Prevention and control of infections across the One Health spectrum is essential for improving antibiotic use and addressing the emergence and spread of antibiotic resistance. Evidence for how best to manage these risks in agricultural communities-45% of households globally-has not been systematically assembled. This systematic review identifies and summarises evidence from on-farm biosecurity and water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) interventions with the potential to directly or indirectly reduce infections and antibiotic resistance in animal agricultural settings. We searched 17 scientific databases (including Web of Science, PubMed, and regional databases) and grey literature from database inception to Dec 31, 2019 for articles that assessed biosecurity or WASH interventions measuring our outcomes of interest; namely, infection burden, microbial loads, antibiotic use, and antibiotic resistance in animals, humans, or the environment. Risk of bias was assessed with the Systematic Review Centre for Laboratory Animal Experimentation tool, Risk of Bias in Non-Randomized Studies of Interventions, and the Appraisal tool for Cross-Sectional Studies, although no studies were excluded as a result. Due to the heterogeneity of interventions found, we conducted a narrative synthesis. The protocol was pre-registered with PROSPERO (CRD42020162345). Of the 20 672 publications screened, 104 were included in this systematic review. 64 studies were conducted in high-income countries, 24 studies in upper-middle-income countries, 13 studies in lower-middle-income countries, two in low-income countries, and one included both upper-middle-income countries and lower-middle-income countries. 48 interventions focused on livestock (mainly pigs), 43 poultry (mainly chickens), one on livestock and poultry, and 12 on aquaculture farms. 68 of 104 interventions took place on intensive farms, 22 in experimental settings, and ten in smallholder or subsistence farms. Positive outcomes were reported for ten of 23 water studies, 17 of 35 hygiene studies, 15 of 24 sanitation studies, all three air-quality studies, and 11 of 17 other biosecurity-related interventions. In total, 18 of 26 studies reported reduced infection or diseases, 37 of 71 studies reported reduced microbial loads, four of five studies reported reduced antibiotic use, and seven of 20 studies reported reduced antibiotic resistance. Overall, risk of bias was high in 28 of 57 studies with positive interventions and 17 of 30 studies with negative or neutral interventions. Farm-management interventions successfully reduced antibiotic use by up to 57%. Manure-oriented interventions reduced antibiotic resistance genes or antibiotic-resistant bacteria in animal waste by up to 99%. This systematic review highlights the challenges of preventing and controlling infections and antimicrobial resistance, even in well resourced agricultural settings. Most of the evidence emerges from studies that focus on the farm itself, rather than targeting agricultural communities or the broader social, economic, and policy environment that could affect their outcomes. WASH and biosecurity interventions could complement each other when addressing antimicrobial resistance in the human, animal, and environmental interface.

Pasteurella multocidais responsible for economically important diseases in sheep and pigs. Antimicrobial susceptibility studies are essential for initiating rational and effective empirical therapy ofP. multocidainfections. In this study we investigated the antimicrobial susceptibility to 18 antimicrobial agents of 156 clinical isolates ofP. multocidafrom sheep (n = 87) and pigs (n = 69) using the microdilution method. Both sheep and pig isolates exhibited low levels of resistance (≤ 15%) to ceftiofur, gentamicin, neomycin, spectinomycin, chlortetracycline, tulathromycin, florfenicol, danofloxacin, and enrofloxacin and trimethoprim/sulphamethoxazole, high resistance rates (> 15% up to 50%) to oxytetracycline, tilmicosin, and tiamulin, and very high resistance rates (> 50%) to tylosin tartrate, clindamycin, and sulphadimethoxine. However, sheep isolates exhibited significantly lower percentages of resistance and lower MIC₉₀values (P < 0.05) than pig isolates for most of the antimicrobials tested. In addition, sheep isolates exhibited also significantly lower phenotypic antimicrobial resistance diversity (8 resistotypes vs. 30 resistotypes). LAC-LIN-SUL-MAC was the resistotype most frequently detected in sheep (39.1%) and LIN-SUL-MAC in pig isolates (26.1%). The differences in susceptibility patterns could be influenced by the lower use of antimicrobials in the small ruminant industry compared with the pig farming industry.

Background: Raising awareness of antimicrobial resistance is a cornerstone of action plans to tackle this global One Health challenge. Tools that can reliably assess levels of awareness of antibiotic resistance (ABR) among human or animal healthcare professionals (HCPs) are required to guide and evaluate interventions. Methods: We designed and tested an ABR awareness scale, a self-administered questionnaire completed by human and animal HCPs trained to prescribe and dispense antibiotics in six countries—Ghana, Nigeria, Tanzania, Vietnam, Thailand and Peru. Questionnaires also elicited demographic, practice, and contextual information. Psychometric analysis for the scale followed Rasch Measurement Theory. Bivariate analysis was carried out to identify factors associated with awareness scores. Results: Overall, 941 HCPs (625 human and 316 animal) from Ghana, Nigeria, Tanzania, Vietnam, Thailand and Peru were included in the study. The 23-item ABR awareness scale had high-reliability coefficients (0.88 for human and 0.90 for animal HCPs) but performed better within countries than across countries. Median ABR awareness scores were 54.6–63.5 for human HCPs and 55.2–63.8 for animal HCPs (scale of 0–100). Physicians and veterinarians scored higher than other HCPs in every country tested. HCPs in this study reported working in contexts with limited laboratory infrastructures. More than 95% of HCPs were interested in receiving information or training on ABR and antimicrobial stewardship. Conclusion: HCPs’ awareness of ABR can be reliably assessed with this validated 23-item scale within the countries tested. Using the scale alongside context questions and objective measurement of practices is recommended to inform interventions to improve antibiotic use.

La leptospirosis es una zoonosis bacteriana de gran impacto. Los perros y otros animales pueden infectarse, constituyendo un factor importante en la diseminación de la bacteria al humano. La infección es causada por cualquiera de los serovares patógenos de los 25 serogrupos de Leptospira spp. El estudio tuvo como objetivo identificar serogrupos de Leptospira spp presentes en perros con diagnóstico clínico presuntivo de leptospirosis de la ciudad de Lima. Se obtuvieron 305 muestras de suero sanguíneo de perros de 31 distritos de Lima Metropolitana. Se realizó la prueba de microaglutinación (MAT), estableciéndose títulos ≥1/100 de serorreactividad como seropositivos. Se utilizaron cepas de referencia de los 25 serogrupos, incluyendo al nuevo serogrupo Iquitos, serovar varillal, cepa VAR10, aislado y reportado en casos humanos en Perú. Se detectaron 177 seropositivos (58.0%), 31 (10.2%) de los cuales fueron coaglutinaciones. Los serogrupos reaccionaron contra 18 serogrupos siendo los de mayor frecuencia: Iquitos (15.1%), Tarassovi (12.1%), Canicola (12.1%), Australis (4.6%), Icterohaemorrhagiae (4.3%), Pomona (3.9%), Mini (3.3%) y Ballum (2.6%). No se identificaron serorreactores en los serugrupos Bataviae, Celledoni, Hebdomadis, Lousiana, Panama, Ranarum y Sarmin.