One Health: Lessons Learned from East Africa

The development and validation of the One Health Community Assessment

Interdisciplinary collaborations to address human, animal, and environmental health have been emphasized since the inception of the One Health framework. A quantitative survey instrument was developed to measure perceptions of the impacts of pets on One Health. Using the exploratory sequential mixed methods approach, 20 interviews were conducted with individuals from a racially diverse and low-socioeconomic status community in the U.S. to understand their perceptions of One Health. Data from those interviews informed the development of a Likert scale survey measuring individual perceptions of community, human, pet, and environmental health and welfare, as well as the connections between the domains of the One Health triad (human, animal, and environment). The resulting One Health Community Assessment (OHCA) was administered in two urban and two rural underserved U.S. communities longitudinally (2018-2021) through door-to-door data collection as well as phone, email, and text surveys. Validation of the instrument was completed using data collected in the third and fourth years of the study (n = 654). Factor analysis with orthogonal varimax rotation was used to assess the structure and internal consistency of the OHCA. Five subscales explained 42.4% of the variance in our 92-item instrument: community health (Cronbach's α = 0.897), human health (α = 0.842), pet health (α = 0.899), environmental health (α = 0.789), and connections between domains of One Health (α = 0.762). The OHCA represents the first reliable and validated instrument to measure the impacts of pets on One Health.

Knowledge, perceptions, and practices around zoonotic diseases among actors in the livestock trade in the Lake Victoria crescent ecosystem in East Africa

Background

Zoonotic diseases such as anthrax, rabies, brucellosis, and Rift Valley fever pose a direct threat to health and undercut livelihoods in the communities in which they occur. A combination of anthropogenic and animal activities like migration and interaction with wildlife and their respective parasites and vectors drives the emergence and re-emergence of zoonotic diseases. Consequently, One Health interdisciplinary approaches that incorporate social scientists can provide key insights into complex local perceptions. The approach calls for collaboration between the human and animal health sectors, including the sharing of disease surveillance data necessary to alleviate disease impacts. Livestock traders interact closely with livestock, which puts them at elevated risk of infection and creates conditions by which they may spread zoonotic disease. It is thus essential to examine practices among actors involved in the livestock trade to understand the most appropriate ways to mitigate these risks.

Methods

A qualitative study was conducted among the actors in the livestock trade in Busia County on their knowledge and perceptions of zoonotic diseases and practices that may contribute to the spread, control, and prevention of zoonotic disease transmission. A thematic analysis framework was used to categorize and synthesize data from in-depth interviews (IDIs), key informant interviews (KIIs), and structured observations.

Results

Whereas participants could list livestock diseases, they could not identify which ones were zoonoses, demonstrating insufficient knowledge of zoonosis. They identify sick animals by checking for dropped ears, excess mucus production, diarrhea, bloody urinal discharge, and general animal activity levels. To prevent the spread of these diseases, they wash their animals, isolate sick animals from the rest of the stock, and vaccinate their animals. They seek help from animal health professionals for sick animals as part of curative practices. This shows that they perceive the diseases as serious and that they need to be attended to by professionals. The results also show that they perceive animals from outside the region to be more vulnerable to diseases compared to those from within. The actors in the livestock trade engage in practices like skinning dead animals before burying them; to them, this is a normal practice. Some also consume dead carcasses. These increase the risk of zoonotic disease transmission.

Conclusion

The actors involved in the livestock trade are critical in the prevention and elimination of zoonotic diseases; hence, they need to be involved when developing intervention programs and policies for animal health extension services. Training them as a continuum of animal health workers blends lay and professional knowledge, which, alongside their intense contact with large numbers of animals, becomes a critical disease surveillance tool. Increasing awareness of zoonoses by using multi-disciplinary teams with social scientists is urgently needed so that practices like skinning dead animals before disposing of them and consumption of dead carcasses can be minimized.

The interfaces between One Health and Global Health: A scoping review

One Health (OH) and Global Health (GH) are interconnected perspectives that may contribute to subsidizing GH policies. This scoping review aims to map the volume, nature, and characteristics of studies focused on the interface of OH and GH concepts. We used PubMed (MEDLINE), Embase, Scopus, and The Virtual Health Library (BVS) as the literature data sources for the review. The search strategy used the descriptors "one health", "one health concept", "one medicine", "global health", "international health", and "planetary health" in title and abstracts. We included original research presented as articles in scientific journals, book chapters or conference papers written in English, Spanish, or Portuguese, exploring the intersections between OH and GH concepts, not necessarily as their primary objectives, and published up to December 31, 2021. A total of 1.060 references were identified in the databases after removing duplicates, 139 publications selected for full-text evaluation and 45 publications were included for analysis. All included publications were published between 2011 and 2021, with the highest concentration in 2014 (22.2%). First authors were most frequently from the United States (35.6%), followed by the United Kingdom (15.6%). Overall, seven key themes were identified zoonosis, emerging infectious diseases, antimicrobial resistance, food safety, policy, human resources, and Sustainable Development Goals (SDG). The majority of the included publications employed OH concepts based on the United States Centre for Disease Control and Prevention, and the American Veterinary Medical Association definitions. We observed a common understanding of OH as an area of knowledge involving multiple disciplines and professionals and recognizing that both humans' and animals' health and the environment are interdependent. Although most authors demonstrated that health issues transcend national boundaries, a formal definition for GH was frequently not clearly identified. OH and GH interfaces are essential for accomplishing the 2030 Agenda and its SDG.

Synergising tools for capacity assessment and One Health operationalisation

Multisectoral, One Health collaboration is essential for addressing national and international health threats that arise at the human-animal-environment interface. Thanks to the efforts of multiple organisations, countries now have an array of One Health tools available to assess capacities within and between sectors, plan and prioritise activities, and strengthen multisectoral, One Health coordination, communication, and collaboration. By doing so, they are able to address health threats at the human-animal-environment interface, including emerging zoonotic and infectious diseases, more efficiently. However, to ensure optimal outcomes for the countries using these One Health tools, the partners responsible for implementation should regularly collaborate and share information such as implementation timelines, results and lessons learned, so that one process can inform the next. This paper presents a consensus framework on how commonly implemented One Health tools might align to best support countries in strengthening One Health systems. Twelve One Health tools were selected based on their high implementation rates, authors' experience with these tools and their focus on multisectoral, One Health coordination. Through a four-step process, the authors: a) jointly carried out a landscape analysis of One Health tools, using a Cloudbased spreadsheet to share the unique characteristics and applications of each tool; b) performed an implementation analysis to identify and share implementation dynamics and identify respective outcomes and synergies; c) jointly created a consensus conceptual model of how the authors suggest the tools might logically work together; and d) extrapolated from steps 1-3 an agreed-upon overarching conceptual framework for how current and future One Health tools could be categorised to best support One Health system strengthening at the national level. Highlighted One Health tools include the States Parties Annual Reporting Tool under the International Health Regulations (IHR), the World Organisation for Animal Health Performance of Veterinary Services (PVS) Pathway, the Joint External Evaluation process, IHR/PVS National Bridging Workshops, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention One Health Zoonotic Disease Prioritization Tool, the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) Laboratory Mapping Tool, the FAO Assessment Tool for Laboratories and Antimicrobial Resistance Surveillance Systems, the FAO Surveillance Evaluation Tool, the One Health Systems Mapping and Analysis Resource Toolkit, the National Action Plan for Health Security, and IHR Monitoring and Evaluation Framework tools for After Action Reviews and Simulation Exercises. A new guidance document entitled, Taking a Multisectoral, One Health Approach: A Tripartite Guide to Addressing Zoonotic Diseases in Countries was also included as a framework that provides guidance to support the implementation of the outputs of the tools described.

Engaging research with policy and action: what are the challenges of responding to zoonotic disease in Africa?

Zoonotic diseases will maintain a high level of public policy attention in the coming decades. From the spectre of a global pandemic to anxieties over agricultural change, urbanization, social inequality and threats to natural ecosystems, effectively preparing and responding to endemic and emerging diseases will require technological, institutional and social innovation. Much current discussion emphasizes the need for a 'One Health' approach: bridging disciplines and sectors to tackle these complex dynamics. However, as attention has increased, so too has an appreciation of the practical challenges in linking multi-disciplinary, multi-sectoral research with policy, action and impact. In this commentary paper, we reflect on these issues with particular reference to the African sub-continent. We structure the themes of our analysis on the existing literature, expert opinion and 11 interviews with leading One Health scholars and practitioners, conducted at an international symposium in 2016. We highlight a variety of challenges in research and knowledge production, in the difficult terrain of implementation and outreach, and in the politicized nature of decision-making and priority setting. We then turn our attention to a number of strategies that might help reconfigure current pathways and accepted norms of practice. These include: (i) challenging scientific expertise; (ii) strengthening national multi-sectoral coordination; (iii) building on what works; and (iv) re-framing policy narratives. We argue that bridging the research-policy-action interface in Africa, and better connecting zoonoses, ecosystems and well-being in the twenty-first century, will ultimately require greater attention to the democratization of science and public policy.This article is part of the themed issue 'One Health for a changing world: zoonoses, ecosystems and human well-being'.

One Health capacity building in sub-Saharan Africa

BACKGROUND

Africa of late has been faced with challenges that require a multidisciplinary and multisectoral approach to address them, and academic and non-academic institutions have played a key role in training and conducting research that would promote the One Health approach.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this review was to document networks and organizations conducting One Health training, research, and outreach in Africa, as one of a series of articles around the world.

METHODS

Data for this review were collected from organizations through key contacts of the authors and their knowledge of networks they have worked with. Web searches were conducted using One Health, training, and research as key words for work done in Africa.

RESULTS

Africa has major networks involved in One Health training, research, and outreach, with participation of both academic and non-academic institutions. This review highlights an effort in Africa to form networks to conduct multidisciplinary training and research. The main networks include Afrique One, Southern African Centre for Infectious Disease Surveillance (SACIDS), and One Health Central and Eastern Africa (OHCEA).

CONCLUSIONS

Both academic and non-academic institutions and organizations have shown an interest to conduct multidisciplinary training and research in Africa for managing challenges that Africa is facing currently, especially the outbreak of infectious diseases.