RESUMO
The assessment of animal welfare poses numerous challenges, yet an emerging approach is the consolidation of existing knowledge into new frameworks which can offer standardised approaches to welfare assessment across a variety of contexts. Multiple tools exist for measuring the welfare of equids, but such tools have typically been developed for specific contexts. There is no 'one size fits all' which means that resulting datasets are generally non-comparable, creating a barrier to knowledge-sharing and collaboration between the many organisations working to improve equid welfare around the globe. To address this, we developed the Equid Assessment, Research and Scoping (EARS) tool, which incorporates pre-existing validated welfare assessment methods alongside new welfare indicators to deliver a larger and more comprehensive series of welfare indicators than currently exists, creating a single resource that can be used to assess equid welfare in any context. We field-trialled three welfare assessment protocols within the EARS tool, and applied these to welfare assessment of equids in a variety of contexts across nineteen countries. The EARS tool proved a useful, versatile and rapid method for collecting welfare assessment data and we collected 7464 welfare assessments in a period of fifteen months. We evaluate the EARS tool and provide ideas for future development.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Immunisation against influenza is an effective intervention that reduces serologically confirmed cases by between 60% and 70%. Almost all influenza immunisation in the UK is done within general practice. Current evidence on the effectiveness of patient reminders for all types of immunisation programmes is largely based on North American studies. AIM: To determine whether telephone appointments offered bygeneral practice receptionists increase the uptake of irfluenza immunisation among the registered population aged over 65 years in east London practices. DESIGN OF STUDY: Randomised controlled trial. SETTING: Three research general practices within the East London and Essex network of researchers (ELENoR). METHOD: Participants were 1,820 low-risk patients aged 65 to 74 years who had not previously been in a recall system for influenza immunisation at their general practice. The intervention, during October 2000, was a telephone call from the practice receptionist to intervention group households, offering an appointment for influenza immunisation at a nurse-run. clinic Main outcome measures were the numbers of individuals in each group receiving immunisation, and practice costs of a telephone-appointing programme. RESULTS: intention to treat analysis showed an immunisation rate in the control group of 44%, compared with 50% in the intervention group (odds ratio = 1.29, 95% confidence interval = 1.03 to 1.63). Of the patients making a telephone appointment, 88% recieved immunisation, while 22% of those not wanting an appointment went on to be immunised. In the controlgroup, income generated was 11.35 pounds per immunisation, for each additional immunisation in the intervention group the income was 5.20 pounds. The 'number needed to telephone' was 17. CONCLUSION: Uptake of influenza immunisation among the low-risk older population in inner-city areas can be boosted by around 6% using a simple intervention by receptionists. Immunisation rates in this low-risk group fell well short of the 60% government target. Improving immunisation rates will require a sustained public health campaign. Retaining the item-of-service payments to practices should support costs of practice-based interventions.