Pragmatic Use of Planetary Health and Nature-Based Solutions for Future Pandemics Using COVID-19 Case Scenario

https://www.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fpubh.2021.62012

Brucellosis Control in Malta and Serbia: A One Health Evaluation

Brucellosis, also known as \u201cundulant fever\u201d or \u201cMalta fever\u201d, is a zoonotic infection caused by microorganisms belonging to Brucella, a genus of gram-negative coccobacilli that behave as facultative intracellular pathogens of ruminants, swine and other animals. Brucellosis is a threat to public health, hence identifying the optimal way of preventing disease spread is important. Under certain circumstances, integrated, multidisciplinary \u201cOne Health\u201d (OH) initiatives provide added value compared to unidisciplinary or conventional health initiatives. Conceptualizing and conducting evaluations of OH approaches may help facilitate decisions on resource allocation. This article historically describes and compares Malta's 1995\u20131997 with Serbia's 2004\u20132006 brucellosis control programmes and quantitatively assesses the extent to which they were compliant with a OH approach. For both case studies, we describe the OH initiative and the system within which it operates. Characteristic OH operations (i.e., thinking, planning, working) and supporting infrastructures (to allow sharing, learning and systemic organization) were evaluated. We scored the different aspects of these programmes, with values ranging from zero to one (1 = strong integration of OH). Malta demonstrated a higher OH index (0.54) and ratio (1.37) than Serbia (0.49 and 1.14 respectively). We conclude that context and timing are key to determining how, when and why a One Health approach should be applied. The adoption of a true OH approach that involved systemic organization, leadership clarity and transdisciplinary communication, collaboration, and co-ordination was essential to Malta's successful eradication of brucellosis after several failed attempts. In contrast, contextual factors in Serbia permitted the successful adoption of a primarily sectorial approach for short term control of brucellosis. However, while a fully-fledged transdisciplinary OH approach was not initially required, it is likely to be key to maintenance of brucellosis control in the medium and long term. Through these two case studies, we demonstrate that One Health initiatives should be applied at the right place, at the right time, with the right people and using the appropriate conditions/infrastructure. Lastly, OH evaluations should include economic assessments to identify optimal of resources in these situations, thereby justifying funding and political support required

Epidemiologic-economic models and the One Health paradigm: echinococcosis and leishmaniasis, case studies in Veneto region, Northeastern Italy

Epidemiology and health economics have systemic interdependencies. The identification of the economic outcomes of any disease is operated by overlapping its epidemiology with the economic functions of the impacted entities. This communication presents two epidemiologic-economic models designed to evaluate the economic burden of cystic echinococcosis and leishmaniasis in Veneto (Northeastern Italy). Following a One Health approach, the research integrates expertise from different disciplines and institutions and fulfilled its first stage by defining the relevant cost categories and the data collection strategy for the two diseases in the study area. The two models identify the relevant epidemiological factors and the economic outcomes of infections in both animals and humans. The results, visualized in flow charts indicating the types of costs associated with these zoonoses, will guide data collection and the epidemiologic and economic assessment in the next research stages. This experience shows that One Health methods, although still innovative or unusual in many scientific and professional contexts, can be applied by using relatively limited resources and already available professional skills

Evaluating the contribution of antimicrobial use in farmed animals to global antimicrobial resistance in humans

Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is currently regarded by the World Health Organization (WHO) as one of the most significant risks to global public health. The most critical causes of AMR infections in humans are the misuse and overuse of antimicrobials in humans and farmed animals. The rising global demand for food of animal origin encourages the increase of animal production worldwide, especially in developing countries. Simultaneously, current farming practices often extensively use antimicrobials on animals, influencing bacterial AMR incidence. This study aims to evaluate the correlation between antimicrobial use (AMU) in farmed animals and the detection of AMR infections in humans, the effects of enforcing laws in animal farming in a country on AMR situation in the neighbors, and the potential of AMR to spread from one country to another. Using data from 30 largest animal-producing countries in different regions of the world, between 2010 and 2020, and a Spatial Durbin Model (SDM), we found that AMU in farmed animals increases AMR in humans and there is a spatial dependence between countries regarding AMR spreading. Such findings indicate that a globally coordinated strategy regulating AMU on farmed animals may reduce AMR emergence and worldwide spreading

Advancing One Health: Updated core competencies

One Health recognises the interdependence between the health of humans, animals, plants and the environment. With the increasing inclusion of One Health in multiple global health strategies, the One Health workforce must be prepared to protect and sustain the health and well-being of life on the planet. In this paper, a review of past and currently accepted One Health core competencies was conducted, with competence gaps identified. Here, the Network for Ecohealth and One Health (NEOH) propose updated core competencies designed to simplify what can be a complex area, grouping competencies into three main areas of: Skills; Values and Attitudes; and Knowledge and Awareness; with several layers underlying each. These are intentionally applicable to stakeholders from various sectors and across all levels to support capacity-building efforts within the One Health workforce. The updated competencies from NEOH can be used to evaluate and enhance current curricula, create new ones, or inform professional training programs at all levels, including students, university teaching staff, or government officials as well as continual professional development for frontline health practitioners and policy makers. The competencies are aligned with the new definition of One Health developed by the One Health High-Level Expert Panel (OHHLEP), and when supported by subjectspecific expertise, will deliver the transformation needed to prevent and respond to complex global challenges

One Health Evaluation: A Case Study at the University of Bologna

The level of One Health (OH), or \u201cOne Health-ness,\u201d of health interventions has been defined as the capacity to operate according to six dimensions concerning OH operations and OH infrastructures, respectively (thinking, planning, and working; and information sharing, reciprocal learning, and systemic organization). Although health initiatives and research increasingly claim their orientation toward OH, such a capacity is rarely assessed. The objective of this study is to evaluate the One Health-ness of the academic team of the University of Bologna (UNIBO Team) working in the \u201cELEPHANT\u201d project (Empowering universities' Learning and rEsearch caPacities in the one Health Approach for the maNagement of animals at the wildlife, livestock and human interface in SouTh Africa). This project involves universities, six from South Africa and two from Europe, and aims at embedding OH in research and learning to enable the control of diseases at the human, animal, and environmental interface, and to emphasize the interests of local African communities with wildlife conservation. The methodology adopts the NEOH method, developed in 2018 by the EU-COST Action, \u201cNetwork for the Evaluation of One Health.\u201d The approach is based on questionnaires delivered to participants, which focus on the six OH dimensions, and then translate answers into quantitative metrics through the OH Index (OHI) and the OH Ratio (OHR). The following two evaluation levels are foreseen: the whole project and the single partner institutions. The evaluations are carried on in parallel, with preliminary, mid-term, and final assessments, to monitor the efficacy of the project actions. The preliminary evaluation of the UNIBO Team resulted in the OHI of 0.23 and the OHR of 1.69 which indicate a low degree of OH-ness and an imbalance between OH operation and OH infrastructure. The UNIBO case study will be the baseline for the evaluation of the other partner institutions involved in the ELEPHANT project. This type of evaluation can support the implementation of OH practices inside a project and underpin the strategies that allow to achieving more effective results. Any improvement in the OH-ness of each single academic team can be also considered as a result of the ELEPHANT project, thus showing its multiplier effect in the context

Brucellosis Control in Malta and Serbia: A One Health Evaluation

Brucellosis, also known as “undulant fever” or “Malta fever”, is a zoonotic infection caused by microorganisms belonging to Brucella, a genus of gram-negative coccobacilli that behave as facultative intracellular pathogens of ruminants, swine and other animals. Brucellosis is a threat to public health, hence identifying the optimal way of preventing disease spread is important. Under certain circumstances, integrated, multidisciplinary “One Health” (OH) initiatives provide added value compared to unidisciplinary or conventional health initiatives. Conceptualizing and conducting evaluations of OH approaches may help facilitate decisions on resource allocation. This article historically describes and compares Malta's 1995–1997 with Serbia's 2004–2006 brucellosis control programmes and quantitatively assesses the extent to which they were compliant with a OH approach. For both case studies, we describe the OH initiative and the system within which it operates. Characteristic OH operations (i.e., thinking, planning, working) and supporting infrastructures (to allow sharing, learning and systemic organization) were evaluated. We scored the different aspects of these programmes, with values ranging from zero to one (1 = strong integration of OH). Malta demonstrated a higher OH index (0.54) and ratio (1.37) than Serbia (0.49 and 1.14 respectively). We conclude that context and timing are key to determining how, when and why a One Health approach should be applied. The adoption of a true OH approach that involved systemic organization, leadership clarity and transdisciplinary communication, collaboration, and co-ordination was essential to Malta's successful eradication of brucellosis after several failed attempts. In contrast, contextual factors in Serbia permitted the successful adoption of a primarily sectorial approach for short term control of brucellosis. However, while a fully-fledged transdisciplinary OH approach was not initially required, it is likely to be key to maintenance of brucellosis control in the medium and long term. Through these two case studies, we demonstrate that One Health initiatives should be applied at the right place, at the right time, with the right people and using the appropriate conditions/infrastructure. Lastly, OH evaluations should include economic assessments to identify optimal of resources in these situations, thereby justifying funding and political support required

Knowledge integration in One Health policy formulation, implementation and evaluation

The One Health concept covers the interrelationship between human, animal and environmental health and requires multistakeholder collaboration across many cultural, disciplinary, institutional and sectoral boundaries. Yet, the implementation of the One Health approach appears hampered by shortcomings in the global framework for health governance. Knowledge integration approaches, at all stages of policy development, could help to address these shortcomings. The identification of key objectives, the resolving of trade-offs and the creation of a common vision and a common direction can be supported by multicriteria analyses. Evidence-based decision-making and transformation of observations into narratives detailing how situations emerge and might unfold in the future can be achieved by systems thinking. Finally, transdisciplinary approaches can be used both to improve the effectiveness of existing systems and to develop novel networks for collective action. To strengthen One Health governance, we propose that knowledge integration becomes a key feature of all stages in the development of related policies. We suggest several ways in which such integration could be promoted