Country governance of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) surveillance

Observations on global progress and aid programme effectiveness using data from the Tracking AMR Country Self-Assessment Survey (TrACSS)

Datos Bibliográficos

ID19534645
AutoresArchie Drake (University of Dar es Salaam, autor de correspondencia), Isabel Sassoon (0000-0002-8685-1054, University of London), Jack Armitage (SNV Netherlands Development Organisation), Jennifer Armitage, Syed Abba (0009-0003-2192-2768, Institute of Development Studies), Syed Abbas (0000-0001-5694-2011, Institute of Development Studies), Rebecca Maudling (0000-0002-8900-2138), Ankur Gupta-Wright (0000-0002-5150-2970, Imperial College London), Alan Serrano (0000-0001-8902-5359, University of London), Anila Shafa (Itad (United Kingdom)), Tim Shorten
Año2026
Volumen22
Número1
Páginas8-8
Fecha de publicación2026-01-07
Peer ReviewedSí
Open AccessSí
TipoARTICLE
RevistaGlobalization and Health (JOURNAL)
Identificadores de la revistaISSN: 1744-8603 • E-ISSN: 1744-8603
EditorialSpringer Science and Business Media LLC (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1186/s12992-025-01179-4
PMID41501875
OpenAlexW7118757374
IdiomaEN
Referencias citadas36

BACKGROUND: AMR is an important global public health challenge, but there is a lack of good data on response progress. This study addresses country governance of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) surveillance, considering changes in responses to the Tracking Antimicrobial Resistance Country Self-Assessment Survey (TrACSS) between 2019 and 2024. Its first objective is to describe progress under the global action agenda on AMR. Its second objective is to assess the effectiveness of a major development aid intervention to encourage action against AMR, the United Kingdom (UK)-funded Fleming Fund (FF). The study applies a pragmatic approach to analysis, involving descriptive exploration and difference-in-differences methodology. RESULTS: Governance of AMR surveillance in low- and middle-income countries generally strengthened over the five years to 2024, converging with high-income countries (HIC). South-East Asian countries reported relatively strong gains, a striking exception to limited global progress. Globally, over fifteen indicators, clear progress was only reported in four: two on strengthening underlying AMR surveillance systems, in both human health (HH) and animal health (AH); and two on regulatory frameworks in AH. FF-supported countries reported strengthening HH surveillance systems more than comparable countries, even accounting for income-group differences. The standardised change score for the 'national surveillance system for AMR in humans' was 0.11 higher in FF-supported than in other Official Development Assistance (ODA)-eligible countries (95% confidence level, p = 0.046). FF-supported countries also reported greater progress on other topics, such as use of surveillance data for decision-making in AH. FF-supported countries were approximately a quarter (25%) more likely to respond 'yes' on this topic. Additional reflections on the strengths and weaknesses of TrACSS data are discussed in detail. CONCLUSION: Our study adds empirical observations about country governance systems as they relate to AMR surveillance efforts. The idea of progressive global momentum, with South-East Asia playing a key role, disrupts established perceptions of European leadership and obstacles to change. From an aid effectiveness perspective, this study indicates that FF strengthened country HH and AH surveillance systems. It also points to institutional changes in how data are used in administrative decision-making processes and, potentially, in the translation of evidence into policy, programmes and regulation. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: Not applicable

Antibiotic resistance · Corporate governance · Health services research · Public health · Social policy · Tracking (education) · Antibiotic Resistance in Bacteria · Antibiotic Use and Resistance · Pharmaceutical and Antibiotic Environmental Impacts