4.7 Article

A One Health approach to antimicrobial resistance surveillance: is there a business case for it?

Journal

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ANTIMICROBIAL AGENTS
Volume 48, Issue 4, Pages 422-427

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2016.06.014

Keywords

Antimicrobial resistance; AMR; Surveillance; One Health; Business case; Economics

Funding

  1. Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations ['Support to present a business case for One Health under the Human-Animal Interface'] [3058, OSRO/INT/602/USA]
  2. Royal Veterinary College's Internal Grant Scheme ['Metrics for One Health benefits: key inputs to create an economic evidence base'] [2958]
  3. Leverhulme Centre for Integrative Research on Agriculture and Health (LCIRAH) (Hatfield, UK) [F/10 208/A]
  4. BBSRC [BB/K011251/1] Funding Source: UKRI
  5. Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council [BB/K011251/1] Funding Source: researchfish

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Antimicrobial resistance is a global problem of complex epidemiology, suited to a broad, integrated One Health approach. Resistant organisms exist in humans, animals, food and the environment, and the main driver of this resistance is antimicrobial usage. A One Health conceptual framework for surveillance is presented to include all of these aspects. Global and European (regional and national) surveillance systems are described, highlighting shortcomings compared with the framework. Policy decisions rely on economic and scientific evidence, so the business case for a fully integrated system is presented. The costs of integrated surveillance are offset by the costs of unchecked resistance and the benefits arising from interventions and outcomes. Current estimates focus on costs and benefits of human health outcomes. A One Health assessment includes wider societal costs of lost labour, changes in health-seeking behaviour, impacts on animal health and welfare, higher costs of animal-origin food production, and reduced consumer confidence in safety and international trade of such food. Benefits of surveillance may take years to realise and are dependent on effective and accepted interventions. Benefits, including the less tangible, such as improved synergies and efficiencies in service delivery and more timely and accurate risk identification, should also be recognised. By including these less tangible benefits to society, animal welfare, ecosystem health and resilience, together with the savings and efficiencies through shared resources and social capital-building, a stronger business case for a One Health approach to surveillance can be made. (C) 2016 Elsevier B.V. and International Society of Chemotherapy. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available