The tales of contradiction: A thematic analysis of British sheep farmers' perceptions of managing sheep scab in their flocks.

Sheep scab is endemic in Great Britain with an estimated national herd-level prevalence of 10.9% from a surveyed population of sheep farms. Previous studies have investigated how sheep farmers manage sheep scab on their farms in Great Britain, but there have not been any qualitative studies investigating sheep farmers perceptions on the roles different stakeholders have in the management of sheep scab. This qualitative study aims to explore how sheep farmers perceive their role and the different stakeholders' roles in the management of sheep scab, and how they would like sheep scab to be managed going forward. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 43 sheep farmers from England, Scotland, and Wales. The data were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis, through the theoretical lens of Foucault's notion of 'biopower'. Two themes were generated: 'The feeling of powerlessness leads to a need of rules and regulations', with sub-themes: 'The need for governmental rules and regulations' and 'The need for rules and regulation at livestock markets', and 'An apparent lack of sheep scab surveillance', with sub-themes: 'The farmers perceive that the veterinarians have control over surveillance' and 'The farmers have control over surveillance on their farms'. In the first theme, the respondents suggested that more rules and regulations to control the management of sheep scab was required. This included reinstating of sheep scab as a notifiable disease in England and Wales, as well as more regulations at livestock markets to prevent the trading of infested sheep; both of which would subject the farmers to regulatory power mechanisms. The second theme centred around who has the control of surveillance on the farms. Most of the respondents perceived that the veterinarians had knowledge and expertise of the local area on sheep scab, which they were able to relay to the farmers. Thus, veterinarians exerted disciplinary power by creating 'docile' bodies. However, it also appeared that veterinarians were not regularly called onto farms. Although disciplinary power flows through the interactions between the farmer and veterinarian, the techniques currently used are not always having their desired effect. The study demonstrated that how sheep farmers want sheep scab to be managed is, at times, conflicting and contradictory, which highlights the complexity of sheep scab as a disease to manage.

Methods to develop and evaluate attitudinal scales to measure farmer perceptions: Using sheep scab as an example.

There is limited information on the attitudes and opinions of British sheep farmers when preventing and managing sheep scab in their flocks. Attitudes are examples of latent traits, which are not directly observable. They must be measured indirectly which can be achieved using measurement scales. Attitudinal measurement scales are used frequently in research, but are seldom evaluated prior to use, particularly in veterinary research. Therefore, the aim of this study was to identify and assess latent traits which influence the control of sheep scab with the use of exploratory factor analysis, and then further evaluate these factors with the use of item response theory to determine how they perform as scales. An online survey was completed by 726 British sheep farmers during October 2021 (725 useable responses), which included a section with 37 belief statements related to the opinions and attitudes of sheep farmers around the management of sheep scab. These belief statements were developed and adapted from previous research. During the analysis, they were subjected to exploratory factor analysis, which suggested that the scales performed reasonably well. The scales were then evaluated further by item response theory. The graded response models for each attitudinal scale were assessed by graphical evaluation. They demonstrated that the scales were able to distinguish those respondents with low perceptions of control, responsibility, and trust, and those who had high perceptions of luck. This study provides insights into some of the factors influencing the management of sheep scab, and how well these scales perform. Additionally, it further highlights the importance of evaluating attitudinal scales for use in research, and that exploratory factor analysis alone does not provide enough information on how well they perform.

Social and ethical implications of data and technology use on farms: a qualitative study of Swedish dairy and pig farmers.

Introduction: Livestock farmers are being increasingly encouraged to adopt digital health technologies on their farms. Digital innovations may have unintended consequences, but there tends to be a pro-innovation bias in previous literature. This has led to a movement towards "responsible innovation," an approach that questions the social and ethical challenges of research and innovation. This paper explores the social and ethical issues of data and technologies on Swedish dairy and pig farms from a critical perspective. Methods: Six focus groups were conducted with thirteen dairy and thirteen pig farmers. The data were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis and a digital critical health lens, which focuses on concepts of identity and power. Results and discussion: The analysis generated four themes: extending the self, sense of agency, quantifying animals, and managing human labour. The findings suggest that technologies can change and form the identities of farmers, their workers, and animals by increasing the visibility of behaviours and bodies through data collection. Technologies can also facilitate techniques of power such as conforming to norms, hierarchical surveillance, and segregation of populations based on data. There were many contradictions in the way that technology was used on farms which suggests that farmers cannot be dichotomised into those who are opposed to and those that support adoption of technologies. Emotions and morality played an important role in the way animals were managed and technologies were used by farmers. Thus, when developing innovations, we need to consider users' feelings and attachments towards the technologies. Technologies have different impacts on farmers and farm workers which suggests that we need to ensure that we understand the perspectives of multiple user groups when developing innovations, including those that might be least empowered.

A survey of British sheep farmers: Practices, opinions and knowledge surrounding the management of sheep scab.

Ovine psoroptic mange (commonly known as sheep scab) is, arguably, one of the most important ectoparasitic diseases of sheep in the UK. Although research has been conducted on the practices and knowledge of British sheep farmers regarding the management of sheep scab, recent data is limited. During October 2021 an online survey was completed by 725 British sheep farmers. Most respondents farmed in England (63.0%, 457/725), followed by Wales (20.6%, 149/725) and Scotland (16.4%, 119/725). Over half (53.0%, 384/725) of the respondents had experienced sheep scab in their flocks before, and 38.3% (147/384) of respondents experienced sheep scab twice or more in the previous ten years. The estimated prevalence of sheep scab from these surveyed farmers was 10.9% (79/725). Of the farmers who had experienced sheep scab before, only 36.2% (139/384) reported using skin scrapes and 12.5% (48/384) reported using blood tests for diagnosis. Over three-quarters of farmers quarantined all new sheep (76.6%; 498/650), but fewer quarantined returning sheep (28.6%; 83/290). Many of the respondents (43.7%, 252/577) did not quarantine new sheep for the suggested minimum 21 days. In addition, only 53.0% (384/725) of respondents answered all three of the knowledge questions regarding sheep scab correctly. The analysis illustrates that there is scope to improve the use of diagnostics, which suggests that misdiagnosis of sheep scab may be high and thus inappropriate treatments may be used, or treatments may not be used at all. It also demonstrated that there is scope for improvement in farmers' knowledge regarding sheep scab, particularly that sheep scab could be detected via a blood test and that the disease could present without visible signs. Our results further support that sheep scab is a large-scale endemic issue, potentially with an increasing prevalence in Great Britain. Future control interventions need to focus on improving knowledge exchange, raising awareness of best practice controls to ensure that better management strategies are employed by farmers, including improved control at livestock markets to reduce the national transmission and thus focus on coordinated control interventions.

Understanding public preferences for different dairy farming systems using a mixed-methods approach.

Global production of milk has doubled over the past 50 yr, yet dairy farming in high-income countries faces scrutiny over practices perceived to affect animal welfare. One such practice is housing dairy cows year-round without access to pasture, which is the norm across North America and increasing within Europe, despite evidence of significant public support for grazing. Diverging opinion between the farming community and the public about what animal welfare means could be a key factor; however, lack of insight into the understanding and motivations underpinning public preferences for grazing could also hamper resolution. On the basis that more information could increase engagement between parties, 60 members of the public across the United Kingdom were interviewed to understand their perspectives of 3 dairy farming scenarios incorporating different amounts of grazing or housing. Their responses were analyzed using a mixed-methods approach combining reflexive thematic analysis with linguistic analysis. The integrated results indicated participants had a dual vision of the cow, seeing her as both domestic and wild. A scenario with housing in winter and grazing in summer therefore suited her, providing both protection and naturalness, and was most associated with analytic thinking. Interviewees also confessed ignorance about the cow's needs, either deferring to others' judgment-including the cow herself-or using familiarity and anthropomorphism to assess the scenarios. This again resulted in most optimism, confidence, and positivity for housing in winter and grazing in summer, and most negativity for housing cows year-round. Grazing was aspirational, but keeping cows outside in winter was confusing and concerning. These findings offer opportunities for the dairy industry to adapt communication or systems to better meet societal views; for example, incorporating access to pasture or increasing cow choice.

Putting sheep scab in its place: A more relational approach.

Since the reintroduction of sheep scab within the UK, its prevalence has increased despite several industry-led initiatives to control and manage the disease. Some studies have suggested that initiatives or policies should instead focus on specific places, such as geographically high-risk areas for sheep scab, which could allow for a more targeted approach. However, this risk of sheep scab has been measured in set geographical areas, without the reference to the interplay of topography, host, pathogen and the way in which humans socially and culturally define risk and place, potentially limiting the effectiveness of preventative initiatives. Therefore, the aim of the current study was to understand how place influences sheep farmers' approaches to the identification and management of the risk of sheep scab in their flocks. Qualitative data was collected from 43 semi-structured interviews with sheep farmers from England, Scotland, and Wales and was analysed by using the constant comparative approach. The codes were grouped into four concepts that influenced farmers' decision-making strategies for sheep scab control: perception of place; risk identification; risk categorisation; and risk management. These concepts were used as an analytical framework to identify three different 'places': 'uncontrollable places', 'liminal places' and 'protective places'. Each place reflects a different sheep scab control strategy used by farmers and shaped by their perceptions of place and risk. The 'uncontrollable places' category represented farmers who were located in areas that were geographically high-risk for sheep scab and who experienced a high frequency of sheep scab infestations in their flocks. The risk posed by their local landscape and neighbouring farmers, who neglected to engage in preventative behaviours, led them to feel unable to engage in effective risk management. Thus, they viewed scab as uncontrollable. The farmers within the 'liminal places' category were characterised as farmers who were located in high-risk areas for sheep scab, but experienced low levels of sheep scab infestations. These farmers characterised the risks associated with sheep scab management in terms of needing to protect their reputation and felt more responsibility for controlling sheep scab, which influenced them to engage in more protective measures. The farmers within the 'protective places' category were characterised as farming within low-risk areas and thus experienced a low level of sheep scab infestations. These farmers also described their risk in terms of their reputation and the responsibility they held for protecting others. However, they sought to rely on their low geographical risk of sheep scab as a main source of protection and therefore did not always engage in protective measures. These results suggest that place-based effects have significant impacts on sheep farmers' beliefs and behaviours and thus should be considered by policymakers when developing future strategies for sheep scab control.

Evaluation of the use of antibiotic waste bins and medicine records to quantify antibiotic use on sheep, beef, and mixed species farms: A mixed methods study.

There is a lack of robust data on antibiotic use on sheep and beef farms in the UK, particularly for farms with mixed species. On mixed farms, quantification of antibiotic use is reliant on accurate farmers' records as veterinary prescription data does not provide information at the species level. Previous studies that have investigated multiple antibiotic use collection methods were conducted on single species farms and failed to collect data on the reasons why differences in methods may exist. This study aimed to evaluate sheep and beef farmers' antibiotic recording practices by comparing quantities of antibiotics measured from medicine records and empty antibiotic packaging collection bins, and identify barriers and facilitators of the antibiotic use collection methods. Thirty-five farms were followed for a year period. Farmers were asked to record their antibiotic treatments and deposit empty antibiotic packaging used in sheep or beef cattle into a bin. Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted to understand the experiences of farmers taking part in the study and explore the possible differences in methods. Bins and medicine records were collected and the mass of active ingredient (mg) was calculated. The level of agreement between the two antibiotic use collection methods was measured using rank parameters of Kendall's Ta. The bins were 67 % (CI = 29-87 %) more likely to measure more antibiotic use than the medicine records. The scale of variability of the measurements between two random farms was 33 % (CI = 6-56 %) larger for the antibiotic waste bins than the scale of variability between the medicine records. Sheep farmers often missed neonatal lamb treatments off their medicine records, with a median of 32.5 missing treatments per farm (IQR = 18-130). Of the mixed species farms, 28 % of treatment entries were missing the species the antibiotic was used in. Farmers reported that the bin was easy to use but they also reported that there was a tendency to under-report actual use where there were multiple workers on the farm or where treatments were administered by the veterinarian. The qualitative analysis identified contextual barriers to accurate medicine recording, such as difficulties with animal identification, with recording in the field, and with recording during lambing time. This study demonstrated that there were significant differences in antibiotic use measured by the bins and the medicine records. The mixed-methods approach provided an understanding of the contextual barriers that impacted farmers' medicine recording and use of the bin. This information on the contextual barriers can be used to inform the design of data collection methods to improve antibiotic consumption data in the sheep and beef sectors.

From the other perspective: Behavioural factors associated with UK sheep farmers' attitudes towards antibiotic use and antibiotic resistance.

Research suggests that many sheep farmers continue to carry out traditional antibiotic use practices despite new 'good practice' recommendations. The aim of this study was to group farmers depending on their attitudes around antibiotic use and antibiotic resistance, and determine the behaviours that are associated with the farmers in these groups. In 2017, a flock health survey was sent to British sheep farmers. K-means cluster analysis was used to identify groups of farmers with similar attitudes towards antibiotic use and resistance. A multivariable logistic regression model was built to determine the associations between farmers' past behaviours and their antibiotic attitude group. There were 461 responses. Two groups of farmers were identified based on their antibiotic attitudes. Cluster 1 were defined as the "discordant" group who had positive views of using antibiotics prophylactically and negative views of reducing antibiotic use. Cluster 2 were defined as the "concordant" group who were positive about reducing antibiotic use and had negative views about using antibiotics prophylactically. Using antibiotics in all lambs (OR = 2.689, CI = 1.571, 4.603), using antibiotics in all ewes (OR = 3.388, CI = 1.318, 8.706), always trimming diseased feet over the past three years (OR = 2.487, CI = 1.459, 4.238), not using a computer to record information over the past three years (OR = 1.996, CI = 1.179, 3.381), not changing worming practices over the past three years (OR = 1.879, CI = 1.144, 3.087), and farmers' perceptions that their sheep flock did not make a financial loss in the past three years (OR = 2.088, CI = 1.079, 4.040) were significantly associated with belonging to the discordant group. Talking to their veterinarian about antibiotic use or the frequency of veterinary visits were not associated with antibiotic attitude group. These results suggest that farmers who had attitudes relating to antibiotic use that did not align with current recommendations carried out more traditional practices, which were strengthened by their positive perceptions of profitability.

Antimicrobial Resistance Patterns of Escherichia coli Isolated from Sheep and Beef Farms in England and Wales: A Comparison of Disk Diffusion Interpretation Methods.

Little data exist on the levels of antimicrobial resistance from bacteria isolated from British sheep and beef cattle. The aim of this study was to investigate antimicrobial resistance patterns on sheep and beef farms in England and Wales using multiple interpretation methods. Fecal samples (n = 350) from sheep and beef cattle were collected from 35 farms. Disk diffusion antimicrobial susceptibility testing against ten antimicrobials was carried out for 1115 (699 sheep, 416 beef) ß-glucuronidase-positive Escherichia coli isolates. Susceptibility was interpreted using clinical breakpoints, which determine clinically resistant bacteria, and epidemiological and livestock-specific cut-off values, which determine microbiological-resistant bacteria (non-wild type). Using livestock-specific cut-off values, a high frequency of wild type for all ten antimicrobials was observed in isolates from sheep (90%) and beef cattle (85%). Cluster analysis was performed to identify patterns in antimicrobial resistance. Interpretation of susceptibility using livestock-specific cut-off values showed a cluster of isolates that were non-wild type to cefotaxime and amoxicillin/clavulanic acid, whereas clinical breakpoints did not. A multilevel logistic regression model determined that tetracycline use on the farm and soil copper concentration were significantly associated with tetracycline non-wild type isolates. The results suggest that using human clinical breakpoints could lead to both the under-reporting and over-reporting of antimicrobial resistance in sheep and beef cattle.

Understanding farmers' naturalistic decision making around prophylactic antibiotic use in lambs using a grounded theory and natural language processing approach.

The routine use of antibiotics for prevention of disease in neonatal lambs has been highlighted as inappropriate, yet research suggests that many farmers in the UK still carry out this practice. The aim of the study was to understand farmers' naturalistic decision-making around prophylactic antibiotic use in lambs. Data from 431 posts by 133 different users of an online discussion forum were analysed quantitatively using natural language processing and qualitatively using a grounded theory approach. Results from the qualitative analysis identified five categories that influenced farmers risk perceptions around prophylactic antibiotic use in lambs: anticipated regret, negative emotions and experiential avoidance; economic considerations; farmer identity; perception of capability; and perception of social judgement. Natural language processing analysis of the posts by the study group were compared to posts on topics unrelated to antibiotic use by control groups from the same forum to understand the underlying style and tone within the text. Analytical thinking and authenticity scores were significantly lower in the study group compared to the control groups (P < 0.01). Words relating to cognitive processes were significantly higher in the study group compared to the control groups (P < 0.01). Results of the qualitative and quantitative analysis were integrated to assess the fit of the data and enhance findings from either method alone. The key findings were the identification of reasons why farmers used antibiotics prophylactically in neonatal lambs. Farmers disassociated the use of oral antibiotics in neonatal lambs from other types of antibiotics within sheep farming. Farmers used the concept of luck and uniqueness to justify their prophylactic antibiotic use. This may explain farmers' low analytical thinking scores as this reflects a more personal style of thinking as farmers express their thoughts on antibiotic use on an individual basis. Farmers' felt that they did not have the capabilities to control neonatal disease without antibiotics during busy periods and this was exacerbated by external economic constraints. For farmers' who used antibiotics for therapeutic use, fear of social judgement was an important factor in their perceptions of risk around antibiotic use. The high frequency of negations and conjunctions suggested feelings of moral duty. As such, antibiotic use has developed into a symbol of their good farming identity which conflicted with the identity held by those who used antibiotics prophylactically. These results can be used to inform knowledge exchange around prophylactic antibiotic use in lambs to improve antibiotic stewardship in the sheep farming sector.

Farmers' Perceptions of Preventing Antibiotic Resistance on Sheep and Beef Farms: Risk, Responsibility, and Action.

Antibiotic resistance is one of the most serious public health risks facing humanity. The overuse of antibiotics in the treatment of infectious disease have been identified as sources of the global threat of antibiotic resistance. This paper examines how farmers perceive and manage risks associated with overuse of antibiotics. Specifically, the paper examines the role of habitus and risk in determining farmers' decisions to adopt national antibiotic reduction targets set by members of the Responsible Use of Medicines in Agriculture Alliance's Targets Task Force. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 34 sheep and beef farmers in England and Wales. Farmers presented four scripts which illuminated reasons for limited adoption of the targets. The scripts presented the farmers as "good farmers" facing an emerging threat to their ontological security. Scripts suggested that they engaged in preventative measures but deflected responsibility for reducing antibiotic resistance to veterinarians and poorly run farms. This research provides valuable insights for policy makers and highlight the benefits of including social science research to support effective implementation.

Antimicrobial use practices and opinions of beef farmers in England and Wales.

BACKGROUND: Limited research exists on antimicrobial use practices of beef farmers. This study aimed to investigate antimicrobial practices and perceptions of beef farmers in England and Wales, and identify drivers of higher antimicrobial use for treatment of bovine pneumonia. METHODS: A survey was sent out in 2017 to beef farmers in England and Wales who supply to two abattoirs. Descriptive statistics were used to summarise the data. A logistic regression model was built to determine factors associated with treating greater than 5 per cent of the predominant group in the herd with antimicrobials for pneumonia. RESULTS: There were a total of 171 useable responses. Most farmers reported using antimicrobials in less than 5 per cent of their herd for the treatment of common diseases. Most farmers (90 per cent) reported that they understood what antimicrobial resistance means, but only 55 per cent were aware of critically important antimicrobials and 9 per cent could name at least one critically important antimicrobial. Having a calf-rearing enterprise and not considering Johne's disease when buying in cattle were associated with using antimicrobials to treat pneumonia in greater than 5 per cent of the predominant group in the herd. CONCLUSION: Self-reported antimicrobial use appears to be low in beef farms. However, some gaps in understanding aspects of antimicrobial stewardship by farmers were identified.

To prescribe or not to prescribe? A factorial survey to explore veterinarians' decision making when prescribing antimicrobials to sheep and beef farmers in the UK.

Resistance to antimicrobials is one of the biggest challenges worldwide for public health. A key strategy for tackling this is ensuring judicious use of antimicrobials in human and veterinary medicine. Whilst there are many studies in human medicine investigating prescribing behaviour of doctors, there is limited work to understand what factors influence veterinarian prescribing behaviour. Veterinarians often prescribe antimicrobials to sheep and beef farmers in contexts other than at a clinical consultation, and decision-making behind this has not been explored. The aim of this study was to measure, for the first time, the influence of factors from social theories on veterinarians' decision to prescribe antimicrobials to sheep and beef farmers without a clinical consultation, using a factorial survey approach. Respondents were presented with eight vignette scenarios, where a farmer asks for antimicrobials at the veterinary practice. Seven factors, identified from constructs of social theories, were included in the vignettes. Random intercept and random slope models were built to estimate the effects of the vignette factors and vet characteristics on the respondents' willingness to prescribe ratings. A total of 306 surveys were completed. The vignette factors: case type, farmer relationship, other veterinarians in practice, time pressure, habit, willingness to pay, and confidence in the farmer, were significant in the decision to prescribe. Confidence in the farmer was the most influential vignette variable, and was included as a random slope effect. Respondent variables with significant influence on the decision to prescribe were agreeableness personality score, region of veterinary practice, and presence of a small animal department. These influential factors could be considered to target interventions in beef and sheep farm animal veterinary practice for improved antimicrobial stewardship.