• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

动物农业环境中的生物安保以及水、环境卫生和个人卫生(WASH)干预措施,以减少感染负担、抗生素使用和抗生素耐药性:一项重视健康的系统评价。

Biosecurity and water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) interventions in animal agricultural settings for reducing infection burden, antibiotic use, and antibiotic resistance: a One Health systematic review.

机构信息

Department of Global Health and Development, Faculty of Public Health and Policy, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK; Antimicrobial Resistance Centre, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK; Agriculture and Infectious Disease Group, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK.

Department of Global Health and Development, Faculty of Public Health and Policy, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK; Agriculture and Infectious Disease Group, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK.

出版信息

Lancet Planet Health. 2023 May;7(5):e418-e434. doi: 10.1016/S2542-5196(23)00049-9.

DOI:10.1016/S2542-5196(23)00049-9
PMID:37164518
Abstract

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.

摘要

预防和控制整个大健康领域的感染对于改善抗生素的使用和应对抗生素耐药性的出现和传播至关重要。关于如何在农业社区(占全球家庭的 45%)中最好地管理这些风险的证据尚未得到系统收集。本系统评价确定并总结了农场生物安全和水、环境卫生(WASH)干预措施的证据,这些措施有可能直接或间接地减少动物农业环境中的感染和抗生素耐药性。我们从数据库成立到 2019 年 12 月 31 日,在 17 个科学数据库(包括 Web of Science、PubMed 和区域数据库)和灰色文献中搜索了评估生物安全或 WASH 干预措施的文章,这些措施测量了我们感兴趣的结果;即感染负担、微生物负荷、动物、人类或环境中的抗生素使用和抗生素耐药性。使用系统评价中心实验室动物实验工具、非随机干预措施的偏倚风险评估和横断面研究评估工具评估了偏倚风险,但没有因偏倚风险而排除任何研究。由于发现的干预措施存在异质性,我们进行了叙述性综合。该方案已在 PROSPERO(CRD42020162345)上预先注册。在筛选出的 20672 篇论文中,有 104 篇被纳入本系统评价。64 项研究在高收入国家进行,24 项在中上收入国家进行,13 项在中下收入国家进行,2 项在低收入国家进行,1 项同时包括中上收入国家和中下收入国家。48 项干预措施集中在畜牧业(主要是猪),43 项集中在家禽(主要是鸡),1 项集中在畜牧业和家禽,12 项集中在水产养殖农场。104 项干预措施中的 68 项发生在密集型农场,22 项发生在实验环境中,10 项发生在小农或自给型农场。23 项水研究中有 10 项、35 项卫生研究中有 17 项、24 项环境卫生研究中有 15 项、所有三项空气质量研究中有三项以及 17 项其他与生物安全相关的干预措施中有 11 项报告了积极结果。总共,26 项研究中有 18 项报告了感染或疾病减少,71 项研究中有 37 项报告了微生物负荷减少,5 项研究中有 4 项报告了抗生素使用减少,20 项研究中有 7 项报告了抗生素耐药性减少。总体而言,57 项阳性干预措施中有 28 项和 30 项阴性或中性干预措施中有 17 项存在高偏倚风险。农场管理干预措施成功地减少了高达 57%的抗生素使用。以粪便为导向的干预措施减少了动物粪便中抗生素抗性基因或抗生素抗性细菌的数量,最高可达 99%。本系统评价强调了预防和控制感染和抗生素耐药性的挑战,即使在资源丰富的农业环境中也是如此。大多数证据来自于侧重于农场本身的研究,而不是针对农业社区或更广泛的社会、经济和政策环境,这些环境可能会影响他们的结果。在人类、动物和环境界面中应对抗生素耐药性时,WASH 和生物安全干预措施可以相辅相成。

相似文献

1
Biosecurity and water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) interventions in animal agricultural settings for reducing infection burden, antibiotic use, and antibiotic resistance: a One Health systematic review.动物农业环境中的生物安保以及水、环境卫生和个人卫生(WASH)干预措施,以减少感染负担、抗生素使用和抗生素耐药性:一项重视健康的系统评价。
Lancet Planet Health. 2023 May;7(5):e418-e434. doi: 10.1016/S2542-5196(23)00049-9.
2
Physical interventions to interrupt or reduce the spread of respiratory viruses.物理干预措施以阻断或减少呼吸道病毒的传播。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2023 Jan 30;1(1):CD006207. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD006207.pub6.
3
Clinician-targeted interventions to influence antibiotic prescribing behaviour for acute respiratory infections in primary care: an overview of systematic reviews.针对临床医生的干预措施对基层医疗中急性呼吸道感染抗生素处方行为的影响:系统评价概述
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Sep 7;9(9):CD012252. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012252.pub2.
4
Interventions to improve antibiotic prescribing practices for hospital inpatients.改善医院住院患者抗生素处方行为的干预措施。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Feb 9;2(2):CD003543. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD003543.pub4.
5
Interventions to improve water, sanitation, and hygiene for preventing soil-transmitted helminth infection.改善水、环境卫生和个人卫生的措施以预防土壤传播性蠕虫感染。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 Jun 21;6(6):CD012199. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012199.pub2.
6
Survivor, family and professional experiences of psychosocial interventions for sexual abuse and violence: a qualitative evidence synthesis.性虐待和暴力的心理社会干预的幸存者、家庭和专业人员的经验:定性证据综合。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 Oct 4;10(10):CD013648. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD013648.pub2.
7
Systemic pharmacological treatments for chronic plaque psoriasis: a network meta-analysis.系统性药理学治疗慢性斑块状银屑病:网络荟萃分析。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021 Apr 19;4(4):CD011535. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011535.pub4.
8
Drugs for preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting in adults after general anaesthesia: a network meta-analysis.成人全身麻醉后预防术后恶心呕吐的药物:网状Meta分析
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020 Oct 19;10(10):CD012859. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012859.pub2.
9
Interventions for preventing abuse in the elderly.预防老年人受虐待的干预措施。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016 Aug 16;2016(8):CD010321. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD010321.pub2.
10
Systemic pharmacological treatments for chronic plaque psoriasis: a network meta-analysis.慢性斑块状银屑病的全身药理学治疗:一项网状Meta分析。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020 Jan 9;1(1):CD011535. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011535.pub3.

引用本文的文献

1
Methods for assessing efficacy of cleaning and disinfection in livestock farms: a narrative review.评估养殖场清洁与消毒效果的方法:一项叙述性综述
Front Vet Sci. 2025 Aug 18;12:1581217. doi: 10.3389/fvets.2025.1581217. eCollection 2025.
2
A holistic review of buffalo productivity, reproductive efficiency, genetic improvement, and disease management in Bangladesh.孟加拉国水牛生产力、繁殖效率、遗传改良及疾病管理的全面综述。
Vet Anim Sci. 2025 Aug 13;29:100496. doi: 10.1016/j.vas.2025.100496. eCollection 2025 Sep.
3
Interconnections between the food system and antimicrobial resistance: A systems-informed umbrella review from a One Health perspective.
食品系统与抗菌药物耐药性之间的相互联系:从“同一健康”视角进行的系统知情综合综述。
One Health. 2025 Jul 23;21:101143. doi: 10.1016/j.onehlt.2025.101143. eCollection 2025 Dec.
4
Qualitative Risk Assessment of Foot-and-Mouth Disease Virus Introduction and Transmission to Dairy Farms via Raw Milk Transportation in Thailand: A Scenario-Based Approach.泰国口蹄疫病毒通过生乳运输传入和传播至奶牛场的定性风险评估:基于情景的方法
Vet Sci. 2025 Jun 27;12(7):623. doi: 10.3390/vetsci12070623.
5
Farmer field schools as interventions to reduce the need for antimicrobials in agrifood systems: a longitudinal analysis of layer farmer field school graduates and non-graduates in Kenya.农民田间学校作为减少农业食品系统中抗菌药物需求的干预措施:肯尼亚蛋鸡养殖户田间学校毕业生与非毕业生的纵向分析
Antimicrob Resist Infect Control. 2025 Jul 2;14(1):79. doi: 10.1186/s13756-025-01580-z.
6
Explore the Contamination of Antibiotic Resistance Genes (ARGs) and Antibiotic-Resistant Bacteria (ARB) of the Processing Lines at Typical Broiler Slaughterhouse in China.探究中国典型肉鸡屠宰场加工生产线中抗生素抗性基因(ARGs)和抗生素抗性细菌(ARB)的污染情况。
Foods. 2025 Mar 19;14(6):1047. doi: 10.3390/foods14061047.
7
Antimicrobial Use and Antimicrobial Resistance in Food-Producing Animals: Cross-Sectional Study on Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practices Among Veterinarians and Operators of Establishments in the Republic of Cyprus.食用动物中的抗菌药物使用与抗菌药物耐药性:塞浦路斯共和国兽医及养殖场经营者知识、态度和行为的横断面研究
Antibiotics (Basel). 2025 Mar 1;14(3):251. doi: 10.3390/antibiotics14030251.
8
A One Health approach to fight antimicrobial resistance in Uganda: Implementation experience, results, and lessons learned.乌干达采用“同一健康”方法抗击抗菌药物耐药性:实施经验、成果及经验教训
Biosaf Health. 2024 Jan 17;6(2):125-132. doi: 10.1016/j.bsheal.2024.01.003. eCollection 2024 Apr.
9
Disinfectants and one health review: The role of reactive oxygen species in the bactericidal activity of chlorine against .消毒剂与“同一个健康”综述:活性氧物质在氯对……的杀菌活性中的作用
One Health. 2025 Feb 6;20:100989. doi: 10.1016/j.onehlt.2025.100989. eCollection 2025 Jun.
10
Modelling Interventions to Combat Antibacterial Resistance in East Africa Using Causal Bayesian Networks.使用因果贝叶斯网络对东非抗击抗菌素耐药性的干预措施进行建模
Res Sq. 2025 Feb 4:rs.3.rs-5944839. doi: 10.21203/rs.3.rs-5944839/v1.