Search

Introduction Gaps in antimicrobial resistance (AMR) surveillance and control, including implementation of national action plans (NAPs), are evident internationally. Countries’ capacity to translate political commitment into action is crucial to cope with AMR at the human–animal–environment interface.Methods We employed a two-stage process to understand opportunities and challenges related to AMR surveillance and control at the human–animal interface in Argentina. First, we compiled the central AMR policies locally and mapped vital stakeholders around the NAP and the national commission against bacterial resistance. Second, we conducted qualitative interviews using a semistructured questionnaire covering stakeholders’ understanding and progress towards AMR and NAP. We employed a mixed deductive–inductive approach and used the constant comparative analysis method. We created categories and themes to cluster subthemes and determined crucial relationships among thematic groups.Results Crucial AMR policy developments have been made since 1969, including gradually banning colistin in food-producing animals. In 2023, a new government decree prioritised AMR following the 2015 NAP launch. Our qualitative analyses identified seven major themes for tackling AMR: (I) Cultural factors and sociopolitical country context hampering AMR progress, (II) Fragmented governance, (III) Antibiotic access and use, (IV) AMR knowledge and awareness throughout stakeholders, (V) AMR surveillance, (VI) NAP efforts and (VII) External drivers. We identified a fragmented structure of the food production chain, poor cross-coordination between stakeholders, limited surveillance and regulation among food-producing animals and geographical disparities over access, diagnosis and treatment. The country is moving to integrate animal and food production into its surveillance system, with most hospitals experienced in monitoring AMR through antimicrobial stewardship programmes.Conclusion AMR accountability should involve underpinning collaboration at different NAP implementation levels and providing adequate resources to safeguard long-term sustainability. Incorporating a multisectoral context-specific approach relying on different One Health domains is crucial to strengthening local AMR surveillance.

Objectives The National Clinical Excellence Awards (NCEAs) in England and Wales were designed, as a form of performance-related pay, to reward high-performing senior doctors and dentists. To inform future scoring of applications and subsequent schemes, we sought to understand how current assessors and other stakeholders would define excellence, differentiate between levels of excellence and ensure unbiased definitions and scoring.Design Semistructured qualitative interview study.Participants 25 key informants were identified from Advisory Committee on Clinical Excellence Awards subcommittees, and relevant professional organisations in England and Wales. Informants were purposively sampled to achieve variety in gender and ethnicity.Findings Participants reported that NCEAs had a role in incentivising doctors to strive for excellence. They were consistent in identifying ‘clinical excellence’ as involving making an exceptional difference to patients and the National Health Service, and in going over and above the expectations associated with the doctor’s job plan. Informants who were assessors reported: encountering challenges with the current scoring scheme when seeking to ensure a fair assessment; recognising tendencies to score more or less leniently; and the potential for conscious or unconscious bias in assessments. Particular groups of doctors, including women, doctors in some specialties and settings, doctors from minority ethnic groups, and doctors who work less than full time, were described as being less likely to self-nominate, lacking support in making applications or lacking motivation to apply on account of a perceived likelihood of not being successful. Practical suggestions were made for improving support and training for applicants and assessors.Conclusions Participants in this qualitative study identified specific concerns in respect of the current approaches adopted in applying for and in assessing NCEAs, pointing to the importance of equity of opportunity to apply, the need for regular training for assessors, and to improved support for applicants and potential applicants.