Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33546762›Full record

ArticleGlobal health research and policy2021

Policy implications for awareness gaps in antimicrobial resistance (AMR) and antimicrobial use among commercial Nepalese poultry producers.

Anastasia S Lambrou, Gabriel K Innes, Laura O'Sullivan, Himal Luitel, Rebanta K Bhattarai, Hom B Basnet, Christopher D Heaney

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Global health research and policy, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 28% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Anastasia S LambrouDepartment of International Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA. anastasia.lambrou@jhu.edu.ORCID 0000-0001-6822-9969
Gabriel K InnesDepartment of Epidemiology, Rutgers School of Public Health, Piscataway, NJ, USA.
Laura O'SullivanDepartment of Environmental Health & Engineering, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Himal LuitelCenter for Biotechnology, Agriculture and Forestry University, Rampur, Chitwan, Nepal.
Rebanta K BhattaraiCenter for Biotechnology, Agriculture and Forestry University, Rampur, Chitwan, Nepal.
Hom B BasnetDepartment of Veterinary Microbiology and Parasitology, Agriculture and Forestry University, Rampur, Chitwan, Nepal.
Christopher D HeaneyDepartment of International Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Agriculture and Forestry University · NPJohns Hopkins University · USRutgers, The State University of New Jersey · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNepal's poultry industry has increased with a growing middle class, which has translated to an increase in antimicrobial consumption and thus a rise in antimicrobial resistance (AMR). Describing and understanding antimicrobial use practices among commercial poultry producers in Nepal may help minimize the risks of AMR development in both humans and animals and determine the effectiveness of relevant policies.

methodsFrom July to August 2018, poultry farmers were randomly recruited from Nepal's Chitwan District to participate in a cross-sectional study. The lead producer in each poultry operation was administered a quantitative structured-survey via a 30-min interview. Participants were asked to provide demographics, production practices, and knowledge about their antimicrobial use practices. Descriptive data analysis was performed to obtain frequencies and compare practices.

resultsIn total, 150 commercial poultry producers of whom raised between 300 and 40,000 birds completed the interviews. Only 33% (n = 49) of producers reported knowing what AMR was, and among them only 50% (n = 25) consulted a veterinarian for treatment options. Antimicrobial administration for growth promotion was still employed by 13% of poultry producers. Similarly, critically important antimicrobial drugs, specifically colistin, were identified at 35% of participating operations. Producers reported low overall understanding and compliance of withdrawal periods (n = 41; 27%), which may result in both AMR development and adverse health reactions among consumers who ingest antimicrobial residues. Although Nepal has publicized antimicrobial use policies and awareness campaigns to instill healthy production practices, most producers (82%) were unaware of them.

conclusionMany Nepalese poultry producers lack overall antimicrobial use and AMR awareness, which is evidenced by low antimicrobial withdrawal period compliance, use of antimicrobials for growth promotion, and the sustained use of critically important antimicrobials. Improved outreach and educational capacities, paired with increased veterinary resources and extensive monitoring in operations and retail meat products, may increase AMR awareness and policy enforcement.

Indexed as

Drug Resistance, MicrobialHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeAnimal HusbandryAnimalsAnti-Infective AgentsCross-Sectional StudiesFarmersHealth PolicyNepalPoultryAnti-Infective AgentsAntimicrobial resistanceHealth policyNepalOne healthPoultryWithdrawal period

Identifiers

PMID33546762
PMCPMC7866638
OpenAlexW3126351796

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.