Dataset Information

Exploring Barriers to One Health Antimicrobial Stewardship in Sri Lanka: A Qualitative Study among Healthcare Professionals.

ABSTRACT: Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a global health threat, but little is known about the perceptions regarding antimicrobials and AMR among healthcare professionals in Sri Lanka. This research aimed to take a One Health approach to explore the knowledge, attitudes and perceptions of antibiotic stewardship and AMR among healthcare professionals in Sri Lanka. A qualitative study, using telephone interviews, allowing for an in-depth exploration of attitudes, beliefs and perspectives was conducted. Healthcare professionals from both the medical and veterinary sectors were included (n = 29). Interviews were conducted by an independent interviewer and were audio-recorded and transcribed. Conventional qualitative content analysis was undertaken. Four main categories were identified: (1) understanding of AMR and observing AMR, (2) barriers to antimicrobial stewardship, (3) personal factors in, and as a result of, inappropriate antibiotic usage and (4) how to tackle AMR. Healthcare professionals showed poor awareness regarding the spread of AMR and identified inappropriate prescribing behaviours by their inter- and intra-professional colleagues. Patient demands and the influence of pharmaceutical companies were factors contributing to poor prescribing behaviour. Suggestions for the future are stricter regulation of AMR control policy, effective government involvement, and awareness campaigns for healthcare professionals and the public.

SUBMITTER: Gunasekara YD

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9311535 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background The COVID-19 pandemic is a serious global health concern, posing a greater risk of psychological vulnerabilities for frontline healthcare workers (HCWs), military professionals and the general public around the globe. These psychological issues appear to be long lasting and heighten the risk of mental health disorders. Therefore, this study aimed to identify psychological problems encountered by HCWs, military professionals, and the general public in Sri Lanka during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods A descriptive cross-sectional study was undertaken with 367 participants, including frontline HCWs (n = 128), military professionals (n = 102), and the general public (n = 137). Depression and anxiety were assessed using the Peradeniya Depression Scale (PDS) and the Generalized Anxiety Disorder scale (GAD-7), respectively. Results Mean (± SD) age of the participants was 35.0 (± 10.6) years. A reasonable proportion of participants experienced depressive symptoms (39.25%, n = 144) and severe anxiety (12.8%, n = 47). Military professionals showed depressive symptoms (73.50%, n = 75) and severe anxiety (32.4%, n = 33) predominantly. Multivariate binary logistic regression revealed that only the level of education and professional engagement affected depressive symptoms and severe anxiety (p < 0.01). Having a high level of education was a protective factor for depressive symptoms (Adjusted OR = 0.34) compared to lower-level education, while being a HCW (Adjusted OR = 4.40) and military professional (Adjusted OR = 5.43) were identified as risk factors for depressive symptoms compared to the general public. Similarly, having a high level of education was a protective factor for severe anxiety (Adjusted OR = 0.29) compared to lower-level education, while being a HCW (Adjusted OR = 3.90) and military professional (Adjusted OR = 4.52) were identified as risk factors for severe anxiety compared to the general public. Conclusion The current study revealed a greater level of anxiety and depressive symptoms among frontline HCWs and military professionals in Sri Lanka during the pandemic of COVID-19 compared to the general public. Therefore, providing psychological first aid for them to better deal with mental problems and an emergency preparedness plan to deal with sudden outbreaks of infectious situations are important. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12888-023-04918-2.

Project description: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.

Dataset Information

Exploring Barriers to One Health Antimicrobial Stewardship in Sri Lanka: A Qualitative Study among Healthcare Professionals.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets