Capturing systematically users' experience of evaluation tools for integrated AMU and AMR surveillance

Tackling antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a goal for many countries. Integrated surveillance of antimicrobial use (AMU) and resistance is a prerequisite for effective risk mitigation. Regular evaluation of any surveillance is needed to ensure its effectiveness and efficiency. The question is how to evaluate specifically integrated surveillance for AMU and AMR. In an international network called CoEvalAMR, we have developed guidelines for selection of the most appropriate tools for such an evaluation. Moreover, we have assessed different evaluation tools as examples using a country case format and a methodology with a focus on the user's experience. This paper describes the updated methodology, which consists of a brief introduction to the case and to the tool separately. Moreover, there are 12 functional aspects and nine content themes which should be scored using a 4-tiered scale. Additionally, four Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats (SWOT) questions should be addressed. Results are illustrated using radar diagrams. An example of application of the updated methodology is given using the ECoSur evaluation tool. No tool can cover all evaluation aspects comprehensively in a user-friendly manner, so the choice of tool must be based upon the specific evaluation purpose. Moreover, adequate resources, time and training are needed to obtain useful outputs from the evaluation. Our updated methodology can be used by tool users to share their experience with available tools, and hereby assist other users in identifying the most suited tool for their evaluation purpose. Additionally, tool developers can get valuable information for further improvements of their tool

Risk of cross-contamination due to the use of antimicrobial medicated feed throughout the trail of feed from the feed mill to the farm.

&lt;p&gt;The cross-contamination of non-medicated feed with residues of antimicrobials causes an animal and public health concern associated with the potential for the selection and dissemination of resistance in commensal bacteria and potentially zoonotic bacteria. To identify the extent of this situation, we built a risk model that provides a way to estimate the percentage of cross-contaminated feed in total and at the different levels at which cross-contamination may occur (i.e. the feed mill, the transport truck, the farm), for different levels of antimicrobial medicated feed produced in a country per year. The model, estimated that when antimicrobial medicated feed represents a hypothetical xi = 2% of the total feed produced in a country per year, then 5.5% (95% CI = 3.4%; 11.4%) of the total feed produced in a year could be cross-contaminated with different levels of antimicrobials due to practices related to medicated feed. In detail, 1.80% (95% CI = 0.2%; 7.7%) of the total feed produced in such a country would be cross-contaminated due to antimicrobial carryover occurring at the feed mill level, 1.83% (95% CI = 1.3%; 2.0%) at the transport truck level and 1.84% (95% CI = 1.2%; 2.0%) at the farm level. The model also demonstrated that even in cases where antimicrobial medicated feed would be produced in end-of-line mixers or a fine dosing system on trucks, the risk of cross-contamination would not be negligible; the percentage of cross-contaminated feed produced in a country (where xi = 2%) per year would be 3.7% (95% CI = 2.9%; 4.0%) and 2.4% (95% CI = 1.6%; 2.7%), respectively. It is hard to reduce the risk to zero as it is the result of factors occurring at different levels. Thus, the use of antimicrobial medicated feed should be avoided as much as possible to reduce selection pressure.&lt;/p&gt;</p

Assessing evidence of a potential Salmonella transmission across the poultry food chain.

Enhanced Salmonella surveillance programmes in poultry were implemented in all European Member States, with minimum prevalence targets for a list of targeted serotypes to safeguard food and public health. Based on the Belgian Salmonella surveillance programme and focusing on poultry, the overarching aim of this study was to highlight possible Salmonella transmissions across the food chain (FC). For this purpose, firstly, the prevalence patterns of Salmonella (targeted and the most prevalent non-targeted) serotypes along the FC were described over time. Secondly, the effectiveness of the control measures against vertical transmission (breeders to 1-day-old broiler and layer chicks) was indirectly assessed by looking into the odds of targeted serotypes detection. Thirdly, it was appraised if Salmonella prevalence can significantly increase during broilers and layers production. In addition, it was tested if being tested negative at the end of production in broilers when tested positive at the entrance is serotype dependent (targeted vs. non-targeted serotypes). Results showed that, firstly, the prevalence patterns of the listed serotypes were inconstant over time and across the FC. Secondly, the odds of Salmonella targeted serotype detection in 1-day-old broiler and in 1-day-old layer flocks were lower than in breeder flocks while, thirdly, infection during broiler and layer production can lead to significant increase in positivity in subsequent samples. Finally, being infected by a targeted or by non-targeted serotype at the entrance of the flock poorly reflects the Salmonella status at the end of production. Note that this study did not make a distinction between the different sources of contamination and the effects of sampling methods and isolation methods should be subject to further&nbsp;investigation.</p

Defining the scope of the European Antimicrobial Resistance Surveillance network in Veterinary medicine (EARS-Vet): A bottom-up and One Health approach

Background: Building the European Antimicrobial Resistance Surveillance network in Veterinary medicine (EARS-Vet) was proposed to strengthen the European One Health antimicrobial resistance (AMR) surveillance approach. Objectives: To define the combinations of animal species/production types/age categories/bacterial species/specimens/antimicrobials to be monitored in EARS-Vet. Methods: The EARS-Vet scope was defined by consensus between 26 European experts. Decisions were guided by a survey of the combinations that are relevant and feasible to monitor in diseased animals in 13 European countries (bottom-up approach). Experts also considered the One Health approach and the need for EARS-Vet to complement existing European AMR monitoring systems coordinated by the ECDC and the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA). Results: EARS-Vet plans to monitor AMR in six animal species [cattle, swine, chickens (broilers and laying hens), turkeys, cats and dogs], for 11 bacterial species (Escherichia coli, Klebsiella pneumoniae, Mannheimia haemolytica, Pasteurella multocida, Actinobacillus pleuropneumoniae, Staphylococcus aureus, Staphylococcus pseudintermedius, Staphylococcus hyicus, Streptococcus uberis, Streptococcus dysgalactiae and Streptococcus suis). Relevant antimicrobials for their treatment were selected (e.g. tetracyclines) and complemented with antimicrobials of more specific public health interest (e.g. carbapenems). Molecular data detecting the presence of ESBLs, AmpC cephalosporinases and methicillin resistance shall be collected too. Conclusions: A preliminary EARS-Vet scope was defined, with the potential to fill important AMR monitoring gaps in the animal sector in Europe. It should be reviewed and expanded as the epidemiology of AMR changes, more countries participate and national monitoring capacities improve