Research Article
Antimicrobial Usage in Smallholder Poultry Production in Nigeria
Table 4
Distribution of treatment methods available to farmers.
| | Characteristics | Location | Total N = 350 | χ 2 (df) | value | | Kebbi n = 70 | Nasarawa n = 70 | Rivers n = 70 | Kwara n = 70 | Imo n = 70 |
| | Treatment of chickens | | | | | | | | | | Traditional | 5 (3.6) | 29 (21.0) | 44 (32.0) | 42 (30.4) | 18 (13.0) | 138 | 216.86 (8) | ≤ 0.001 | | Western | 60 (68.2) | 1 (1.1) | 0 (0.0) | 15 (17.1) | 12 (13.6) | 88 | | Traditional and western | 5 (4.0) | 40 (32.3) | 26 (21.0) | 13 (10.5) | 40 (32.2) | 124 |
| | Traditional method | | | n = 5 | n = 29 | n = 44 | n = 42 | n = 18 | N = 138 | | | | Primary reason for only using traditional method | | | | | | | | | | Easily administered | 0 (0.0) | 8 (36.4) | 4 (18.2) | 10 (45.4) | 0 (0.0) | 22 | 50.35 (16) | ≤ 0.001 | | Availability/accessibility | 5 (12.5) | 7 (17.5) | 8 (20.0) | 9 (22.5) | 11 (27.5) | 40 | | Not costly | 0 (0.0) | 10 (18.9) | 19 (35.8) | 17 (32.1) | 7 (13.2) | 53 | | Very effective | 0 (0.0) | 1 (5.3) | 13 (68.4) | 5 (26.3) | 0 (0.0) | 19 | | Safe to birds, humans and the environment | 0 (0.0) | 3 (75.0) | 0 (0.0) | 1 (25.0) | 0 (0.0) | 4 |
| | Secondary reason | | | | | | | | | | Easily administered | 0 (0.0) | 3 (12.5) | 14 (58.3) | 4 (16.7) | 3 (12.5) | 24 | 51.95 (12) | ≤ 0.001 | | Availability/accessibility | 0 (0.0) | 20 (33.9) | 11 (18.6) | 22 (37.3) | 6 (10.2) | 59 | | Not costly | 5 (15.6) | 4 (12.5) | 4 (12.5) | 12 (37.5) | 7 (21.9) | 32 | | Very effective | 0 (0.0) | 2 (8.7) | 15 (65.2) | 4 (17.4) | 2 (8.7) | 23 | | Safe to birds, humans and the environment | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) | 0 |
|
|
values in parenthesis are percentages (%).
|
