有限制但不受限制:瑞典乳业兽医对抗菌药使用和抗菌药耐药性的看法。

IF 1.3 Q2 VETERINARY SCIENCES
Veterinary Record Open Pub Date : 2021-12-27 eCollection Date: 2021-12-01 DOI:10.1002/vro2.25
Hedvig Gröndal, Nils Fall, Isabel Blanco-Penedo, Susanna Sternberg-Lewerin
{"title":"有限制但不受限制:瑞典乳业兽医对抗菌药使用和抗菌药耐药性的看法。","authors":"Hedvig Gröndal, Nils Fall, Isabel Blanco-Penedo, Susanna Sternberg-Lewerin","doi":"10.1002/vro2.25","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and aims: </strong>In Europe, the antimicrobial use (AMU) for food-producing animals has decreased rapidly. However, studies indicate that a too strict policy, with too restrictive AMU, is potentially problematic for veterinarians because it threatens animal welfare and creates tensions between farmers and veterinarians. The AMU in Sweden is among the lowest in Europe, and regulation of AMU in farm animals is strict. The aim of our study was to explore how Swedish veterinarians describe the relations between (1) being restrictive with antibiotics due to the risk of AMR and (2) concerns for animal welfare and/or the veterinarian-client relationship.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Semi-structured interviews with 21 veterinarians, working with dairy cattle, were performed. The transcripts were analysed, and a number of dominant patterns which recurred in all, or most of, the interviews were identified.</p><p><strong>Result: </strong>The interviewed veterinarians described AMR prevention and tackling the threat AMR poses towards public health, as central for their profession and as influencing their everyday practice and decisions on AMU. Importantly, veterinarians described accounting for AMR in everyday practice as fairly unproblematic, both in relation to animal welfare as well as in relation to farmers. The veterinarians generally perceived that they could treat animals with antibiotics when justified, and being restrictive with antibiotics was described as an expression of professional skill and not as challenging as animal welfare. Moreover, they stated that restrictive AMU seldom or never caused conflicts with farmers.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Strict AMU policy and restrictive AMU do not necessarily put veterinarians in a problematic position where they are caught between conflicting demands and risks.</p>","PeriodicalId":23565,"journal":{"name":"Veterinary Record Open","volume":"8 1","pages":"e25"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8711788/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Restrictive but not restricted: Perspectives on antimicrobial use and antimicrobial resistance among Swedish dairy veterinarians.\",\"authors\":\"Hedvig Gröndal, Nils Fall, Isabel Blanco-Penedo, Susanna Sternberg-Lewerin\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/vro2.25\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background and aims: </strong>In Europe, the antimicrobial use (AMU) for food-producing animals has decreased rapidly. However, studies indicate that a too strict policy, with too restrictive AMU, is potentially problematic for veterinarians because it threatens animal welfare and creates tensions between farmers and veterinarians. The AMU in Sweden is among the lowest in Europe, and regulation of AMU in farm animals is strict. The aim of our study was to explore how Swedish veterinarians describe the relations between (1) being restrictive with antibiotics due to the risk of AMR and (2) concerns for animal welfare and/or the veterinarian-client relationship.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Semi-structured interviews with 21 veterinarians, working with dairy cattle, were performed. The transcripts were analysed, and a number of dominant patterns which recurred in all, or most of, the interviews were identified.</p><p><strong>Result: </strong>The interviewed veterinarians described AMR prevention and tackling the threat AMR poses towards public health, as central for their profession and as influencing their everyday practice and decisions on AMU. Importantly, veterinarians described accounting for AMR in everyday practice as fairly unproblematic, both in relation to animal welfare as well as in relation to farmers. The veterinarians generally perceived that they could treat animals with antibiotics when justified, and being restrictive with antibiotics was described as an expression of professional skill and not as challenging as animal welfare. Moreover, they stated that restrictive AMU seldom or never caused conflicts with farmers.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Strict AMU policy and restrictive AMU do not necessarily put veterinarians in a problematic position where they are caught between conflicting demands and risks.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":23565,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Veterinary Record Open\",\"volume\":\"8 1\",\"pages\":\"e25\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-12-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8711788/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Veterinary Record Open\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/vro2.25\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2021/12/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"VETERINARY SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Veterinary Record Open","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/vro2.25","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/12/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"VETERINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景和目的:在欧洲,食用动物的抗菌药使用量(AMU)已迅速减少。然而,研究表明,过于严格的政策和过于严格的抗菌药物使用量(AMU)限制可能会给兽医带来问题,因为这会威胁到动物福利,并造成养殖户与兽医之间的紧张关系。瑞典是欧洲AMU最低的国家之一,对农场动物AMU的管理也很严格。我们的研究旨在探讨瑞典兽医如何描述以下两者之间的关系:(1) 因 AMR 风险而限制使用抗生素;(2) 关注动物福利和/或兽医与客户之间的关系:对 21 名从事奶牛饲养的兽医进行了半结构式访谈。对访谈记录进行了分析,确定了在所有或大部分访谈中反复出现的一些主要模式:结果:接受访谈的兽医认为,预防 AMR 和应对 AMR 对公共卫生造成的威胁是他们职业的核心,并影响着他们的日常实践和有关 AMU 的决策。重要的是,兽医们认为在日常工作中考虑到 AMR 是没有问题的,这既与动物福利有关,也与农民有关。兽医们普遍认为,他们可以在合理的情况下使用抗生素治疗动物,限制使用抗生素被认为是专业技能的体现,不像动物福利那样具有挑战性。此外,他们还表示,限制性 AMU 很少或从未与养殖户发生冲突:严格的AMU政策和限制性AMU并不一定会使兽医陷入需求与风险相互冲突的困境。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Restrictive but not restricted: Perspectives on antimicrobial use and antimicrobial resistance among Swedish dairy veterinarians.

Background and aims: In Europe, the antimicrobial use (AMU) for food-producing animals has decreased rapidly. However, studies indicate that a too strict policy, with too restrictive AMU, is potentially problematic for veterinarians because it threatens animal welfare and creates tensions between farmers and veterinarians. The AMU in Sweden is among the lowest in Europe, and regulation of AMU in farm animals is strict. The aim of our study was to explore how Swedish veterinarians describe the relations between (1) being restrictive with antibiotics due to the risk of AMR and (2) concerns for animal welfare and/or the veterinarian-client relationship.

Methods: Semi-structured interviews with 21 veterinarians, working with dairy cattle, were performed. The transcripts were analysed, and a number of dominant patterns which recurred in all, or most of, the interviews were identified.

Result: The interviewed veterinarians described AMR prevention and tackling the threat AMR poses towards public health, as central for their profession and as influencing their everyday practice and decisions on AMU. Importantly, veterinarians described accounting for AMR in everyday practice as fairly unproblematic, both in relation to animal welfare as well as in relation to farmers. The veterinarians generally perceived that they could treat animals with antibiotics when justified, and being restrictive with antibiotics was described as an expression of professional skill and not as challenging as animal welfare. Moreover, they stated that restrictive AMU seldom or never caused conflicts with farmers.

Conclusion: Strict AMU policy and restrictive AMU do not necessarily put veterinarians in a problematic position where they are caught between conflicting demands and risks.

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
Veterinary Record Open
Veterinary Record Open VETERINARY SCIENCES-
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
25
审稿时长
19 weeks
期刊介绍: Veterinary Record Open is a journal dedicated to publishing specialist veterinary research across a range of topic areas including those of a more niche and specialist nature to that considered in the weekly Vet Record. Research from all disciplines of veterinary interest will be considered. It is an Open Access journal of the British Veterinary Association.
×
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