以利益相关者为重点的实用方法,用于评估太平洋岛国的生物安全系统。

IF 1.1 4区 农林科学 Q3 VETERINARY SCIENCES
New Zealand veterinary journal Pub Date : 2024-09-01 Epub Date: 2024-06-25 DOI:10.1080/00480169.2024.2363347
Amj McFadden, T Rawdon, S Fifita
{"title":"以利益相关者为重点的实用方法,用于评估太平洋岛国的生物安全系统。","authors":"Amj McFadden, T Rawdon, S Fifita","doi":"10.1080/00480169.2024.2363347","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>To develop a structured process for a transparent, efficient, high-level review of a low-resource biosecurity system (limited by physical infrastructure, financial, and human resources), in order to identify and prioritise key areas for future focus which could then lead to interventions, tailored by country, to improve the system. A key requirement was that the approach developed was culturally sensitive and respectful to Pasifika people within the country.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Animal health and biosecurity systems need to be urgently strengthened by Pacific Island countries and territories (PICTs) if they are to respond to current and future threats. Understanding where additional resources should be allocated to maximise benefit and ensuring buy-in from PICT stakeholders are critical for uptake of any recommendations made. However, there is little available literature on reviewing biosecurity systems, particularly where there is a need for efficiency, simplicity, and cultural sensitivity. A framework was developed through initial in-person consultation between four New Zealand experts who had experience working in international animal health development and support programmes. This was followed by input from informal discussions with selected heads of agriculture in PICTs and included their experiences with previous system reviews, as well as general advice from experts in Pasifika culture. Foundational objectives included simplicity, local inclusivity, and a structured approach, which could be undertaken over a relatively short period of time.A rapid evidence assessment methodology was used to search the available literature (published and grey, search terms <i>biosecurity, system, Pacific, animal, framework,</i> and <i>review</i> used in AND/OR combinations), to establish an evidence base for other methods of biosecurity system review. The developed framework for review of biosecurity systems in low-resource PICTs was based on elements from expert elicitation frameworks, the SurF surveillance evaluation framework and the Performance of Veterinary Services tool from The World Organisation for Animal Health.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The developed framework involved bringing stakeholders together in a workshop environment and comprised up to 10 steps including mapping the PICT biosecurity system and exploring attributes of component activities. Understanding the system at a high level enables stakeholders to make informed recommendations on improvements to address future needs. Using the Delphi method, recommendations were then prioritised by stakeholders.</p><p><strong>Conclusions and clinical relevance: </strong>A distinctive difference flowing from the use of the needs analysis described in this process was the empowerment of PICT stakeholders to determine their own needs and priorities, rather than have these developed by external parties.</p>","PeriodicalId":19322,"journal":{"name":"New Zealand veterinary journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A practical stakeholder-focused approach for assessing the biosecurity system in Pacific Island countries.\",\"authors\":\"Amj McFadden, T Rawdon, S Fifita\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/00480169.2024.2363347\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>To develop a structured process for a transparent, efficient, high-level review of a low-resource biosecurity system (limited by physical infrastructure, financial, and human resources), in order to identify and prioritise key areas for future focus which could then lead to interventions, tailored by country, to improve the system. A key requirement was that the approach developed was culturally sensitive and respectful to Pasifika people within the country.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Animal health and biosecurity systems need to be urgently strengthened by Pacific Island countries and territories (PICTs) if they are to respond to current and future threats. Understanding where additional resources should be allocated to maximise benefit and ensuring buy-in from PICT stakeholders are critical for uptake of any recommendations made. However, there is little available literature on reviewing biosecurity systems, particularly where there is a need for efficiency, simplicity, and cultural sensitivity. A framework was developed through initial in-person consultation between four New Zealand experts who had experience working in international animal health development and support programmes. This was followed by input from informal discussions with selected heads of agriculture in PICTs and included their experiences with previous system reviews, as well as general advice from experts in Pasifika culture. Foundational objectives included simplicity, local inclusivity, and a structured approach, which could be undertaken over a relatively short period of time.A rapid evidence assessment methodology was used to search the available literature (published and grey, search terms <i>biosecurity, system, Pacific, animal, framework,</i> and <i>review</i> used in AND/OR combinations), to establish an evidence base for other methods of biosecurity system review. The developed framework for review of biosecurity systems in low-resource PICTs was based on elements from expert elicitation frameworks, the SurF surveillance evaluation framework and the Performance of Veterinary Services tool from The World Organisation for Animal Health.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The developed framework involved bringing stakeholders together in a workshop environment and comprised up to 10 steps including mapping the PICT biosecurity system and exploring attributes of component activities. Understanding the system at a high level enables stakeholders to make informed recommendations on improvements to address future needs. Using the Delphi method, recommendations were then prioritised by stakeholders.</p><p><strong>Conclusions and clinical relevance: </strong>A distinctive difference flowing from the use of the needs analysis described in this process was the empowerment of PICT stakeholders to determine their own needs and priorities, rather than have these developed by external parties.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19322,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"New Zealand veterinary journal\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"New Zealand veterinary journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"97\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/00480169.2024.2363347\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"农林科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/6/25 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"VETERINARY SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"New Zealand veterinary journal","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00480169.2024.2363347","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/6/25 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"VETERINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:为对资源匮乏的生物安全系统(受物质基础设施、财政和人力资源的限制)进行透明、高效、高水平的审查制定一个结构化流程,以确定未来重点关注的关键领域并确定其优先次序,从而根据国家的具体情况采取干预措施,改善该系统。一个关键要求是,所制定的方法应具有文化敏感性,并尊重国内的 Pasifika 人:太平洋岛屿国家和地区(PICTs)要想应对当前和未来的威胁,就迫切需要加强动物健康和生物安全系统。了解应在哪些方面分配额外资源以实现利益最大化,并确保太平洋岛国和地区利益相关者的支持,对于采纳任何建议都至关重要。然而,关于审查生物安全系统的文献很少,尤其是在需要提高效率、简化程序和文化敏感性的情况下。通过与四位具有国际动物健康发展和支持计划工作经验的新西兰专家进行初步的面对面磋商,制定了一个框架。随后,与太平洋岛屿国家选定的农业负责人进行了非正式讨论,听取了他们对以往系统审查的经验以及 Pasifika 文化专家的一般性建议。快速证据评估方法用于搜索现有文献(已出版和灰色文献,搜索词为生物安全、系统、太平洋、动物、框架和以 AND/OR 组合使用的审查),为生物安全系统审查的其他方法建立证据基础。为审查资源贫乏的太平洋岛屿国家的生物安全系统而开发的框架是基于专家征询框架、SurF 监控评估框架和世界动物卫生组织的兽医服务绩效工具等要素:所制定的框架涉及在研讨会环境中召集利益相关者,包括多达 10 个步骤,其中包括绘制 PICT 生物安全系统图和探索各组成部分活动的属性。利益相关者通过对系统的深入了解,能够针对未来需求提出明智的改进建议。然后,利益相关者使用德尔菲法对建议进行优先排序:在这一过程中使用需求分析法的一个显著区别是,PICT 的利益相关者有权决定他们自己的需求和优先事项,而不是由外部机构来制定这些需求和优先事项。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A practical stakeholder-focused approach for assessing the biosecurity system in Pacific Island countries.

Aims: To develop a structured process for a transparent, efficient, high-level review of a low-resource biosecurity system (limited by physical infrastructure, financial, and human resources), in order to identify and prioritise key areas for future focus which could then lead to interventions, tailored by country, to improve the system. A key requirement was that the approach developed was culturally sensitive and respectful to Pasifika people within the country.

Methods: Animal health and biosecurity systems need to be urgently strengthened by Pacific Island countries and territories (PICTs) if they are to respond to current and future threats. Understanding where additional resources should be allocated to maximise benefit and ensuring buy-in from PICT stakeholders are critical for uptake of any recommendations made. However, there is little available literature on reviewing biosecurity systems, particularly where there is a need for efficiency, simplicity, and cultural sensitivity. A framework was developed through initial in-person consultation between four New Zealand experts who had experience working in international animal health development and support programmes. This was followed by input from informal discussions with selected heads of agriculture in PICTs and included their experiences with previous system reviews, as well as general advice from experts in Pasifika culture. Foundational objectives included simplicity, local inclusivity, and a structured approach, which could be undertaken over a relatively short period of time.A rapid evidence assessment methodology was used to search the available literature (published and grey, search terms biosecurity, system, Pacific, animal, framework, and review used in AND/OR combinations), to establish an evidence base for other methods of biosecurity system review. The developed framework for review of biosecurity systems in low-resource PICTs was based on elements from expert elicitation frameworks, the SurF surveillance evaluation framework and the Performance of Veterinary Services tool from The World Organisation for Animal Health.

Results: The developed framework involved bringing stakeholders together in a workshop environment and comprised up to 10 steps including mapping the PICT biosecurity system and exploring attributes of component activities. Understanding the system at a high level enables stakeholders to make informed recommendations on improvements to address future needs. Using the Delphi method, recommendations were then prioritised by stakeholders.

Conclusions and clinical relevance: A distinctive difference flowing from the use of the needs analysis described in this process was the empowerment of PICT stakeholders to determine their own needs and priorities, rather than have these developed by external parties.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
New Zealand veterinary journal
New Zealand veterinary journal 农林科学-兽医学
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
37
审稿时长
12-24 weeks
期刊介绍: The New Zealand Veterinary Journal (NZVJ) is an international journal publishing high quality peer-reviewed articles covering all aspects of veterinary science, including clinical practice, animal welfare and animal health. The NZVJ publishes original research findings, clinical communications (including novel case reports and case series), rapid communications, correspondence and review articles, originating from New Zealand and internationally. Topics should be relevant to, but not limited to, New Zealand veterinary and animal science communities, and include the disciplines of infectious disease, medicine, surgery and the health, management and welfare of production and companion animals, horses and New Zealand wildlife. All submissions are expected to meet the highest ethical and welfare standards, as detailed in the Journal’s instructions for authors.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信