Antibiotic use in animal agriculture contributes significantly to antibiotic use globally and is a key driver of the rising threat of antibiotic resistance. It is becoming increasingly important to better understand antibiotic use in livestock in low-and-middle income countries where antibiotic use is predicted to increase considerably as a consequence of the growing demand for animal-derived products. Antibiotic crossover-use refers to the practice of using antibiotic formulations licensed for humans in animals and vice versa. This practice has the potential to cause adverse drug reactions and contribute to the development and spread of antibiotic resistance between humans and animals. We performed secondary data analysis of in-depth interview and focus-group discussion transcripts from independent studies investigating antibiotic use in agricultural communities in Uganda, Tanzania and India to understand the practice of antibiotic crossover-use by medicine-providers and livestock-keepers in these settings. Thematic analysis was conducted to explore driving factors of reported antibiotic crossover-use in the three countries. Similarities were found between countries regarding both the accounts of antibiotic crossover-use and its drivers. In all three countries, chickens and goats were treated with human antibiotics, and among the total range of human antibiotics reported, amoxicillin, tetracycline and penicillin were stated as used in animals in all three countries. The key themes identified to be driving crossover-use were: (1) medicine-providers’ and livestock-keepers’ perceptions of the effectiveness and safety of antibiotics, (2) livestock-keepers’ sources of information, (3) differences in availability of human and veterinary services and antibiotics, (4) economic incentives and pressures. Antibiotic crossover-use occurs in low-intensity production agricultural settings in geographically distinct low-and-middle income countries, influenced by a similar set of interconnected contextual drivers. Improving accessibility and affordability of veterinary medicines to both livestock-keepers and medicine-providers is required alongside interventions to address understanding of the differences between human and animal antibiotics, and potential dangers of antibiotic crossover-use in order to reduce the practice. A One Health approach to studying antibiotic use is necessary to understand the implications of antibiotic accessibility and use in one sector upon antibiotic use in other sectors.

Smallholder farms are the predominant livestock system in India. Animals are often kept in close contact with household members, and access to veterinary services is limited. However, limited research exists on how antibiotics are used in smallholder livestock in India. We investigated antibiotic supply, usage, and their drivers in smallholder livestock production systems, including crossover-use of human and veterinary antibiotics in two rural sites in West Bengal. Qualitative interviews were conducted with key informants (n = 9), livestock keepers (n = 37), and formal and informal antibiotic providers from veterinary and human health sectors (n = 26). Data were analysed thematically and interpreted following a One Health approach. Livestock keepers and providers used antibiotics predominantly for treating individual animals, and for disease prevention in poultry but not for growth promotion. All providers used (highest priority) critically important antimicrobials for human health and engaged in crossover-use of human antibiotic formulations in livestock. Inadequate access to veterinary drugs and services, and a perceived efficacy and ease of dosing of human antibiotics in animals drove crossover-use. Veterinary antibiotics were not used for human health due to their perceived adverse effects. Given the extent of usage of protected antibiotics and crossover-use, interventions at the community level should adopt a One Health approach that considers all antibiotic providers and livestock keepers and prioritizes the development of evidence-based guidelines to promote responsible use of antibiotics in animals.

This study investigated the economic performance of pastoralist small ruminant flocks in Kajiado county, Kenya, and the financial impact of mortalities and changes in performance indicators. A survey of 129 pastoralist small ruminant flocks captured production and economic data for a 12-month period via interview. Simulation models were then developed for flocks with different performance levels and trading activities. Their gross margins, and the financial impact from mortalities, were estimated. Sensitivity analyses were conducted for select performance indicators to assess their relative economic importance. On average, pastoralists who were not purchasing supplementary feed (79% of flocks) had gross margins of KSh 3,016 – KSh 3,123 per reproductive female. Goat production generated 2.43–2.51 times greater returns than sheep production. High efficiency mixed flocks achieved 2.04–2.06 times greater returns than medium efficiency flocks, and 12.19–14.25 times greater returns than low efficiency flocks. Pastoralist-only flocks had 3.82–4.01 times greater returns than pastoralist-traders. Financial losses due to mortality were on average 17.81% of the starting flock value. Fecundity and abortion rates in sheep, and parturition rate in goats, had the greatest economic impact. The developed models could support decision-making toward improving the economic performance of pastoralist flocks and the evaluation of interventions and external shocks.