobial resistance in food-producing animals is a major public health concern, many countries have implemented antimicrobial monitoring systems at a national level. When designing a sampling scheme for antimicrobial resistance monitoring, it is necessary to consider both cost effectiveness and statistical plausibility. In this study, we examined how sampling scheme precision and sensitivity can vary with the number of animals sampled from each farm, while keeping the overall sample size constant to avoid additional sampling costs. Five sampling strategies were investigated. These employed 1, 2, 3, 4 or 6 animal samples per farm, with a total of 12 animals sampled in each strategy. A total of 1,500 Escherichia coli isolates from 300 fattening pigs on 30 farms were tested for resistance against 12 antimicrobials. The performance of each sampling strategy was evaluated by bootstrap resampling from the observational data. In the bootstrapping procedure, farms, animals, and isolates were selected randomly with replacement, and a total of 10,000 replications were conducted. For each antimicrobial, we observed that the standard deviation and 2.5–97.5 percentile interval of resistance prevalence were smallest in the sampling strategy that employed 1 animal per farm. The proportion of bootstrap samples that included at least 1 isolate with resistance was also evaluated as an indicator of the sensitivity of the sampling strategy to previously unidentified antimicrobial resistance. The proportion was greatest with 1 sample per farm and decreased with larger samples per farm. We concluded that when the total number of samples is pre-specified, the most precise and sensitive sampling strategy involves collecting 1 sample per farm.

Suggested Citation

  • Takehisa Yamamoto & Yoko Hayama & Arata Hidano & Sota Kobayashi & Norihiko Muroga & Kiyoyasu Ishikawa & Aki Ogura & Toshiyuki Tsutsui, 2014. "Sampling Strategies in Antimicrobial Resistance Monitoring: Evaluating How Precision and Sensitivity Vary with the Number of Animals Sampled per Farm," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(1), pages 1-5, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0087147
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0087147
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0087147
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0087147&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0087147?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0087147. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.