Search

Background: The overuse of antimicrobial medicines is a global health concern, including as a major driver of antimicrobial resistance. In many low- and middle-income countries, a substantial proportion of antibiotics are purchased over-the-counter without a prescription. But while antibiotics are widely available, information on when and how to use them is not., Objective: We aimed to understand the acceptability among experts and professionals of sharing information on antibiotic use with end users - patients, carers and farmers - in Uganda, Tanzania and Malawi., Methods: Building on extended periods of fieldwork amongst end-users and antibiotic providers in the three countries, we conducted two workshops in each, with a total of 44 medical and veterinary professionals, policy makers and drug regulators, in December 2021. We carried out extensive documentary and literature reviews to characterise antibiotic information systems in each setting., Results: Participants reported that the general public had been provided information on medicine use in all three countries by national drug authorities, health care providers and in package inserts. Participants expressed concern over the danger of sharing detailed information on antibiotic use, particularly that end-users are not equipped to determine appropriate use of medicines. Sharing of general instructions to encourage professionally-prescribed practices was preferred., Conclusions: Without good access to prescribers, the tension between enclaving and sharing of knowledge presents an equity issue. Transitioning to a client care-centred model that begins with the needs of the patient, carer or farmer will require sharing unbiased antibiotic information at the point of care.

Despite some progress, universal access to safe water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) by 2030-a remit of Sustainable Development Goal 6-remains a distant prospect in many countries. Policy-makers and implementers of the WASH sector are challenged to track a new path. This research aimed to identify core orienting themes of the sector, as legacies of past processes, which can provide insights for its future. We reviewed global policy, science and programmatic documents and carried out 19 expert interviews to track the evolution of the global WASH sector over seven decades. We situated this evolution in relation to wider trends in global health and development over the same time period.With transnational flows of concern, expertise and resources from high-income to lower-income countries, the WASH sector evolved over decades of international institutionalisation of health and development with (1) a focus on technologies (technicalisation), (2) a search for generalised solutions (universalisation), (3) attempts to make recipients responsible for environmental health (responsibilisation) and (4) the shaping of programmes around quantifiable outcomes (metricisation). The emergent commitment of the WASH sector to these core themes reflects a pragmatic response in health and development to depoliticise poverty and social inequalities in order to enable action. This leads to questions about what potential solutions have been obscured, a recognition which might be understood as 'uncomfortable knowledge'-the knowns that have had to be unknown, which resonate with concerns about deep inequalities, shrinking budgets and the gap between what could and has been achieved., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Multimorbidity is an emerging challenge for health systems globally. It is commonly defined as the co-occurrence of two or more chronic conditions in one person, but its meaning remains a lively area of academic debate, and the utility of the concept beyond high-income settings is uncertain. This article presents the findings from an interdisciplinary research initiative that drew together 60 academic and applied partners working in 10 African countries to answer the questions: how useful is the concept of multimorbidity within Africa? Can the concept be adapted to context to optimise its transformative potentials? During a three-day concept-building workshop, we investigated how the definition of multimorbidity was understood across diverse disciplinary and regional perspectives, evaluated the utility and limitations of existing concepts and definitions, and considered how to build a more context-sensitive, cross-cutting description of multimorbidity. This iterative process was guided by the principles of grounded theory and involved focus- and whole-group discussions during the workshop, thematic coding of workshop discussions, and further post-workshop development and refinement. Three thematic domains emerged from workshop discussions: the current focus of multimorbidity on constituent diseases; the potential for revised concepts to centre the priorities, needs, and social context of people living with multimorbidity (PLWMM); and the need for revised concepts to respond to varied conceptual priorities amongst stakeholders. These themes fed into the development of an expanded conceptual model that centres the catastrophic impacts multimorbidity can have for PLWMM, families and support structures, service providers, and health systems., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist., (Copyright: © 2024 Dixon et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)

National action plans enumerate many interventions as potential strategies to reduce the burden of bacterial antimicrobial resistance (AMR). However, knowledge of the benefits achievable by specific approaches is needed to inform policy making, especially in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) with substantial AMR burden and low health-care system capacity. In a modelling analysis, we estimated that improving infection prevention and control programmes in LMIC health-care settings could prevent at least 337 000 (95% CI 250 200-465 200) AMR-associated deaths annually. Ensuring universal access to high-quality water, sanitation, and hygiene services would prevent 247 800 (160 000-337 800) AMR-associated deaths and paediatric vaccines 181 500 (153 400-206 800) AMR-associated deaths, from both direct prevention of resistant infections and reductions in antibiotic consumption. These estimates translate to prevention of 7·8% (5·6-11·0) of all AMR-associated mortality in LMICs by infection prevention and control, 5·7% (3·7-8·0) by water, sanitation, and hygiene, and 4·2% (3·4-5·1) by vaccination interventions. Despite the continuing need for research and innovation to overcome limitations of existing approaches, our findings indicate that reducing global AMR burden by 10% by the year 2030 is achievable with existing interventions. Our results should guide investments in public health interventions with the greatest potential to reduce AMR burden., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests A meeting held to coordinate this paper was supported by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (INV-055356 to RL) and the Africa Centres for Disease Control and Prevention (to all authors). Neither funder had any role in the design, writing, or the decision to submit the paper for publication. RL has received grant funding from the National Science Foundation (CCF1918628). LYH reports an institutional research grant for research on antimicrobial resistance from the Singapore National Medical Research Council (MOH-001010–00). EC reports providing unrestricted antibiotic stewardship lectures to clinical conferences organised by Pfizer in Australia in 2023. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2024 Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved, including those for text and data mining, AI training, and similar technologies.)

Prevention and control of infections across the One Health spectrum is essential for improving antibiotic use and addressing the emergence and spread of antibiotic resistance. Evidence for how best to manage these risks in agricultural communities-45% of households globally-has not been systematically assembled. This systematic review identifies and summarises evidence from on-farm biosecurity and water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) interventions with the potential to directly or indirectly reduce infections and antibiotic resistance in animal agricultural settings. We searched 17 scientific databases (including Web of Science, PubMed, and regional databases) and grey literature from database inception to Dec 31, 2019 for articles that assessed biosecurity or WASH interventions measuring our outcomes of interest; namely, infection burden, microbial loads, antibiotic use, and antibiotic resistance in animals, humans, or the environment. Risk of bias was assessed with the Systematic Review Centre for Laboratory Animal Experimentation tool, Risk of Bias in Non-Randomized Studies of Interventions, and the Appraisal tool for Cross-Sectional Studies, although no studies were excluded as a result. Due to the heterogeneity of interventions found, we conducted a narrative synthesis. The protocol was pre-registered with PROSPERO (CRD42020162345). Of the 20 672 publications screened, 104 were included in this systematic review. 64 studies were conducted in high-income countries, 24 studies in upper-middle-income countries, 13 studies in lower-middle-income countries, two in low-income countries, and one included both upper-middle-income countries and lower-middle-income countries. 48 interventions focused on livestock (mainly pigs), 43 poultry (mainly chickens), one on livestock and poultry, and 12 on aquaculture farms. 68 of 104 interventions took place on intensive farms, 22 in experimental settings, and ten in smallholder or subsistence farms. Positive outcomes were reported for ten of 23 water studies, 17 of 35 hygiene studies, 15 of 24 sanitation studies, all three air-quality studies, and 11 of 17 other biosecurity-related interventions. In total, 18 of 26 studies reported reduced infection or diseases, 37 of 71 studies reported reduced microbial loads, four of five studies reported reduced antibiotic use, and seven of 20 studies reported reduced antibiotic resistance. Overall, risk of bias was high in 28 of 57 studies with positive interventions and 17 of 30 studies with negative or neutral interventions. Farm-management interventions successfully reduced antibiotic use by up to 57%. Manure-oriented interventions reduced antibiotic resistance genes or antibiotic-resistant bacteria in animal waste by up to 99%. This systematic review highlights the challenges of preventing and controlling infections and antimicrobial resistance, even in well resourced agricultural settings. Most of the evidence emerges from studies that focus on the farm itself, rather than targeting agricultural communities or the broader social, economic, and policy environment that could affect their outcomes. WASH and biosecurity interventions could complement each other when addressing antimicrobial resistance in the human, animal, and environmental interface., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests We declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Multimorbidity has been framed as a pressing global health challenge that exposes the limits of systems organised around single diseases. This article seeks to expand and strengthen current thinking around multimorbidity by analysing its construction within the field of global health. We suggest that the significance of multimorbidity lies not only in challenging divisions between disease categories but also in what it reveals about the culture and history of transnational biomedicine. Drawing on social research from sub-Saharan Africa to ground our arguments, we begin by describing the historical processes through which morbidity was made divisible in biomedicine and how the single disease became integral not only to disease control but to the extension of biopolitical power. Multimorbidity, we observe, is hoped to challenge single disease approaches but is assembled from the same problematic, historically-loaded categories that it exposes as breaking down. Next, we highlight the consequences of such classificatory legacies in everyday lives and suggest why frameworks and interventions to integrate care have tended to have limited traction in practice. Finally, we argue that efforts to align priorities and disciplines around a standardised biomedical definition of multimorbidity risks retracing the same steps. We call for transdisciplinary work across the field of global health around a more holistic, reflexive understanding of multimorbidity that foregrounds the culture and history of translocated biomedicine, the intractability of single disease thinking, and its often-adverse consequences in local worlds. We outline key domains within the architecture of global health where transformation is needed, including care delivery, medical training, the organisation of knowledge and expertise, global governance, and financing., Competing Interests: The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article., (© The Author(s) 2023.)

Background: Raising awareness of antimicrobial resistance is a cornerstone of action plans to tackle this global One Health challenge. Tools that can reliably assess levels of awareness of antibiotic resistance (ABR) among human or animal healthcare professionals (HCPs) are required to guide and evaluate interventions., Methods: We designed and tested an ABR awareness scale, a self-administered questionnaire completed by human and animal HCPs trained to prescribe and dispense antibiotics in six countries-Ghana, Nigeria, Tanzania, Vietnam, Thailand and Peru. Questionnaires also elicited demographic, practice, and contextual information. Psychometric analysis for the scale followed Rasch Measurement Theory. Bivariate analysis was carried out to identify factors associated with awareness scores., Results: Overall, 941 HCPs (625 human and 316 animal) from Ghana, Nigeria, Tanzania, Vietnam, Thailand and Peru were included in the study. The 23-item ABR awareness scale had high-reliability coefficients (0.88 for human and 0.90 for animal HCPs) but performed better within countries than across countries. Median ABR awareness scores were 54.6-63.5 for human HCPs and 55.2-63.8 for animal HCPs (scale of 0-100). Physicians and veterinarians scored higher than other HCPs in every country tested. HCPs in this study reported working in contexts with limited laboratory infrastructures. More than 95% of HCPs were interested in receiving information or training on ABR and antimicrobial stewardship., Conclusion: HCPs' awareness of ABR can be reliably assessed with this validated 23-item scale within the countries tested. Using the scale alongside context questions and objective measurement of practices is recommended to inform interventions to improve antibiotic use., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of British Society for Antimicrobial Chemotherapy.)

Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared.

Thailand's antimicrobial stewardship strategy has focussed on promoting 'rational drug use' in the public sector, to reduce the threat of drug resistance and control healthcare expenditure. The strategy's next ambition is to attend to the private sector, where antibiotics are widely available over the counter without prescription. Using ethnographic and survey data, this paper follows antibiotics through community pharmacies, to explore drug distribution and access, and identify potential challenges for stewardship. We extend the analytical frame beyond 'irrational' dispenser-customer transactions, to explore the logics of practice of a multiplicity of actors in the context of a highly competitive pharmaceutical market. Highlighting the role of the pharmaceutical industry in mystifying medicines, we show how antibiotics are collapsed into a category of 'strong medicines' and requested by customers using 'prescriptions by proxy'. We further examine how Thailand's drug regulation and classificatory systems, historically orientated around access to medicines, enable the proliferation of antibiotics in the context of contemporary efforts to control distribution. Recognising the negotiations involved in dispensing antibiotics in a pluralistic health system, we attempt to reconfigure allocations of responsibility, advocating for stewardship approaches that take into account local ecologies of care, as well as implications for access, equity, and accountability.

Faced with the threat of antimicrobial resistance, health workers are urged to reduce unnecessary prescription of antimicrobials. Clinical guidelines are expected to form the basis of prescribing decisions in practice. Emerging through evaluations of best practice - bundling clinical, technological and economic dimensions - guidelines also create benchmarks through which practice can be assessed with metrics. To understand the relationships between guidelines and practice in the prescribing and dispensing of antibiotics, ethnographic fieldwork was undertaken in lower-level health care facilities in rural Eastern Uganda for 10 months between January and October 2020, involving direct observations during and outside of clinics and interviews with staff. In a context of scarcity, where 'care' is characterised by delivery of medicines, and is constituted beyond algorithmic outputs, we observed that clinical practice was shaped by availability of resources, and professional and patient expectations, as much as by the clinical guidelines. For stewardship to care for patients as well as for medicines, a better understanding of clinical practice and expectations of care is required in relation to and beyond clinical guidelines.

The diminishing effectiveness of antimicrobials raises serious concerns for human health. While policy makers grapple to reduce the overuse of antimicrobial medicines to stem the rise of antimicrobial resistance, insufficient attention has been paid to how this applies to low-resource contexts. We provide an in-depth portrayal of antimicrobial prescribing at primary health care level in rural Chikwawa District, Malawi. Ethnographic fieldwork took place over 18 months (2018-2020). We surveyed 22 health facilities in the district, observed 1348 health worker-patient consultations, and carried out 49 in-depth interviews with staff and patients. Care was centred around provision of an antimicrobial. Amid chronic lack of essential medicines and other resources, clinic interactions were tightly scripted, providing patients little time to question or negotiate their treatment. We develop the concept of 'antibiotic vulnerabilities' to reveal multiple ways in which provision of antimicrobials in rural Malawi impacts care in conditions of extreme scarcity. Antibiotics are central and essential to primary care. As targets for optimal antimicrobial prescribing take a more central role in global policy, close attention is required of the ramifications for the delivery of care to ensure that efforts to stem resistance do not undermine the goal of improved health for all.

Drug resistant infections are increasing across the world and urgent action is required to preserve current classes of antibiotics. Antibiotic use practices in low-and-middle-income countries have gained international attention, especially as antibiotics are often accessed beyond the formal health system. Public awareness campaigns have gained popularity, often conceptualising antimicrobial resistance (AMR) as a problem of excess, precipitated by irrational behaviour. Insufficient attention has been paid to people's lived experiences of accessing medicines in low-income contexts. In Chikwawa District, Malawi, a place of extreme scarcity, our study aimed to understand the care and medicine use practices of households dependent on subsistence farming. Adopting an anthropological approach, we undertook medicine interviews (100), ethnographic fieldwork (six-month period) and key informant interviews (33) with a range of participants in two villages in rural Chikwawa. The most frequently used drugs were cotrimoxazole and amoxicillin, not considered to be of critical importance to human health. Participants recognised that keeping, sharing, and buying medicines informally was not the "right thing." However, they described using antibiotics and other medicines in these ways due to conditions of extreme precarity, the costs and limitations of seeking formal care in the public sector, and the inevitability of future illness. Our findings emphasise the need in contexts of extreme scarcity to equip policy actors with interventions to address AMR through strengthening health systems, rather than public awareness campaigns that foreground overuse and the dangers of using antibiotics beyond the formal sector., Competing Interests: The authors have no competing interests to declare., (Copyright: © 2022 MacPherson et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)

The advent of antibiotics transformed the global public health landscape, dramatically improving health outcomes. Drawing on historical and ethnographic research on sex work in Zimbabwe, we examine the role of antibiotics in the management of sexually transmitted infections among sex workers, from punitive colonial approaches to "empowerment"-based discourses. We illustrate how programs for sex workers, while valued by these women, are narrow, exclusionary, and enact a pharmaceuticalized form of governance that hangs on the efficacy of antibiotics. With antibiotics' efficacy under threat, we consider how latent colonial logics are in danger of being reactivated to control both infections and women.

Background: As concerns about the prevalence of infections that are resistant to available antibiotics increase, attention has turned toward the use of these medicines both within and outside of formal healthcare settings. Much of what is known about use beyond formal settings is informed by survey-based research. Few studies to date have used comparative, mixed-methods approaches to render visible patterns of use within and between settings as well as wider points of context shaping these patterns., Design: This article analyses findings from mixed-methods anthropological studies of antibiotic use in a range of rural and urban settings in Zimbabwe, Malawi and Uganda between 2018 and 2020. All used a 'drug bag' survey tool to capture the frequency and types of antibiotics used among 1811 households. We then undertook observations and interviews in residential settings, with health providers and key stakeholders to better understand the stories behind the most-used antibiotics., Results: The most self-reported 'frequently used' antibiotics across settings were amoxicillin, cotrimoxazole and metronidazole. The stories behind their use varied between settings, reflecting differences in the configuration of health systems and antibiotic supplies. At the same time, these stories reveal cross-cutting features and omissions of contemporary global health programming that shape the contours of antibiotic (over)use at national and local levels., Conclusions: Our findings challenge the predominant focus of stewardship frameworks on the practices of antibiotic end users. We suggest future interventions could consider systems-rather than individuals-as stewards of antibiotics, reducing the need to rely on these medicines to fix other issues of inequity, productivity and security., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Addressing antibiotic use is essential to tackle antimicrobial resistance, a major human and animal health challenge. This review seeks to inform stewardship efforts in companion animals by collating research insights regarding antibiotic use in this group and identifying overlooked avenues for future research and stewardship efforts. The development of population-based methods has established that antibiotics are frequently used in companion animal care. Research insights are also contributing toward an in-depth comprehension of the contexts to antibiotic use. Qualitative approaches, for example, have enabled a nuanced understanding in four key areas: interactions with owners, clinical and financial risk management, time pressures, and clinic dynamics. This review identifies that much of the existing research frames antibiotic use as the result of choices made by the individuals at the interface of their use. Future research and policy endeavours could look beyond the moment of prescribing to consider the societal structures and networks in which companion animal antibiotic use is entangled. A diversification in research approaches and frameworks through which antibiotic use is understood will facilitate the identification of additional targets for stewardship initiatives beyond providing information and awareness campaigns., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2021 Tompson, Mateus, Brodbelt and Chandler.)

In this article, we consider how social sciences can help us to understand the rising use of antibiotics globally. Drawing on ethnography as a way to research how we are in the world, we explore scholarship that situates antibiotic use in relation to interactions of pathogens, humans, animals and the environment in the context of globalization, changes in agriculture and urbanization. We group this research into three areas: practices, structures and networks. Much of the public health and related social research concerning antimicrobial resistance has focused on antibiotic use as a practice, with research characterizing how antibiotics are used by patients, farmers, fishermen, drug sellers, clinicians and others. Researchers have also positioned antibiotic use as emergent of political-economic structures, shedding light on how working and living conditions, quality of care, hygiene and sanitation foster reliance on antibiotics. A growing body of research sees antibiotics as embedded in networks that, in addition to social and institutional networks, comprise physical, technical and historical connections such as guidelines, supply chains and reporting systems. Taken together, this research emphasizes the multiple ways that antibiotics have become built into daily life. Wider issues, which may be invisible without explication through ethnographic approaches, need to be considered when addressing antibiotic use. Adopting the complementary vantage points of practices, networks and structures can support the diversification of our responses to AMR., (© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Society for Antimicrobial Chemotherapy.)

Rising concerns around antimicrobial resistance (AMR) have led to a renewed push to rationalise antibiotic prescribing in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). There is increasing unease in conceptualising antibiotic use as individuals behaving '(ir)rationally' and recognition that rising use is emergent of and contributing to wider economic and political challenges. But in between these individual and societal 'drivers' of antibiotic use is an everyday articulation of care through these substances, written-in to the scripts, delivery chains and pedagogics of global healthcare. This article focuses on this everyday 'architecture' that over time and across spaces has knitted-in antibiotics and rhetorics of control that inform current responses to AMR. Based on historically informed ethnographic research in Zimbabwe, we examine points of continuity and change between 20th Century rational drug use (RDU) discourses and contemporary socio-political formations around AMR and antimicrobial stewardship (AMS), paying particular attention to their co-evolution with the process of pharmaceuticalisation. We illustrate how the framework and techniques of RDU were embedded within programmes to increase access to essential medicines and as such complemented the building of one of Africa's strongest postcolonial health systems in Zimbabwe. Whilst 20th Century RDU was focused on securing the health and safety of patients and affordability for systems, AMS programmes aim to secure medicines. Continuous through both RDU and AMS programmes is the persistent rhetoric of 'irrational use'. Health workers in Harare, attuned to the values and language of these programmes, enact in their everyday practice an architecture in which antibiotics have been designed-in. This research illustrates the struggle to optimise antibiotic use within current framings for action. We propose a reconfiguring of the architecture of global health such that frontline prescribers are able to provide 'good' care without necessarily turning to antibiotics. To design-out antibiotic reliance would require attention beyond '(ir)rationality', to the redrafting of blueprints that inscribe practice., (Copyright © 2020 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: Use of antibiotics to treat humans and animals is increasing worldwide, but evidence from low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) is limited. We conducted cross-sectional surveys in households and farms in Uganda to assess patterns of antibiotic use among humans and animals., Methods: Between May and December 2018, a convenience sample of 100 households in Nagongera (rural), 174 households in Namuwongo (urban) and 115 poultry and piggery farms in Wakiso (peri-urban) were selected and enrolled. Using the 'drug bag' method, participants identified antibiotics they used frequently and the sources of these medicines. Prevalence outcomes were compared between different sites using prevalence ratios (PRs) and chi-squared tests., Results: Nearly all respondents in Nagongera and Namuwongo reported using antibiotics to treat household members, most within the past month (74.7% Nagongera versus 68.8% Namuwongo, P  =   0.33). Use of metronidazole was significantly more common in Namuwongo than in Nagongera (73.6% versus 40.0%, PR 0.54, 95% CI: 0.42-0.70, P  <   0.001), while the opposite was true for amoxicillin (33.3% versus 58.0%, PR 1.74, 95% CI: 1.33-2.28, P  <   0.001).Veterinary use of antibiotics within the past month was much higher in Wakiso than in Nagongera (71.3% versus 15.0%, P  <   0.001). At both sites, oxytetracycline hydrochloride was the most frequently used veterinary antibiotic, but it was used more commonly in Wakiso than in Nagongera (76.5% versus 31.0%, PR 0.41, 95% CI: 0.30-0.55, P  <   0.001)., Conclusions: Antibiotics are used differently across Uganda. Further research is needed to understand why antibiotics are relied upon in different ways in different contexts. Efforts to optimize antibiotic use should be tailored to specific settings., (© The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Society for Antimicrobial Chemotherapy.)

Antimicrobial use in companion animals is a largely overlooked contributor to the complex problem of antimicrobial resistance. Humans and companion animals share living spaces and some classes of antimicrobials, including those categorised as Highest Priority Critically Important Antimicrobials (HPCIAs). Veterinary guidelines recommend that these agents are not used as routine first line treatment and their frequent deployment could offer a surrogate measure of 'inappropriate' antimicrobial use. Anthropological methods provide a complementary means to understand how medicines use makes sense 'on-the-ground' and situated in the broader social context. This mixed-methods study sought to investigate antimicrobial use in companion animals whilst considering the organisational context in which increasing numbers of veterinarians work. Its aims were to i) to epidemiologically analyse the variation in the percentage of antimicrobial events comprising of HPCIAs in companion animal dogs attending UK clinics belonging to large veterinary groups and, ii) to analyse how the organisational structure of companion animal practice influences antimicrobial use, based on insight gained from anthropological fieldwork. A VetCompass TM dataset composed of 468,665 antimicrobial dispensing events in 240,998 dogs from June 2012 to June 2014 was analysed. A hierarchical model for HPCIA usage was built using a backwards elimination approach with clinic and dog identity numbers included as random effects, whilst veterinary group, age quartile, breed and clinic region were included as fixed effects. The largest odds ratio of an antimicrobial event comprising of a HPCIA by veterinary group was 7.34 (95% confidence interval 5.14 - 10.49), compared to the lowest group (p < 0.001). Intraclass correlation was more strongly clustered at dog (0.710, 95% confidence interval 0.701 - 0.719) than clinic level (0.089, 95% confidence interval 0.076 -0.104). This suggests that veterinarians working in the same clinic do not automatically share ways of working with antimicrobials. Fieldwork revealed how the structure of the companion animal veterinary sector was more fluid than that depicted in the statistical model, and identified opportunities and challenges regarding altering antimicrobial use. These findings were organised into the following themes: "Highest priority what?"; "He's just not himself"; "Oh no - here comes the antibiotics police"; "We're like ships that pass in the night"; and "There's not enough hours in the day". This rigorous mixed-methods study demonstrates the importance of working across disciplinary silos when tackling the complex problem of antimicrobial resistance. The findings can help inform the design of sustainable stewardship schemes for the companion animal veterinary sector., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

There is increasing concern globally about the enormity of the threats posed by antimicrobial resistance (AMR) to human, animal, plant and environmental health. A proliferation of international, national and institutional reports on the problems posed by AMR and the need for antibiotic stewardship have galvanised attention on the global stage. However, the AMR community increasingly laments a lack of action, often identified as an 'implementation gap'. At a policy level, the design of internationally salient solutions that are able to address AMR's interconnected biological and social (historical, political, economic and cultural) dimensions is not straightforward. This multidisciplinary paper responds by asking two basic questions: (A) Is a universal approach to AMR policy and antibiotic stewardship possible? (B) If yes, what hallmarks characterise 'good' antibiotic policy? Our multistage analysis revealed four central challenges facing current international antibiotic policy: metrics, prioritisation, implementation and inequality. In response to this diagnosis, we propose three hallmarks that can support robust international antibiotic policy. Emerging hallmarks for good antibiotic policies are: Structural, Equitable and Tracked. We describe these hallmarks and propose their consideration should aid the design and evaluation of international antibiotic policies with maximal benefit at both local and international scales., Competing Interests: Competing interests: SH is Scientific Director of CIHR’s Institute of Population and Public Health and CIHR’s Scientific Co-Lead for Antimicrobial Resistance. He is Director of the WHO Collaborating Centre on Global Governance of Antimicrobial Resistance. KO in principal investigator of CARB-X, a project at Boston University (my employer), funded by three governments (US, UK and Germany) and two charitable foundations (Wellcome Trust and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation). CARB-X is a non-profit, making grants for preclinical antibacterial research. I do not view this as a conflict, but disclose in an abundance of caution. APR is the co-ordinator of the JPIAMR funded Network NEAR-AMR. ADS reports grants from ReAct-Action on Antibiotic Resistance and from Open Society Foundation during the conduct of the study. He served as Co-Convener of the UN Interagency Coordination Group on Antimicrobial Resistance (2018–2019), as a member of the Expert Commission on Addressing the Livestock Contribution to the Antibiotic Resistance Crisis (2016–2017), as a commissioned author to the UK Commission on AMR on 'A Framework for Costing the Lowering of Antimicrobial Use in Food Animal Production' (2016), as Head of the Secretariat of the Antibiotic Resistance Coalition, and as a Member of the Working Group on Antibiotic Resistance for the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (2013–2014)., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.)

Background: There has been a successful push towards parasitological diagnosis of malaria in Africa, mainly with rapid diagnostic tests (mRDTs), which has reduced over-prescribing of artemisinin-based combination therapies (ACT) to malaria test-negative patients. The effect on prescribing for test-positive patients has received much less attention. Malaria infection in endemic Africa is often most dangerous for young children and those in low-transmission settings. This study examined non-prescription of antimalarials for patients with malaria infection demonstrated by positive mRDT results, and in particular these groups who are most vulnerable to poor outcomes if antimalarials are not given., Methods: Analysis of data from 562,762 patients in 8 studies co-designed as part of the ACT Consortium, conducted 2007-2013 in children and adults, in Cameroon, Ghana, Nigeria, Tanzania, and Uganda, in a variety of public and private health care sector settings, and across a range of malaria endemic zones., Results: Of 106,039 patients with positive mRDT results (median age 6 years), 7426 (7.0%) were not prescribed an ACT antimalarial. The proportion of mRDT-positive patients not prescribed ACT ranged across sites from 1.3 to 37.1%. For patients under age 5 years, 3473/44,539 (7.8%) were not prescribed an ACT, compared with 3833/60,043 (6.4%) of those aged ≥ 5 years. The proportion of < 5-year-olds not prescribed ACT ranged up to 41.8% across sites. The odds of not being prescribed an ACT were 2-32 times higher for patients in settings with lower-transmission intensity (using test positivity as a proxy) compared to areas of higher transmission. mRDT-positive children in low-transmission settings were especially likely not to be prescribed ACT, with proportions untreated up to 70%. Of the 7426 mRDT-positive patients not prescribed an ACT, 4121 (55.5%) were prescribed other, non-recommended non-ACT antimalarial medications, and the remainder (44.5%) were prescribed no antimalarial., Conclusions: In eight studies of mRDT implementation in five African countries, substantial proportions of patients testing mRDT-positive were not prescribed an ACT antimalarial, and many were not prescribed an antimalarial at all. Patients most vulnerable to serious outcomes, children < 5 years and those in low-transmission settings, were most likely to not be prescribed antimalarials, and young children in low-transmission settings were least likely to be treated for malaria. This major public health risk must be addressed in training and practice., Trial Registration: Reported in individual primary studies.

Background: Intermittent preventive treatment (IPT) of malaria is recommended as policy for certain high-risk populations, but not currently for schoolchildren. A cluster-randomized trial was conducted to evaluate the effect of IPT with dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine (DP) on primary schoolchildren in Jinja, Uganda. Results of the impact of IPT of schoolchildren on community-level transmission have been reported previously. Here, secondary outcomes from a school-based survey are presented., Methods: Eighty-four clusters (one primary school plus 100 households) were randomized to intervention and control (1:1 ratio). Participants from intervention schools received monthly IPT with DP for up to 6 rounds (June-December 2014). At endline (November-December 2014), randomly selected children from all 84 schools were surveyed (13 per school) and thick blood smears were done. Those with fever or history of fever were tested with rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) for malaria. Haemoglobin was measured in every fifth participant. Outcome measures included prevalence of asexual parasites and gametocytes (by microscopy), and prevalence of anaemia. Prevalence outcomes were analysed using generalized linear Poisson models with log link function, incorporating a cluster-level random intercept and quantified using prevalence risk ratios., Results: Among 23,280 students listed on the 42 intervention school registers, 10,079 (43.3%) aged 5-20 years were enrolled into the IPT intervention and received at least one dose of DP; of these, 9286 (92.1%) received at least one full (3-day) course. In total, 1092 children were enrolled into the final school survey (546 per arm) and had a thick blood smear done; of these, 255 had haemoglobin measured (129 intervention, 126 control). Children in the intervention arm were less likely to have asexual parasites (9.2% intervention vs 44.1% control, adjusted risk ratio [aRR] 0.22 [95% CI 0.16-0.30] p < 0.001), gametocytes (3.1% intervention vs 9.5% control, aRR 0.34 [95% CI 0.20-0.56] p < 0.001), fever (20.2% intervention vs 56.2% control, aRR 0.35 [95% CI 0.25-0.50] p < 0.001), or symptomatic malaria (5.1% intervention vs 35.7% control, aRR 0.14 [95% CI 0.08-0.26] p < 0.001). Prevalence of anaemia and mean haemoglobin were similar in both study arms., Conclusions: School-aged children are a major reservoir of malaria parasites. Delivering IPT to schoolchildren would benefit individual children and may reduce transmission. School-based IPT could help to intensify malaria control toward elimination, and should be considered for policies and programmes. Trial registration Clinicaltrials.gov (NCT02009215), Registered 11 December 2013. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02009215.

Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is one of the latest issues to galvanise political and financial investment as an emerging global health threat. This paper explores the construction of AMR as a problem, following three lines of analysis. First, an examination of some of the ways in which AMR has become an object for action-through defining, counting and projecting it. Following Lakoff's work on emerging infectious diseases, the paper illustrates that while an 'actuarial' approach to AMR may be challenging to stabilise due to definitional and logistical issues, it has been successfully stabilised through a 'sentinel' approach that emphasises the threat of AMR. Second, the paper draws out a contrast between the way AMR is formulated in terms of a problem of connectedness-a 'One Health' issue-and the frequent solutions to AMR being focused on individual behaviour. The paper suggests that AMR presents an opportunity to take seriously connections, scale and systems but that this effort is undermined by the prevailing tendency to reduce health issues to matters for individual responsibility. Third, the paper takes AMR as a moment of infrastructural inversion (Bowker and Star) when antimicrobials and the work they do are rendered more visible. This leads to the proposal of antibiotics as infrastructure-part of the woodwork that we take for granted, and entangled with our ways of doing life, in particular modern life. These explorations render visible the ways social, economic and political frames continue to define AMR and how it may be acted upon, which opens up possibilities for reconfiguring AMR research and action., Competing Interests: Competing interests: The author declares no competing interests.

Understanding the prevalence and types of antibiotics used in a given human and/or animal population is important for informing stewardship strategies. Methods used to capture such data often rely on verbal elicitation of reported use that tend to assume shared medical terminology. Studies have shown the category 'antibiotic' does not translate well linguistically or conceptually, which limits the accuracy of these reports. This article presents a 'Drug Bag' method to study antibiotic use (ABU) in households and on farms, which involves using physical samples of all the antibiotics available within a given study site. We present the conceptual underpinnings of the method, and our experiences of using this method to produce data about antibiotic recognition, use and accessibility in the context of anthropological research in Africa and South-East Asia. We illustrate the kinds of qualitative and quantitative data the method can produce, comparing and contrasting our experiences in different settings. The Drug Bag method produce accurate antibiotic use data as well as provide a talking point for participants to discuss antibiotic experiences. We propose it can help improve our understanding of antibiotic use in peoples' everyday lives across different contexts, and our reflections add to a growing conversation around methods to study ABU beyond prescriber settings, where data gaps are currently substantial.

Background: Intermittent preventive treatment (IPT) is a well established malaria control intervention. Evidence that delivering IPT to schoolchildren could provide community-level benefits is limited. We did a cluster-randomised controlled trial to assess the effect of IPT of primary schoolchildren with dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine (DP) on indicators of malaria transmission in the community, in Jinja, Uganda., Methods: We included 84 clusters, each comprising one primary school and the 100 closest available households. The clusters were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive IPT with DP or standard care (control) by restricted randomisation to ensure balance by geography and school type. Children in intervention schools received IPT monthly for up to six rounds (June to December, 2014). We did cross-sectional community surveys in randomly selected households at baseline and in January to April, 2015, during which we measured participants' temperatures and obtained finger-prick blood smears for measurement of parasite prevalence by microscopy. We also did entomological surveys 1 night per month in households from 20 randomly selected IPT and 20 control clusters. The primary trial outcome was parasite prevalence in the final community survey. The primary entomological survey outcome was the annual entomological inoculation rate (aEIR) from July, 2014, to April, 2015. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02009215., Findings: Among 23 280 students registered in the 42 intervention schools, 10 079 (43%) aged 5-20 years were enrolled and received at least one dose of DP. 9286 (92%) of 10 079 received at least one full course of DP (three doses). Community-level parasite prevalence was lower in the intervention clusters than in the control clusters (19% vs 23%, adjusted risk ratio 0·85, 95% CI 0·73-1·00, p=0·05). The aEIR was lower in the intervention group than in the control group, but not significantly so (10·1 vs 15·2 infective bites per person, adjusted incidence rate ratio 0·80, 95% CI 0·36-1·80, p=0·59)., Interpretation: IPT of schoolchildren with DP might have a positive effect on community-level malaria indicators and be operationally feasible. Studies with greater IPT coverage are needed., Funding: UK Medical Research Council, UK Department for International Development, and Wellcome Trust., (Copyright © 2018 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Since 2010, the World Health Organization has been recommending that all suspected cases of malaria be confirmed with parasite-based diagnosis before treatment. These guidelines represent a paradigm shift away from presumptive antimalarial treatment of fever. Malaria rapid diagnostic tests (mRDTs) are central to implementing this policy, intended to target artemisinin-based combination therapies (ACT) to patients with confirmed malaria and to improve management of patients with nonmalarial fevers. The ACT Consortium conducted ten linked studies, eight in sub-Saharan Africa and two in Afghanistan, to evaluate the impact of mRDT introduction on case management across settings that vary in malaria endemicity and healthcare provider type. This synthesis includes 562,368 outpatient encounters (study size range 2,400-432,513). mRDTs were associated with significantly lower ACT prescription (range 8-69% versus 20-100%). Prescribing did not always adhere to malaria test results; in several settings, ACTs were prescribed to more than 30% of test-negative patients or to fewer than 80% of test-positive patients. Either an antimalarial or an antibiotic was prescribed for more than 75% of patients across most settings; lower antimalarial prescription for malaria test-negative patients was partly offset by higher antibiotic prescription. Symptomatic management with antipyretics alone was prescribed for fewer than 25% of patients across all scenarios. In community health worker and private retailer settings, mRDTs increased referral of patients to other providers. This synthesis provides an overview of shifts in case management that may be expected with mRDT introduction and highlights areas of focus to improve design and implementation of future case management programs.

Development of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) threatens our ability to treat common and life threatening infections. Identifying the emergence of AMR requires strengthening of surveillance for AMR, particularly in low and middle-income countries (LMICs) where the burden of infection is highest and health systems are least able to respond. This work aimed, through a combination of desk-based investigation, discussion with colleagues worldwide, and visits to three contrasting countries (Ethiopia, Malawi and Vietnam), to map and compare existing models and surveillance systems for AMR, to examine what worked and what did not work. Current capacity for AMR surveillance varies in LMICs, but and systems in development are focussed on laboratory surveillance. This approach limits understanding of AMR and the extent to which laboratory results can inform local, national and international public health policy. An integrated model, combining clinical, laboratory and demographic surveillance in sentinel sites is more informative and costs for clinical and demographic surveillance are proportionally much lower. The speed and extent to which AMR surveillance can be strengthened depends on the functioning of the health system, and the resources available. Where there is existing laboratory capacity, it may be possible to develop 5-20 sentinel sites with a long term view of establishing comprehensive surveillance; but where health systems are weaker and laboratory infrastructure less developed, available expertise and resources may limit this to 1-2 sentinel sites. Prioritising core functions, such as automated blood cultures, reduces investment at each site. Expertise to support AMR surveillance in LMICs may come from a variety of international, or national, institutions. It is important that these organisations collaborate to support the health systems on which AMR surveillance is built, as well as improving technical capacity specifically relating to AMR surveillance. Strong collaborations, and leadership, drive successful AMR surveillance systems across countries and contexts., Competing Interests: Competing interests: No competing interests were disclosed.

The observation that many people in Africa seek care for febrile illness in the retail sector has led to a number of public health initiatives to try to improve the quality of care provided in these settings. The potential to support the introduction of rapid diagnostic tests for malaria (mRDTs) into drug shops is coming under increased scrutiny. Those in favour argue that it enables the harmonisation of policy around testing and treatment for malaria and maintains a focus on market-based solutions to healthcare. Despite the enthusiasm among many global health actors for this policy option, there is a limited understanding of the consequences of the introduction of mRDTs in the retail sector. We undertook an interpretive, mixed methods study with drug shop vendors (DSVs), their clients and local health workers to explore the uses and interpretations of mRDTs as they became part of daily practice in drug shops during a trial in Mukono District, Uganda. This paper reports the unintended consequences of their introduction. It describes how the test engendered trust in the professional competence of DSVs; was misconstrued by clients and providers as enabling a more definitive diagnosis of disease in general rather than malaria alone; that blood testing made drug shops more attractive places to seek care than they had previously been; was described as shifting treatment-seeking behaviour away from formal health centres and into drug shops; and influenced an increase in sales of medications, particularly antibiotics., Trial Registration Number: NCT01194557; Results., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared.

Abstract -Rigorous evidence of "what works" to improve health care is in demand, but methods for the development of interventions have not been scrutinized in the same ways as methods for evaluation. This article presents and examines intervention development processes of eight malaria health care interventions in East and West Africa. A case study approach was used to draw out experiences and insights from multidisciplinary teams who undertook to design and evaluate these studies. Four steps appeared necessary for intervention design: (1) definition of scope, with reference to evaluation possibilities; (2) research to inform design, including evidence and theory reviews and empirical formative research; (3) intervention design, including consideration and selection of approaches and development of activities and materials; and (4) refining and finalizing the intervention, incorporating piloting and pretesting. Alongside these steps, projects produced theories, explicitly or implicitly, about (1) intended pathways of change and (2) how their intervention would be implemented.The work required to design interventions that meet and contribute to current standards of evidence should not be underestimated. Furthermore, the process should be recognized not only as technical but as the result of micro and macro social, political, and economic contexts, which should be acknowledged and documented in order to infer generalizability. Reporting of interventions should go beyond descriptions of final intervention components or techniques to encompass the development process. The role that evaluation possibilities play in intervention design should be brought to the fore in debates over health care improvement.

Optimizing quality of care for malaria and other febrile illnesses is a complex challenge of major public health importance. To evaluate the impact of an intervention aiming to improve malaria case management on the health of community children, a cluster-randomized trial was conducted from 2010-2013 in Tororo, Uganda, where malaria transmission is high. Twenty public health centers were included; 10 were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to intervention or control. Households within 2 km of health centers provided the sampling frame for the evaluation. The PRIME intervention included training in fever case management using malaria rapid diagnostic tests (mRDTs), patient-centered services, and health center management; plus provision of mRDTs and artemether-lumefantrine. Cross-sectional community surveys were conducted at baseline and endline (N = 8,766), and a cohort of children was followed for approximately 18 months (N = 992). The primary outcome was prevalence of anemia (hemoglobin < 11.0 g/dL) in children under 5 years of age in the final community survey. The intervention was delivered successfully; however, no differences in prevalence of anemia or parasitemia were observed between the study arms in the final community survey or the cohort. In the final survey, prevalence of anemia in children under 5 years of age was 62.5% in the intervention versus 63.1% in control (adjusted risk ratio = 1.01; 95% confidence interval = 0.91-1.13; P = 0.82). The PRIME intervention, focusing on training and commodities, did not produce the expected health benefits in community children in Tororo. This challenges common assumptions that improving quality of care and access to malaria diagnostics will yield health gains., (© The American Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene.)