Kayla Strong, Fiona Emdin, Sam Orubu, Susan Rogers Van Katwyk, Heather Ganshorn, Jeremy Grimshaw, Mathieu J P Poirier
{"title":"减少生产动物兽用抗微生物药物消费的政府政策干预措施:系统审查方案和证据图。","authors":"Kayla Strong, Fiona Emdin, Sam Orubu, Susan Rogers Van Katwyk, Heather Ganshorn, Jeremy Grimshaw, Mathieu J P Poirier","doi":"10.1186/s13643-025-02829-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Globally, agricultural production systems consume two-thirds of all antimicrobials. These systems are used to raise animals that produce products for consumption, such as meat, eggs, milk, and wool. The World Bank estimates that by 2030, AMR will reduce global livestock production by up to 7.5%, resulting in economic losses of up to one trillion USD. Governments worldwide have implemented various policies to promote antimicrobial stewardship in production animals, such as requiring veterinary prescriptions for antimicrobial use, restricting certain antimicrobials, and prohibiting antimicrobial use for growth promotion. However, the efficacy of these measures remains uncertain, necessitating a comprehensive review to guide policymakers. This review will identify and describe implemented government policy interventions to reduce veterinary AMU and AMR in production animals. A secondary analysis will map the policy pathways and the stakeholders involved in their successful implementation.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>An electronic search strategy has been developed in consultation with a public health librarian and a veterinary health librarian. CAB Abstracts, MEDLINE, Web of Science, and ProQuest Dissertations will be searched, and additional studies will be identified using gray literature searches. The intervention of interest is any policy intervention enacted by a government or government agency in any country to change antimicrobial use in production animals. For inclusion within the review, studies must (1) describe the government policy, (2) quantitatively measure the impact of the policy in production animals using a rigorous study design, and (3) measure the impact of the intervention through antimicrobial use (AMU) or AMR. Two independent reviewers will screen for eligibility using defined criteria, and data will be extracted using Covidence software and Excel, respectively. Results will be synthesized narratively and visually (using maps and Sankey plots) to identify evidence gaps.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>This systematic review is intended to inform future government policies addressing antimicrobial resistance and antimicrobial use in production animal systems. It will also inform future research priorities by identifying evidence gaps about the effectiveness of various policy interventions.</p><p><strong>Systematic review registration: </strong>Open Science framework.</p>","PeriodicalId":22162,"journal":{"name":"Systematic Reviews","volume":"14 1","pages":"122"},"PeriodicalIF":6.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12131453/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Government policy interventions to reduce veterinary antimicrobial consumption in production animals: a protocol for a systematic review and evidence map.\",\"authors\":\"Kayla Strong, Fiona Emdin, Sam Orubu, Susan Rogers Van Katwyk, Heather Ganshorn, Jeremy Grimshaw, Mathieu J P Poirier\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s13643-025-02829-9\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Globally, agricultural production systems consume two-thirds of all antimicrobials. These systems are used to raise animals that produce products for consumption, such as meat, eggs, milk, and wool. The World Bank estimates that by 2030, AMR will reduce global livestock production by up to 7.5%, resulting in economic losses of up to one trillion USD. Governments worldwide have implemented various policies to promote antimicrobial stewardship in production animals, such as requiring veterinary prescriptions for antimicrobial use, restricting certain antimicrobials, and prohibiting antimicrobial use for growth promotion. However, the efficacy of these measures remains uncertain, necessitating a comprehensive review to guide policymakers. This review will identify and describe implemented government policy interventions to reduce veterinary AMU and AMR in production animals. A secondary analysis will map the policy pathways and the stakeholders involved in their successful implementation.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>An electronic search strategy has been developed in consultation with a public health librarian and a veterinary health librarian. CAB Abstracts, MEDLINE, Web of Science, and ProQuest Dissertations will be searched, and additional studies will be identified using gray literature searches. The intervention of interest is any policy intervention enacted by a government or government agency in any country to change antimicrobial use in production animals. For inclusion within the review, studies must (1) describe the government policy, (2) quantitatively measure the impact of the policy in production animals using a rigorous study design, and (3) measure the impact of the intervention through antimicrobial use (AMU) or AMR. Two independent reviewers will screen for eligibility using defined criteria, and data will be extracted using Covidence software and Excel, respectively. Results will be synthesized narratively and visually (using maps and Sankey plots) to identify evidence gaps.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>This systematic review is intended to inform future government policies addressing antimicrobial resistance and antimicrobial use in production animal systems. It will also inform future research priorities by identifying evidence gaps about the effectiveness of various policy interventions.</p><p><strong>Systematic review registration: </strong>Open Science framework.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":22162,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Systematic Reviews\",\"volume\":\"14 1\",\"pages\":\"122\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12131453/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Systematic Reviews\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-025-02829-9\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Systematic Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-025-02829-9","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:在全球范围内,农业生产系统消耗了所有抗微生物药物的三分之二。这些系统用来饲养生产消费产品的动物,如肉、蛋、奶和羊毛。世界银行估计,到2030年,抗生素耐药性将使全球畜牧业产量减少7.5%,造成高达1万亿美元的经济损失。世界各国政府已经实施了各种政策,以促进生产动物的抗菌素管理,例如要求兽医处方使用抗菌素,限制某些抗菌素,并禁止为促进生长而使用抗菌素。然而,这些措施的有效性仍然不确定,需要进行全面审查以指导政策制定者。本综述将确定和描述为减少生产动物的兽医AMU和AMR而实施的政府政策干预措施。第二次分析将绘制政策路径和参与其成功实施的利益相关者的地图。方法:与公共卫生图书管理员和兽医卫生图书管理员协商制定了电子检索策略。CAB Abstracts、MEDLINE、Web of Science和ProQuest Dissertations将被检索,并使用灰色文献检索识别其他研究。利益干预是指任何国家的政府或政府机构为改变生产动物中抗菌素的使用而制定的任何政策干预。为了纳入审查,研究必须(1)描述政府政策,(2)使用严格的研究设计定量测量政策对生产动物的影响,以及(3)通过抗菌药物使用(AMU)或AMR测量干预的影响。两名独立审查员将使用确定的标准筛选合格性,并分别使用covid - ence软件和Excel提取数据。结果将以叙述和视觉(使用地图和桑基图)的方式综合,以确定证据差距。讨论:本系统综述旨在为未来政府应对生产动物系统中抗菌素耐药性和抗菌素使用的政策提供信息。它还将通过确定关于各种政策干预措施有效性的证据差距,为未来的研究重点提供信息。系统评审注册:开放科学框架。
Government policy interventions to reduce veterinary antimicrobial consumption in production animals: a protocol for a systematic review and evidence map.
Background: Globally, agricultural production systems consume two-thirds of all antimicrobials. These systems are used to raise animals that produce products for consumption, such as meat, eggs, milk, and wool. The World Bank estimates that by 2030, AMR will reduce global livestock production by up to 7.5%, resulting in economic losses of up to one trillion USD. Governments worldwide have implemented various policies to promote antimicrobial stewardship in production animals, such as requiring veterinary prescriptions for antimicrobial use, restricting certain antimicrobials, and prohibiting antimicrobial use for growth promotion. However, the efficacy of these measures remains uncertain, necessitating a comprehensive review to guide policymakers. This review will identify and describe implemented government policy interventions to reduce veterinary AMU and AMR in production animals. A secondary analysis will map the policy pathways and the stakeholders involved in their successful implementation.
Methods: An electronic search strategy has been developed in consultation with a public health librarian and a veterinary health librarian. CAB Abstracts, MEDLINE, Web of Science, and ProQuest Dissertations will be searched, and additional studies will be identified using gray literature searches. The intervention of interest is any policy intervention enacted by a government or government agency in any country to change antimicrobial use in production animals. For inclusion within the review, studies must (1) describe the government policy, (2) quantitatively measure the impact of the policy in production animals using a rigorous study design, and (3) measure the impact of the intervention through antimicrobial use (AMU) or AMR. Two independent reviewers will screen for eligibility using defined criteria, and data will be extracted using Covidence software and Excel, respectively. Results will be synthesized narratively and visually (using maps and Sankey plots) to identify evidence gaps.
Discussion: This systematic review is intended to inform future government policies addressing antimicrobial resistance and antimicrobial use in production animal systems. It will also inform future research priorities by identifying evidence gaps about the effectiveness of various policy interventions.
Systematic review registration: Open Science framework.
期刊介绍:
Systematic Reviews encompasses all aspects of the design, conduct and reporting of systematic reviews. The journal publishes high quality systematic review products including systematic review protocols, systematic reviews related to a very broad definition of health, rapid reviews, updates of already completed systematic reviews, and methods research related to the science of systematic reviews, such as decision modelling. At this time Systematic Reviews does not accept reviews of in vitro studies. The journal also aims to ensure that the results of all well-conducted systematic reviews are published, regardless of their outcome.