Dataset Information

Shared Goals, Different Barriers: A Qualitative Study of UK Veterinarians' and Farmers' Beliefs About Antimicrobial Resistance and Stewardship.

ABSTRACT: Although much research has investigated the drivers of inappropriate antimicrobial prescribing in human medicine, equivalent research in veterinary medicine is in its infancy. This qualitative study used a critical incident approach to explore farm veterinarians' (vets) and farmers' beliefs about antimicrobial use and antimicrobial stewardship. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 13 vets and 12 farmers in the UK, who worked mostly with beef cattle, dairy cattle and sheep, but a minority also worked with pigs or poultry. An inductive thematic analysis was conducted to explore how vets and farmers understood their responsibilities toward stewardship and antimicrobial resistance (AMR) and to identify key similarities and differences between the professions. The analysis generated four themes: "A shared conflict between ideals and behaviour," "Barriers to stewardship: the vets' perspective," "Barriers to stewardship: the farmers' perspective," and "A shared ambivalence: ownership vs. other-blaming." Vets and farmers demonstrated good understanding of stewardship but their treatment decisions are not always aligned to stewardship principles. Various barriers to improving antimicrobial stewardship were discussed by vets and farmers, but they placed differing emphasis on specific barriers. Faced with these barriers and an awareness that antimicrobial usage is not always aligned to stewardship principles, vets and farmers expressed frustration and a sense of ambivalence toward stewardship, and also engaged in other-blaming for the problem of AMR. In conclusion, vets and farmers in this study seem motivated to be antimicrobial stewards but feel challenged by the day-to-day reality of their jobs; they experience ambivalence toward their responsibilities for AMR, which may negatively impact their motivation to always act as antimicrobial stewards. Successfully tackling AMR will require change at the individual-, group-, and societal-level. Future interventions to improve antimicrobial usage in livestock farming could be situated within a social ecological framework, where other-blaming between professions is seen as a result of the interplay between psychological and contextual factors. Other-blaming could be reduced using a social identity approach; a common ingroup identity could be created by encouraging vets and farmers to focus on their common goal, namely a shared desire to promote animal welfare through optimal antimicrobial stewardship.

SUBMITTER: Golding SE

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6494936 | biostudies-literature | 2019

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Shared Goals, Different Barriers: A Qualitative Study of UK Veterinarians' and Farmers' Beliefs About Antimicrobial Resistance and Stewardship.

Golding Sarah E SE Ogden Jane J Higgins Helen M HM

Frontiers in veterinary science 20190425

Although much research has investigated the drivers of inappropriate antimicrobial prescribing in human medicine, equivalent research in veterinary medicine is in its infancy. This qualitative study used a critical incident approach to explore farm veterinarians' (vets) and farmers' beliefs about antimicrobial use and antimicrobial stewardship. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 13 vets and 12 farmers in the UK, who worked mostly with beef cattle, dairy cattle and sheep, but a minori ...[more]

PMID: 31106216

Similar Datasets

Project description:It is economically essential, but challenging, for dairy farmers to manage bovine fertility. Vets can help farmers to improve fertility, and this is cost-effective bringing benefits for production, animal health and welfare, and the environment. However, the extent to which vets are involved in fertility varies considerably between farms, for reasons that are unclear. This study investigated the motivators and barriers that vets perceive when trying to increase their involvement with fertility management on UK dairy farms. Interviews were conducted with 20 vets and four themes identified. The first, "clinical baggage," highlighted vets' disillusionment due to past experiences of low uptake of their advice by farmers. Consequently, some vets made assumptions about farmer needs and behaviours, and exhibited ageist stereotyping. These issues, along with concerns and fatigue associated with repeatedly offering the same advice which was not acted upon, negatively influenced vets' engagement with farmers. The second theme "stuck in the comfort zone" revealed a loss of enthusiasm by some senior vets, whilst others lacked confidence to engage due to perceived gaps in their knowledge. Vets also reported farmers not perceiving their problems and lack of farm data or facilities, as barriers. The "vet-farmer relationship" theme highlighted building trust and developing strong relationships which were key drivers for vets to proactively engage and to "go the extra mile" for their clients. The final theme "money matters" explored vets' motivations to improve their clients' profitability and included the future sustainability of their own businesses. Our themes provide useful insight into the challenges vets face and provide key areas that can be targeted in future interventions to improve veterinary involvement in fertility management. For example, post-graduate training and support for vets needs to consider factors such as reflection, mentorship, stereotyping, relationships, communication, and leadership skills. This type of postgraduate support is currently limited for vets and requires investment from stakeholders if improvements in production, animal health and welfare, and the environment are to be achieved. Our findings are informative for facilitating veterinary involvement in any disease context, and are relevant for stakeholders including governments, educators, charities, farmer representatives, environmentalists, and veterinary leaders.

Project description:BackgroundRapid molecular diagnostic tests to investigate the microbial aetiology of pneumonias may improve treatment and antimicrobial stewardship in intensive care units (ICUs). Clinicians' endorsement and uptake of these tests is crucial to maximise engagement; however, adoption may be impeded if users harbour unaddressed concerns or if device usage is incompatible with local practice. Accordingly, we strove to identify ICU clinicians' beliefs about molecular diagnostic tests for pneumonias before implementation at the point-of-care.MethodsWe conducted semi-structured interviews with 35 critical care doctors working in four ICUs in the United Kingdom. A clinical vignette depicting a fictitious patient with signs of pneumonia was used to explore clinicians' beliefs about the importance of molecular diagnostics and their concerns. Data were analysed thematically.ResultsClinicians' beliefs about molecular tests could be grouped into two categories: perceived potential of molecular diagnostics to improve antibiotic prescribing (Molecular Diagnostic Necessity) and concerns about how the test results could be implemented into practice (Molecular Diagnostic Concerns). Molecular Diagnostic Necessity stemmed from beliefs that positive results would facilitate targeted antimicrobial therapy; that negative results would signal the absence of a pathogen, and consequently that having the molecular diagnostic results would bolster clinicians' prescribing confidence. Molecular Diagnostic Concerns included unfamiliarity with the device's capabilities, worry that it would detect non-pathogenic bacteria, uncertainty whether it would fail to detect pathogens, and discomfort with withholding antibiotics until receiving molecular test results.ConclusionsClinicians believed rapid molecular diagnostics for pneumonias were potentially important and were open to using them; however, they harboured concerns about the tests' capabilities and integration into clinical practice. Implementation strategies should bolster users' necessity beliefs while reducing their concerns; this can be accomplished by publicising the tests' purpose and benefits, identifying and addressing clinicians' misconceptions, establishing a trial period for first-hand familiarisation, and emphasising that, with a swift (e.g., 60-90 min) test, antibiotics can be started and refined after molecular diagnostic results become available.

Project description:BackgroundAntimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a global public health threat. The indiscriminate use of antibiotics in the animal health sector contributes to increasing rates of AMR and studies involving dairy farmers in India have found knowledge levels regarding antibiotics and AMR to be very low. The purpose of this study was to assess different methods to raise awareness and knowledge about AMR and antibiotic use among dairy farmers, paravets (veterinary assistants), and veterinarians.Materials and methodsThe study was conducted in September-December of 2018 in some parts of Haryana, Assam, Karnataka, and West Bengal. It had two parts: an intervention meeting (September-October 2018) which consisted of focus group discussions (FGD) with farmers, key informant interviews (KII) with veterinary professionals along with distribution of information packages, and then a follow-up survey (November-December 2018). The villages were randomly allocated to either one of the four intervention approaches (1-FGD/KII and information package on AMR; 2-FGD/KI and information on animal health; 3- FGD/KII and information package on animal health plus information on AMR; or 4- only the FGD/KII). A follow-up survey was done to assess the effect of interventions.ResultsIn total, 274 dairy farmers and 51 veterinary professionals (21 veterinarians and 30 paravets) participated in the follow-up survey. Many of the farmers and veterinary professionals who participated in the follow-up survey had been part of the intervention meetings. The average knowledge score of farmers was 7.8. It was found that the knowledge score was higher amongst farmers who had participated in the intervention meetings (p < 0.05), had received intervention approach 2 (p = 0.03) or approach 3 (p = 0.01), and amongst female farmers (p = 0.03) compared to male. The veterinary professionals had good knowledge but lacked interest in training the farmers about antimicrobial resistance.ConclusionOur research demonstrated that a higher percentage of farmers and veterinary professionals who attended the intervention meeting had improved knowledge. Dairy farmers should be regularly educated on antibiotic usage and how to avoid misusing them. Also, veterinary experts should be provided with tools and strategies to educate farmers on the use of antimicrobials.

Dataset Information

Shared Goals, Different Barriers: A Qualitative Study of UK Veterinarians' and Farmers' Beliefs About Antimicrobial Resistance and Stewardship.

Publications

Shared Goals, Different Barriers: A Qualitative Study of UK Veterinarians' and Farmers' Beliefs About Antimicrobial Resistance and Stewardship.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets