Progressing Antimicrobial Resistance Sensing Technologies across Human, Animal, and Environmental Health Domains

ACS Sensors ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kira J. Fitzpatrick ◽  
Hayden J. Rohlf ◽  
Tara D. Sutherland ◽  
Kevin M. Koo ◽  
Sam Beckett ◽  
...  
2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (Supplement_5) ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  

Abstract Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is driven by inter-related dynamics in the human, animal, and environmental health sectors and one of the most significant and complex current public health issues of our time. Without effective antimicrobials even common infections may become life-threatening and many treatments such as surgical procedures and chemotherapy will not be possible. There is widespread consensus that the response to AMR requires multiple actions, including improving awareness and understanding of AMR, strengthening the knowledge and evidence based through surveillance and research, reducing the incidence of infection through effective sanitation, hygiene and infection prevention measures, optimising the use of antimicrobials in human and animal health and stimulating research and development (R&D) in novel antimicrobials and alternatives. International and national efforts to combat AMR have grown steadily over the last two decades. Two major landmark developments include the launch of the World Health Organisation (WHO) Global Action Plan on AMR in 2015, which asks all countries to develop national action plans by 2017, and the United Nations (UN) General Assembly agreeing a political declaration on AMR in 2016 where countries committed to work at national, regional, and global levels to develop and implement multisectoral national action plans in accordance with the 'One Health' approach. The European Commission also published a One Health action plan against antimicrobial resistance in 2017. However, despite progress at international level, there remains inconsistent progress and implementation of recommended policies to tackle AMR at national level. The UN Interagency Coordination Group on Antimicrobial Resistance (IACG) recently concluded that currently the greatest challenge in AMR is not designing a national action plan but implementing it. The contrasting cultures, behaviours and incentives of each sector and relevant stakeholders is what makes the successful implementation of AMR national action plans so challenging. The purpose of this workshop will be to discuss the evidence and thinking on the different facets of the complex problem of tackling AMR for academics and policy-makers. These discussions will be informed by a forthcoming book jointly published by the European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development titled 'Challenges in Tackling Antimicrobial Resistance: Economic and Policy Responses'. The workshop will focus on five key questions; How can implementation of AMR national action plans be strengthened? What is the evidence on the rise of AMR and its health and economic impact? How can AMR be most effectively addressed in community healthcare settings? How can the discovery of new antibiotics be reinvigorated to replace those rendered ineffective by resistance? Can more use be made of vaccines to tackle AMR? Key messages Antimicrobial resistance is a complex issue which requires actions across the human, animal, environmental health sectors taking a 'One Health' approach. Improving the quality of governance within antimicrobial resistance national action plans is an essential step to strengthening implementation.


2022 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. e007388
Author(s):  
Madalene Oberin ◽  
Skye Badger ◽  
Céline Faverjon ◽  
Angus Cameron ◽  
Melanie Bannister-Tyrrell

IntroductionElectronic information systems (EIS) that implement a ‘One Health’ approach by integrating antimicrobial resistance (AMR) data across the human, animal and environmental health sectors, have been identified as a global priority. However, evidence on the availability, technical capacities and effectiveness of such EIS is scarce.MethodsThrough a qualitative synthesis of evidence, this systematic scoping review aims to: identify EIS for AMR surveillance that operate across human, animal and environmental health sectors; describe their technical characteristics and capabilities; and assess whether there is evidence for the effectiveness of the various EIS for AMR surveillance. Studies and reports between 1 January 2000 and 21 July 2021 from peer-reviewed and grey literature in the English language were included.Results26 studies and reports were included in the final review, of which 27 EIS were described. None of the EIS integrated AMR data in a One Health approach across all three sectors. While there was a lack of evidence of thorough evaluations of the effectiveness of the identified EIS, several surveillance system effectiveness indicators were reported for most EIS. Standardised reporting of the effectiveness of EIS is recommended for future publications. The capabilities of the EIS varied in their technical design features, in terms of usability, data display tools and desired outputs. EIS that included interactive features, and geospatial maps are increasingly relevant for future trends in AMR data analytics.ConclusionNo EIS for AMR surveillance was identified that was designed to integrate a broad range of AMR data from humans, animals and the environment, representing a major gap in global efforts to implement One Health approaches to address AMR.


Antibiotics ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. 385
Author(s):  
Lauren L. Wind ◽  
Jonathan S. Briganti ◽  
Anne M. Brown ◽  
Timothy P. Neher ◽  
Meghan F. Davis ◽  
...  

The success of a One Health approach to combating antimicrobial resistance (AMR) requires effective data sharing across the three One Health domains (human, animal, and environment). To investigate if there are differences in language use across the One Health domains, we examined the peer-reviewed literature using a combination of text data mining and natural language processing techniques on 20,000 open-access articles related to AMR and One Health. Evaluating AMR key term frequency from the European PubMed Collection published between 1990 and 2019 showed distinct AMR language usage within each domain and incongruent language usage across domains, with significant differences in key term usage frequencies when articles were grouped by the One Health sub-specialties (2-way ANOVA; p < 0.001). Over the 29-year period, “antibiotic resistance” and “AR” were used 18 times more than “antimicrobial resistance” and “AMR”. The discord of language use across One Health potentially weakens the effectiveness of interdisciplinary research by creating accessibility issues for researchers using search engines. This research was the first to quantify this disparate language use within One Health, which inhibits collaboration and crosstalk between domains. We suggest the following for authors publishing AMR-related research within the One Health context: (1) increase title/abstract searchability by including both antimicrobial and antibiotic resistance related search terms; (2) include “One Health” in the title/abstract; and (3) prioritize open-access publication.


PLoS ONE ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. e0227947 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roksana Hoque ◽  
Syed Masud Ahmed ◽  
Nahitun Naher ◽  
Mohammad Aminul Islam ◽  
Emily K. Rousham ◽  
...  

2016 ◽  
Vol 12 (9) ◽  
pp. e1005731 ◽  
Author(s):  
Waithaka Mwangi ◽  
Paul de Figueiredo ◽  
Michael F. Criscitiello

2017 ◽  
Vol 18 (S1) ◽  
pp. 263 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonathan M. Sleeman ◽  
Thomas DeLiberto ◽  
Natalie Nguyen

2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah Harrison ◽  
Michael G. Baker ◽  
Jackie Benschop ◽  
Russell G. Death ◽  
Nigel P. French ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (5) ◽  
pp. 539-549 ◽  
Author(s):  
Philip E. Hulme

In the wake of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, the world has woken up to the importance of biosecurity and the need to manage international borders. Yet strong sectorial identities exist within biosecurity that are associated with specific international standards, individual economic interests, specific research communities, and unique stakeholder involvement. Despite considerable research addressing human, animal, plant, and environmental health, the science connections between these sectors remain quite limited. One Biosecurity aims to address these limitations at global, national, and local scales. It is an interdisciplinary approach to biosecurity policy and research that builds on the interconnections between human, animal, plant, and environmental health to effectively prevent and mitigate the impacts of invasive alien species. It provides an integrated perspective to address the many biosecurity risks that transcend the traditional boundaries of health, agriculture, and the environment. Individual invasive alien plant and animal species often have multiple impacts across sectors: as hosts of zoonotic parasites, vectors of pathogens, pests of agriculture or forestry, as well as threats to biodiversity and ecosystem function. It is time these risks were addressed in a systematic way. One Biosecurity is essential to address several major sociological and environmental challenges to biosecurity: climate change, increasing urbanisation, agricultural intensification, human global mobility, loss of technical capability as well as public resistance to pesticides and vaccines. One Biosecurity will require the bringing together of taxonomists, population biologists, modellers, economists, chemists, engineers, and social scientists to engage in a new agenda that is shaped by politics, legislation, and public perceptions.


2007 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 9-10 ◽  
Author(s):  
G Werner ◽  
S Bronzwaer

The overuse and misuse of antibiotics pose a serious danger to public health by contributing to the development of bacteria resistant to treatment. In 2001, the European Commission launched a strategy to combat the threat of antimicrobial resistance to human, animal and plant health, which includes data collection, surveillance, research, awareness-raising exercises and the phasing out of antibiotics for non-medical use in animals. The Council Recommendation on the prudent use of antibiotics in human medicine adopted in 2002 was a component in this strategy, outlining clear-cut measures in human medicine that EU Member States could take to reduce antimicrobial resistance.


2021 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Grace W. Goryoka ◽  
Virgil Kuassi Lokossou ◽  
Kate Varela ◽  
Nadia Oussayef ◽  
Bernard Kofi ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Zoonotic diseases pose a significant threat to human, animal, and environmental health. The Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) has endured a significant burden of zoonotic disease impacts. To address zoonotic disease threats in ECOWAS, a One Health Zoonotic Disease Prioritization (OHZDP) was conducted over five days in December 2018 to prioritize zoonotic diseases of greatest regional concern and develop next steps for addressing these priority zoonoses through a regional, multisectoral, One Health approach. Methods The OHZDP Process uses a mixed methods prioritization process developed by the United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. During the OHZDP workshop, representatives from human, animal, and environmental health ministries from all 15 ECOWAS Member States used a transparent and equal process to prioritize endemic and emerging zoonotic diseases of greatest regional concern that should be jointly addressed by One Health ministries and other partners. After the priority zoonotic diseases were identified, participants discussed recommendations and further regional actions to address the priority zoonoses and advance One Health in the region. Results ECOWAS Member States agreed upon a list of seven priority zoonotic diseases for the region – Anthrax, Rabies, Ebola and other viral hemorrhagic fevers (for example, Marburg fever, Lassa fever, Rift Valley fever, Crimean-Congo Hemorrhagic fever), zoonotic influenzas, zoonotic tuberculosis, Trypanosomiasis, and Yellow fever. Participants developed recommendations and further regional actions that could be taken, using a One Health approach to address the priority zoonotic diseases in thematic areas including One Health collaboration and coordination, surveillance and laboratory, response and preparedness, prevention and control, workforce development, and research. Conclusions ECOWAS was the first region to use the OHZDP Process to prioritize zoonotic disease of greatest concern. With identified priority zoonotic diseases for the region, ECOWAS Member States can collaborate more effectively to address zoonotic diseases threats across the region using a One Health approach. Strengthening national and regional level multisectoral, One Health Coordination Mechanisms will allow ECOWAS Member States to advance One Health and have the biggest impact on improving health outcomes for both people and animals living in a shared environment.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document