One Health Aotearoa: a transdisciplinary initiative to improve human, animal and environmental health in New Zealand

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.

Download Full-text

25.H. Workshop: Challenges in tackling antimicrobial resistance: economic and policy responses

European Journal of Public Health ◽

10.1093/eurpub/ckaa165.1199 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 30 (Supplement_5) ◽

Author(s):

◽

Keyword(s):

Antimicrobial Resistance ◽

Environmental Health ◽

One Health ◽

Action Plan ◽

National Level ◽

World Health ◽

Successful Implementation ◽

Action Plans ◽

Policy Responses ◽

Human Animal

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.

Download Full-text

“One Health” – Linking human, animal and environmental health

International Journal of Medical Microbiology ◽

10.1016/j.ijmm.2014.08.014 ◽

2014 ◽

Vol 304 (7) ◽

pp. 775-776 ◽

Cited By ~ 5

Author(s):

Lothar H. Wieler

Keyword(s):

Environmental Health ◽

One Health ◽

Human Animal

Download Full-text

Sensitive Detection of E. coli in Artificial Seawater by Aptamer-Coated Magnetic Beads and Direct PCR

Applied Sciences ◽

10.3390/app9245392 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 9 (24) ◽

pp. 5392 ◽

Cited By ~ 3

Author(s):

Zoi Kotsiri ◽

Apostolos Vantarakis ◽

Francesco Rizzotto ◽

Devon Kavanaugh ◽

Nalini Ramarao ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Environmental Health ◽

One Health ◽

Magnetic Beads ◽

Artificial Seawater ◽

Sensitive Detection ◽

Direct Pcr ◽

E Coli ◽

Human Animal ◽

The One

The ‘One Health’ approach recommended by WHO recognizes the inseparable link between human, animal and environmental health [...]

Download Full-text

One Health: competing perspectives in an emerging field

Parasitology ◽

10.1017/s0031182015001845 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 144 (1) ◽

pp. 7-14 ◽

Cited By ~ 13

Author(s):

P. KINGSLEY ◽

E. M. TAYLOR

Keyword(s):

Environmental Health ◽

Complexity Theory ◽

One Health ◽

New Technologies ◽

The Political ◽

The Social ◽

Health Concept ◽

Human Animal ◽

Fault Lines ◽

The One

SUMMARYOver the last decade, One Health has attracted considerable attention from researchers and policymakers. The concept argues that the fields of human, animal and environmental health ought to be more closely integrated. Amid a flurry of conferences, projects and publications, there has been substantial debate over what exactly One Health is and should be. This review summarizes the main trends in this emerging discussion, highlighting the fault lines between different perspectives on One Health. Some have shown that One Health's call to synthesize knowledge from different disciplines can lead to better interventions. Others, however, argue that One Health's challenge to existing practice must go further, and set out a vision that foregrounds the social and economic drivers of disease. Meanwhile, recent examples of One Health in practice highlight the potential but also the challenges of institutionalizing cooperation. We also discuss the promise and pitfalls of using complexity theory to tackle multifaceted problems, and consider how the One Health concept has been brought to bear on other issues, such as emerging new technologies. Ultimately, One Health is an important and worthwhile goal, and requires a debate that clarifies both the competing uses and the political nature of the project.

Download Full-text

First International One Health congress

Onderstepoort Journal of Veterinary Research ◽

10.4102/ojvr.v79i2.471 ◽

2012 ◽

Vol 79 (2) ◽

Author(s):

Martyn H. Jeggo

Keyword(s):

Food Security ◽

Food Safety ◽

Environmental Health ◽

One Health ◽

Political Action ◽

Animal Health ◽

Environmental Drivers ◽

Scientific Presentation ◽

Human Animal ◽

The One

More than 650 people from around 60 countries attended the 1st International One Health Conference, held in Melbourne from 14 to 16 February 2011. Scientists, clinicians, government and community members from a range of disciplines came together to discuss the benefits of working together to promote a One Health approach to human, animal and environmental health. One Health embraces systems thinking and recognising the interdependence of people, animals and environment. The conference was hosted by the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO) and was supported by international agencies, the Australian and Canadian governments, and industry.The Organising Committee recognised from the outset, the need to provide a forum not just for scientific presentation, but for open discussion and dialogue around the policy and political issues, as well as the science that drives the One Health agenda. The Committee was also cognizant of the need to embrace a definition of One Health that includes food security and food safety and included the social and economic pressures that shapes this area. The meeting was therefore organised under four themes with plenary sessions followed by breakout parallel sessions for each of these. The themes covered Disease Emergence, Environmental Drivers, Trade, Food Security and Food Safety, and Science Policy and Political Action. The plenary session commenced with one or two keynote presentations by world leaders on the topic being covered, followed by panel discussions involving six to eight experts and involving all participants at the congress. Each of the panel members spoke briefly on the topic covered by the keynote speaker and were asked to be as provocative as possible. The discussions that followed allowed debate and discussion on the keynote presentations and the panel members comments. This was followed by six to eight parallel breakout sessions involving in depth papers on the session’s topic. Throughout the conference at various times, sponsored sessions dealt with particular areas of science or policy providing a further framework not only to learn current science but for debate and discussion. A full copy of all abstracts is available on the web at http://www.springerlink.com.In concluding the Congress recognised the interdependence of, and seeks to improve human, animal and environmental health; recognised that communication, collaboration and trust between human and animal health practitioners is at the heart of the One Health concept; agreed that a broad vision that includes other disciplines such as economics and social behaviour is essential to success. The Congress stressed the need to promote the ‘do-able’ such as improving surveillance and response for emerging infectious diseases whilst developing the broader approach. It identified a need to emphasise community participation and development of community capacity, and especially, an open transparent dialogue with both a ‘ground up’ and ‘top down’ approach that would lead to an improved understanding of our ecosystems, including molecular ecobiology, are an essential part of One Health.

Download Full-text

Electronic information systems for One Health surveillance of antimicrobial resistance: a systematic scoping review

BMJ Global Health ◽

10.1136/bmjgh-2021-007388 ◽

2022 ◽

Vol 7 (1) ◽

pp. e007388

Author(s):

Madalene Oberin ◽

Skye Badger ◽

Céline Faverjon ◽

Angus Cameron ◽

Melanie Bannister-Tyrrell

Keyword(s):

Information Systems ◽

Antimicrobial Resistance ◽

Environmental Health ◽

Scoping Review ◽

English Language ◽

One Health ◽

Grey Literature ◽

Qualitative Synthesis ◽

Electronic Information ◽

Human Animal

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.

Download Full-text

One Health Disparities and COVID-19

Evolution Medicine and Public Health ◽

10.1093/emph/eoab003 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Alma Solis ◽

Charles L Nunn

Keyword(s):

Health Disparities ◽

Environmental Health ◽

Disease Transmission ◽

One Health ◽

Social Environments ◽

Disease Expression ◽

The Social ◽

Interdisciplinary Framework ◽

Human Animal ◽

Diabetes And Obesity

Abstract The global impact of the COVID-19 pandemic has disproportionately affected some communities and populations more than others. We propose that an interdisciplinary framework of “One Health Disparities” advances understanding of the social and systemic issues that drive COVID-19 in vulnerable populations. One Health Disparities integrates the social environment with One Health perspectives on the interconnectedness of human, animal, and environmental health. To apply this framework, we consider One Health Disparities that emerge in three key components of disease transmission: exposure, susceptibility, and disease expression. Exposure disparities arise through variation in contact with COVID-19’s causative agent, SARS-CoV-2. Disparities in susceptibility and disease expression also exist; these are driven by biological and social factors, such as diabetes and obesity, and through variation in access to healthcare. We close by considering how One Health Disparities informs understanding of spillback into new animal reservoirs, and what this might mean for further human health disparities. Lay Summary One Health focuses on interconnections between human, animal, and environmental health. We propose that social environments are also important to One Health and help illuminate disparities in the coronavirus pandemic, including its origins, transmission and susceptibility among humans, and spillback to other species. We call this framework One Health Disparities.

Download Full-text