Search

Retrospective analyses of the non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) used to combat the ongoing COVID-19 outbreak have highlighted the potential of optimizing interventions. These optimal interventions allow policymakers to manage NPIs to minimize the epidemiological and human health impacts of both COVID-19 and the intervention itself. Here, we use a susceptible-infectious-recovered (SIR) mathematical model to explore the feasibility of optimizing the duration, magnitude and trigger point of five different NPI scenarios to minimize the peak prevalence or the attack rate of a simulated UK COVID-19 outbreak. An optimal parameter space to minimize the peak prevalence or the attack rate was identified for each intervention scenario, with each scenario differing with regard to how reductions to transmission were modelled. However, we show that these optimal interventions are fragile, sensitive to epidemiological uncertainty and prone to implementation error. We highlight the use of robust, but suboptimal interventions as an alternative, with these interventions capable of mitigating the peak prevalence or the attack rate over a broader, more achievable parameter space, but being less efficacious than theoretically optimal interventions. This work provides an illustrative example of the concept of intervention optimization across a range of different NPI strategies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Routine usage of antibiotics for animal health is a key driver of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) in food-producing animals. Taxation is a possible approach to incentivise appropriate antibiotic usage in food-producing animals. Taxation can be applied flatly across all antibiotic classes, targeted to single antibiotic classes, or scaled based on resistance in each class, so called "differential" taxation. However, quantifying the potential impact of taxation is challenging, due to the nonlinear and unintuitive response of AMR dynamics to interventions and changes in antibiotic usage caused by alterations in price. We combine epidemiological models with price elasticities of demand for veterinary antibiotics, to compare the potential benefits of taxation schemes with currently implemented bans on antibiotic usage. Taxation strategies had effects comparable to bans on antibiotic usage in food-producing animals to reduce average resistance prevalence and prevent increases in overall infection. Taxation could also maximise the average number of antibiotics with a resistance prevalence of under 25% and potentially generate annual global revenues of ∼1 billion US$ under a 50% taxation to current prices of food-producing animal antibiotics. Differential taxation was also able to maintain a high availability of antibiotics over time compared to single and flat taxation strategies, while also having the lowest rates of intervention failure and highest potential revenue across all taxation strategies. These findings suggest that taxation should be further explored as a tool to combat the ongoing AMR crisis., Competing Interests: All authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest., (© 2023 The Authors.)

Antibiotic usage in livestock has been suggested as a driver of antimicrobial resistance in human and livestock populations. This has contributed to the implementation of stewardship programs to curtail usage of antibiotics in livestock. However, the consequences of antibiotic curtailment in livestock on human health are poorly understood. There is the potential for increases in the carriage of pathogens such as Salmonella spp. in livestock, and subsequent increases in human foodborne disease. We use a mathematical model fitted to four case studies, ampicillin and tetracycline usage in fattening pig and broiler poultry populations, to explore the impact of curtailing antibiotic usage in livestock on salmonellosis in humans. Increases in the daily incidence of salmonellosis and a decrease in the proportion of resistant salmonellosis were identified following curtailment of antibiotic usage in livestock. The extent of these increases in human foodborne disease ranged from negligible, to controllable through interventions to target the farm-to-fork pathway. This study provides a motivating example of one plausible scenario following curtailment of antibiotic usage in livestock and suggests that a focus on ensuring good farm-to-fork hygiene and livestock biosecurity is sufficient to mitigate the negative human health consequences of antibiotic stewardship in livestock populations., Competing Interests: All authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest., (© 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.)