Fijian Farmers' Attitude and Knowledge Towards Antimicrobial Use and Antimicrobial Resistance in Livestock Production Systems–A Qualitative Study

A qualitative analysis of the unwritten rules influencing antibiotic prescribing practices among French poultry veterinarians

Background

It is now recognized that a better understanding of prescriber behaviour is needed to improve antimicrobial stewardship programmes. Most studies conducted in the livestock sector have focused on farmers' perspectives, while the prescribing habits of veterinarians have remained overlooked.

Objective

Our study explored the psychosocial determinants associated with antibiotic prescribing practices in the French poultry sector by analysing the informal norms and unwritten rules that influence veterinarians' prescribing decisions.

Methods

A qualitative study was conducted in four French regions in February 2021. Using the biographical narrative interpretive method, semi-structured interviews were conducted with 16 poultry veterinarians with varying professional experience. Three main themes were retained for data analysis: (i) compliance with and deviations from prescribing recommendations, (ii) the influence of fellow veterinarians on antibiotic decisions and (iii) the key role of veterinary corporate groups.

Results

When prescribing antibiotics, junior veterinarians were strongly influenced by senior veterinarians who acted as role models driving clinical practices. Prescribing habits were shared through peer networks in which veterinarians participated throughout their careers. Finally, veterinary corporate groups helped to shape veterinarians' prescribing habits by promoting existing guidelines and even producing in-house recommendations.

Conclusions

We show that, in parallel with official guidelines, prescribing habits circulate among veterinarians and are shared in professional circles. Therefore, antimicrobial stewardship interventions should focus not only on official guidelines and communication channels, but also unwritten professional rules and organizations influencing veterinarians' prescribing practices.

Knowledge and practice of antimicrobial usage and resistance among poultry farmers: A systematic review, meta-analysis, and meta-regression

A systematic review was conducted to summarize and synthesize the existing research on poultry farmers' knowledge, practices, and awareness regarding antimicrobial use (AMU) and antimicrobial resistance (AMR). It was undertaken by systematically searching databases, screening and characterizing relevant studies, extracting data, and evaluating the risk of bias. The outcomes were stratified into several subgroups, and pooled prevalence of each subgroup was calculated using a random-effect meta-analysis. Meta-regression was used for selected outcomes to further investigate the potential sources of heterogeneity across studies. Poultry farmers had knowledge and practice gaps on antimicrobial use. While most (65%; 95% CI: 50%-80%) used antimicrobials on poultry for therapeutic purposes, a portion used them to prevent disease (45%; 95% CI: 34%-55%) or boost growth (29%; 95% CI: 13%-46%) and productivity (20%; 95% CI: 6%-34%). 60% (95% CI: 50%-69%) of farmers approached veterinarians for antimicrobial advice, although many consulted drug sellers and fellow farmers. Insufficient antimicrobial residue knowledge (45%; 95% CI: 29%-62%), as well as inadequate awareness and faulty practice on withdrawal periods, were identified. Only 43% (95% CI: 34%-53%) were knowledgeable about AMR. Around half of farmers understood AMR's impacts on poultry, human health, and the environment. Meta-regression demonstrated that the source of heterogeneity for therapeutic antimicrobial use was the type of poultry farmers sampled and their educational qualifications; geographical region was significantly associated with antimicrobial usage based on farmers' experience; and the country's economic state was correlated with farmers' understanding of antimicrobial residue. This study recommends implementing legislation for judicious antimicrobial use, and farmer awareness campaigns to reinforce knowledge about prudent AMU and AMR.

Fijian Veterinarian and Para-Veterinarians' Behavior, Attitude and Knowledge Toward Antimicrobial Use and Antimicrobial Resistance: A Qualitative Study

Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a global health issue affecting humans and livestock. Reduction in antimicrobial use (AMU) and appropriate use of antimicrobials in livestock production systems have been encouraged. Lack of access to qualified veterinarians, policies regulating AMU and knowledge of AMU and AMR have been identified as drivers of inappropriate AMU behavior in developing countries. Hence, para-veterinarians take a lead role in providing veterinary services to livestock farmers in developing countries. Our previous work found Fijian farmers lack knowledge and understanding of AMU and AMR. However, the attitude, knowledge, and behavior of Fijian veterinary professionals toward AMU and AMR is currently unknown. Therefore, this qualitative study used face-to-face, semi-structured interviews to explore and understand Fijian veterinarian and para-veterinarians' attitude, knowledge, and behavior toward AMU and AMR. A sample of at least ten participants was targeted and recruited from the Central and Western divisions of Viti Levu, Fiji. The Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) informed the development of the semi-structured interview guide. The interviews were audio-recorded and analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis and deductively using the TPB framework. Our analysis generated three key themes: 1) Antimicrobials prescribed and used based on availability and cost rather than clinical need, 2) Para-veterinarians awareness and knowledge of AMR influence treatment decisions, and 3) Limited resources impede effective consultation and veterinary service delivery. This study demonstrated para-veterinarians (not veterinarians) lacked knowledge and understanding of AMU and AMR. The availability and cost of antimicrobials rather than clinical justification drove antimicrobial prescribing amongst the para-veterinarians. Veterinarians did not visit farms to provide veterinary services; therefore, para-veterinarians provided the veterinary services to the livestock farmers. Lack of human resources, antimicrobials, and physical resources incapacitated veterinary service delivery, where services to farmers' were delayed or not provided at all. Terms of reference for veterinary service delivery and para-veterinarian training framework targeting prescribing, dispensing, use of antimicrobials and risks associated with inappropriate AMU are recommended as part of antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) programmes. Allocation of physical and human resources to Fijian veterinary services should be considered part of AMS programmes to improve veterinary service delivery to livestock farmers and optimize the AMU at the country level.

Factors Associated with Antimicrobial Use in Fijian Livestock Farms

Antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) programmes in human health and livestock production are vital to tackling antimicrobial resistance (AMR). Data on antimicrobial use (AMU), resistance, and drivers for AMU in livestock are needed to inform AMS efforts. However, such data are limited in Fiji. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate the association between farmer (socio-economic, demographic) and livestock production and management factors with AMU. Information was collected using purposive and snowball sampling from 236 livestock farmers and managers located in Central and Western divisions, Viti Levu, Fiji. Multinomial logistic regression was used to determine the factors associated with AMU in farms using an aggregated livestock farm model. Farms that raised cattle only for dairy (farm factor) were more likely to use antibiotics and anthelmintics (p = 0.018, OR = 22.97, CI 1.713, 308.075) compared to mixed cattle and poultry farms. Farms that maintained AMU records were more likely to use antibiotics (p = 0.045, OR = 2.65, CI 1.024, 6.877) compared to farms that did not. Other livestock production and management factors had no influence on AMU on the livestock farms. AMU in livestock farms was not influenced by the socio-economic and demographic characteristics of the farmer. There were differences between livestock enterprises regarding their management. The lack of association between management system and AMU could be because there was so much variation in management system, levels of farmer knowledge and awareness of AMU, and in management of farm biosecurity. Future studies exploring farmers’ knowledge and awareness of AMU and livestock management are required to design AMS programmes promoting prudent AMU in all livestock farms locally.