首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>Frontiers in Veterinary Science >Shared Goals Different Barriers: A Qualitative Study of UK Veterinarians and Farmers Beliefs About Antimicrobial Resistance and Stewardship
【2h】

Shared Goals Different Barriers: A Qualitative Study of UK Veterinarians and Farmers Beliefs About Antimicrobial Resistance and Stewardship

机译:共同的目标不同的障碍:对英国兽医和农民关于抗菌素耐药性和管理权信念的定性研究

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

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.
机译:尽管许多研究已经调查了人类医学中抗菌药物处方不当的驱动因素,但兽医学的等效研究仍处于起步阶段。这项定性研究使用关键事件方法来探索农场兽医(兽医)和农民对抗菌素使用和抗菌素管理的信念。对英国的13位兽医和12位农民进行了半结构化访谈,他们主要从事肉牛,奶牛和绵羊的工作,但也有少数从事猪或家禽的工作。进行了归纳性主题分析,以探索兽医和农民如何理解他们对管理和抗菌素耐药性(AMR)的责任,并确定职业之间的关键异同。分析产生了四个主题:“理想与行为之间的共同冲突”,“管理权的障碍:兽医的观点”,“管理权的障碍:农民的观点”和“共同的矛盾心:所有权与其他责任” 。”兽医和农民对管理有很好的理解,但是他们的治疗决策并不总是与管理原则保持一致。兽医和农民讨论了改善抗菌素管理的各种障碍,但他们对特定障碍的重视程度不同。面对这些障碍以及人们认识到抗菌药物的使用并不总是与管理原则保持一致,兽医和农民表达了沮丧和对管理的矛盾感,并且还为抗菌素耐药性问题承担了其他责任。总而言之,本研究中的兽医和农民似乎有动机成为抗菌药物的管理者,但他们受到工作日复一日的现实的挑战。他们在应对抗菌药物耐药性方面会感到模棱两可,这可能会对他们始终担任抗菌素管理者的动机产生负面影响。成功解决AMR,将需要在个人,团体和社会层面进行改变。未来在畜牧业中提高抗菌素使用量的干预措施可能位于社会生态框架内,由于心理因素和情境因素之间的相互作用,职业之间的其他责任被认为是其他原因。可以使用社会认同方法来减少其他责备;鼓励兽医和农民专注于他们的共同目标,即通过最佳抗菌管理促进动物福利的共同愿望,可以建立共同的群体认同。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号