| pubmed-article:16899706 | rdf:type | pubmed:Citation | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:16899706 | lifeskim:mentions | umls-concept:C0038172 | lld:lifeskim |
| pubmed-article:16899706 | lifeskim:mentions | umls-concept:C0579233 | lld:lifeskim |
| pubmed-article:16899706 | lifeskim:mentions | umls-concept:C0222632 | lld:lifeskim |
| pubmed-article:16899706 | lifeskim:mentions | umls-concept:C0012682 | lld:lifeskim |
| pubmed-article:16899706 | lifeskim:mentions | umls-concept:C0020281 | lld:lifeskim |
| pubmed-article:16899706 | pubmed:issue | 9 | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:16899706 | pubmed:dateCreated | 2006-8-10 | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:16899706 | pubmed:abstractText | An experimental teat dip containing 0.5% hydrogen peroxide as the active ingredient was compared with a teat disinfectant also containing 0.5% hydrogen peroxide that is commercially available throughout North America. The study was conducted under conditions of experimental challenge with a positive control following the guidelines recommended by the National Mastitis Council. The efficacy of the test product and the positive control product were compared in 45 cows, with 89 total teats receiving each product after milking during a 10-wk study period. There was no significant difference between the experimental hydrogen peroxide product and the positive control in new intramammary infections caused by Staphylococcus aureus (27.0 and 18.0% in the treatment groups, respectively). Additionally, there was no significant difference between the experimental product (6.7%) and the positive control groups (4.5%) in new intramammary infections caused by Streptococcus agalactiae. Traditional analysis of teat skin condition changes supported improved teat skin condition with the test disinfectant. After accounting for the correlation of teats within cow, significant differences were also observed between the treatment groups for teat skin condition. The experimental hydrogen peroxide-based teat disinfectant provided efficacy similar to that of the positive control teat disinfectant, with significant improvement in teat skin condition and no adverse effects on teat end condition. | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:16899706 | pubmed:language | eng | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:16899706 | pubmed:journal | http://linkedlifedata.com/r... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:16899706 | pubmed:citationSubset | IM | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:16899706 | pubmed:chemical | http://linkedlifedata.com/r... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:16899706 | pubmed:chemical | http://linkedlifedata.com/r... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:16899706 | pubmed:status | MEDLINE | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:16899706 | pubmed:month | Sep | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:16899706 | pubmed:issn | 1525-3198 | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:16899706 | pubmed:author | pubmed-author:LeslieK EKE | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:16899706 | pubmed:author | pubmed-author:BashiriAA | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:16899706 | pubmed:author | pubmed-author:DingwellR TRT | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:16899706 | pubmed:author | pubmed-author:VernooyEE | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:16899706 | pubmed:issnType | Electronic | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:16899706 | pubmed:volume | 89 | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:16899706 | pubmed:owner | NLM | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:16899706 | pubmed:authorsComplete | Y | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:16899706 | pubmed:pagination | 3696-701 | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:16899706 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:16899706... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:16899706 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:16899706... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:16899706 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:16899706... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:16899706 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:16899706... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:16899706 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:16899706... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:16899706 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:16899706... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:16899706 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:16899706... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:16899706 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:16899706... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:16899706 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:16899706... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:16899706 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:16899706... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:16899706 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:16899706... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:16899706 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:16899706... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:16899706 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:16899706... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:16899706 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:16899706... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:16899706 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:16899706... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:16899706 | pubmed:year | 2006 | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:16899706 | pubmed:articleTitle | Efficacy of two hydrogen peroxide teat disinfectants against Staphylococcus aureus and Streptococcus agalactiae. | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:16899706 | pubmed:affiliation | Department of Population Medicine, Ontario Veterinary College, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario N1G 2W1. keleslie@ovc.uoguelph.ca | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:16899706 | pubmed:publicationType | Journal Article | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:16899706 | pubmed:publicationType | Comparative Study | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:16899706 | pubmed:publicationType | Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't | lld:pubmed |
