Quality of Data Recording and Antimicrobial Use in a Municipal Veterinary Clinic in Ghana
Résumé fourni par la source
The recording of antimicrobial use data is critical for the development of interventions for the containment of antimicrobial resistance. This cross-sectional study assessed whether dissemination activities and recommendations made after an operational research (OR) study in 2021 resulted in better data recording and improved the use of antimicrobials in a rural veterinary clinic. Routinely collected data from treatment record books were compared between 2013 and 2019 (pre-OR) and from July 2021 to April 2023 (post-OR). The most common animals presenting for care in the the pre - and post OR periods were dogs (369 and 206, respectively). Overall, antimicrobial use in animals increased from 53% to 77% between the two periods. Tetracycline was the most commonly used antimicrobial (99%) during the pre-OR period, while Penicillin-Streptomycin was the most commonly used antimicrobial (65%) during the post-OR period. All animals that received care at the clinic were documented in the register during both periods. Whereas the diagnosis was documented in 269 (90%) animals in the post-OR period compared to 242 (47%) in the pre-OR period, the routes and dosages were not adequately recorded during the both periods. Therefore, the quality of data recording was still deficient despite the dissemination and the recommendations made to some key stakeholders. Recommendations are made for a standardized antimicrobial reporting tool, refresher training, and continuous supervisory visits to the clinic.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Quality of Data Recording and Antimicrobial Use in a Municipal Veterinary Clinic in Ghana
- Date Crossref
- 26/10/2023
- Éditeur
- MDPI AG
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude et ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.