Poultry vaccines available on the Polish market after the harmonization of pharmaceutical code according to EU legislation - analysis of trends at domestic versus global scale

• Autorzy: Cybulski W. , Pasik K. , Krasucka D. , Lysiak E. , Mitura A. , Klimowicz A. , Tomczyk G. , Pietron W.
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

Poland’s accession to the European Union (EU) has entailed the implementation of mutual recognition procedures for the authorization of immunological veterinary medicinal products (IVMPs) since 2009. The aim of the study was to analyse data on the assortment and number of doses in the batches of vaccines for poultry authorized on the Polish market in 2010. These data, compared with the total output of doses in the same batches of IVMPs manufactured worldwide, revealed trends in the application of poultry vaccines in Poland. The results of the survey indicate that poultry IVMPs were the most important immunologicals on the Polish market in terms of variety and the numbers of doses. The dominant position of poultry IVMPs against viral diseases on the Polish market reflected the global trend. They accounted for 97.98% of all poultry IVMPs, followed by anti-bacterial (1.55%) and anti-parasitic IVMPs (0.47%). The order of the five most popular poultry IVMPs was the same on the Polish market as in the global markets, namely vaccines against IB, IBD, ND, MD and TRT. In contrast, anti-bacterial vaccines against Salmonellosis (SE and ST) took the 8th place in terms of their share of the total number of doses manufactured and sold on the Polish market, whereas the total number of doses manufactured globally situated them at the 15th place. Moreover, the position of some anti-viral vaccines was substantially different in Poland; namely relatively high dose counts in vaccines against MD, TRT, DD and SHS, as opposed to rather low shares of vaccine doses against AE, AP, ILT from what these were on the global market. In conclusion, these differences require thorough analysis and the recognition of trends in supply and demand terms accordingly sustainable vaccination programming. The findings might reveal a gap between immunoprophylaxis guidelines and current immunoprophylaxis needs relevant to epidemiological status of poultry flocks in Poland.

• Wydawca: -
• Czasopismo: Medycyna Weterynaryjna
• Rocznik: 2015
• Tom: 71
• Numer: 05
• Opis fizyczny: p.281-285,fig.,ref.

Twórcy

autor

Cybulski W.

• Department of Pharmacology and Toxicology, National Veterinary Research Institute, Partyzantow 57, 24-100 Pulawy, Poland

autor

Pasik K.

• Department of Veterinary Pharmacy, The National Veterinary Research Institute, Partyzantow 57, 24-100 Pulawy, Poland

autor

Krasucka D.

• Department of Veterinary Pharmacy, The National Veterinary Research Institute, Partyzantow 57, 24-100 Pulawy, Poland

autor

Lysiak E.

• Department of Veterinary Pharmacy, The National Veterinary Research Institute, Partyzantow 57, 24-100 Pulawy, Poland

autor

Mitura A.

• Department of Cattle and Sheep Diseases, National Veterinary Research Institute, Partyzantow 57, 24-100 Pulawy, Poland

autor

Klimowicz A.

• Department of Veterinary Pharmacy, National Veterinary Research Institute, Partyzantow 57, 24-100 Pulawy, Poland

autor

Tomczyk G.

• Department of Poultry Diseases, National Veterinary Research Institute, Partyzantow 57, 24-100 Pulawy, Poland

autor

Pietron W.

• Department of Radiobiology, National Veterinary Research Institute, Partyzantow 57, 24-100 Pulawy, Poland

Bibliografia

• 1. Conan A., Goutard F. L., Sorn S., Vong S.: Biosecurity measures for backyard poultry in developing countries: a systematic review. BMC Vet. Res. 2012, 8,240-242.
• 2. East I. J.: Adoption of biosecurity practices in the Australian poultry industries. Australian Vet. J. 2007, 85, 107-112.
• 3. European Parliament Directive 2001/82/EC and the Council of 6 November 2006 on the Community code relating to veterinary medicinal products, 2001.
• 4. Islam A.: Vaccine failure in poultry. Available online: http://en. engormix.com/ MA-poultry-industry/health/articles/vaccines, 2010.
• 5. Fasina F. O., Ali A. M., Yilma J. M., Thieme O., Ankers P.: The cost-benefit of biosecurity measures on infectious diseases in the Egyptian household poultry.Prev. Vet. Med. 2012, 103, 178-191.
• 6. Krasucka D., Cybulski W., Klimowicz A., Dzierżawski A.: Polish market of immunological veterinary medicine products for cattle and small ruminants in 2008-2009. Proceedings of symposium on health management in cattle herds.Wydawnictwo Wspólnota Polska, Łomża, Poland 2010, p. 27-31.
• 7. Krasucka D., Cybulski W., Klimowicz A., Dzierżawski A.: Polish market of immunological veterinary medicine products for swine in the years 2008 and 2009. Proceedings of symposium on swine health. Magazyn Wet. 2010, 6,638-640.
• 8. Leibler J. H., Otte J., Roland-Holst D., Pfeiffer D. U., Soares M. R., Rushton J., Graham J. P., Silbergeld E. K.: Industrial food animal production and globalhealth risks: exploring the ecosystems and economics of avian influenza.EcoHealth 2009, 6, 58-70.
• 9. Negro-Calduch E., Elfadaly S., Tibbo M., Ankers P., Bailey E.: Assessment of biosecurity practices of small-scale broiler producers in central Egypt. Prev.Vet. Med. 2013, 110, 252-262.
• 10. Nespeca R., Vaillancourt J.-P., Morrow Morgan W. E.: Validation of a poultry biosecurity survey. Prev. Vet. Med. 1997, 3, 73-86.
• 11. Szeleszczuk P., Żbikowski A., Dolka B., Dolka I., Szubstarski J., Sikora W., Barabasz S., Szewczyk R.: Avian Encephalomeylitis (AE) in broiler flocks –ignorance or helplessness? Contemporary problems of avian pathology withemphasis on antimicrobial resistance. Proc. of Conference, Wrocław 2013,p. 107-118.