ABSTRACT
As the complexity of health systems has increased over time, there is an urgent need for developing multi-sectoral and multi-disciplinary collaboration within the domain of One Health (OH). Despite the efforts to promote collaboration in health surveillance and overcome professional silos, implementing OH surveillance systems in practice remains challenging for multiple reasons. In this study, we describe the lessons learned from the evaluation of OH surveillance using OH-EpiCap (an online evaluation tool for One Health epidemiological surveillance capacities and capabilities), the challenges identified with the implementation of OH surveillance, and the main barriers that contribute to its sub-optimal functioning, as well as possible solutions to address them. We conducted eleven case studies targeting the multi-sectoral surveillance systems for antimicrobial resistance in Portugal and France, Salmonella in France, Germany, and the Netherlands, Listeria in The Netherlands, Finland and Norway, Campylobacter in Norway and Sweden, and psittacosis in Denmark. These evaluations facilitated the identification of common strengths and weaknesses, focusing on the organization and functioning of existing collaborations and their impacts on the surveillance system. Lack of operational and shared leadership, adherence to FAIR data principles, sharing of techniques, and harmonized indicators led to poor organization and sub-optimal functioning of OH surveillance systems. In most cases, the effectiveness of OH surveillance over traditional surveillance, operational costs, behavioural changes, and population health outcomes brought by the OH surveillance have not been evaluated. To this end, the establishment of a formal governance body with representatives from each sector could assist in overcoming long-standing barriers. Moreover, demonstrating the impacts of OH-ness of surveillance may facilitate the implementation of OH surveillance systems.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This work was supported by funding from Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation programme under grant agreement No 773830: One Health European Joint Programme. Funding sources did not affect the design of this study, data collection, data analysis, decisions on publication, or preparation of the manuscript.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
The MATRIX project obtained ethical approval from the advisors of the One Health European Joint Programme.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
All data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors