Evidence Hub

To seal or not to seal following an antimicrobial infusion at dry-off? A systematic review and multivariate meta-analysis of the incidence and prevalence of intramammary infections post-calving in dairy cows

Afifi M, Stryhn H, Sanchez J, Heider LC, Kabera F, Roy JP, Godden S, Dufour S

Preventive veterinary medicine, 2023

10 participants

Abstract

Teat sealants (TSs) consist of sterile formulations with no antibacterial activity. Alone or in combination with antimicrobial (AM) or non-AM treatments, TSs have been commonly used in dairy cows at dry-off to prevent intra-mammary infections (IMIs) during the dry period. This study aimed to identify and synthesise the available evidence on the efficacy of combining TSs with AM treatments on the incidence and prevalence of IMIs. A comprehensive search of three electronic databases, two relevant conference proceedings, and reference lists of reviews and eligible articles was conducted to retrieve and identify studies that could answer the following question: in dairy cows, how does the efficacy of an AM-TS combination administered at dry-off compare with an AM alone for preventing new IMI? In addition to the general IMIs, bacterial species-specific data were extracted and combined into nine distinct pathogen groups: coagulase-positive and negative staphylococci; S. dysgalactiae; non-dysgalactiae Streptococci; E. coli; non-E. coli Enterobacteriaceae; Corynebacterium spp.; yeast and other frequent mastitis pathogens. The structural relationship between each study's prevalence and incidence, as the new (incidence) and persistent (uncured) infections make up the prevalence, was utilised to approximate a variance-covariance matrix for the within-study correlation between their study-specific log odds ratios (ORs). A bivariate random-effects meta-analysis was employed, utilising…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in animal, not in people. Its evidence level is 5 of 5 (Very low · case / narrative / animal / in vitro / in silico). Case reports, narrative reviews, and animal, cell or computer-model studies give the weakest evidence for human health. Reported size: 10 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free