Awareness and practices regarding antimicrobial resistance among livestock farmers in Northern Uganda

Background Antimicrobial use in animals may contribute to antimicrobial resistance (AMR), which poses direct risks to animal health and welfare and can potentially impact human health since some diseases affect both animals and people. This study determined the level of awareness regarding AMR among livestock farmers in Northern Uganda. Methods A community-based cross-sectional study was conducted among livestock farmers in three districts of Northern Uganda, namely, Gulu, Omoro, and Amuru districts. A structured questionnaire was used to collect data. Results Data from 246 participants, with a median age of 38 years (interquartile range: 29–50 years), were analyzed. Most farmers had attained a primary level of education ( n = 125, 50.8%) and grew crops as their major economic activity ( n = 88, 35.8%). Goats were the most commonly reared animals ( n = 167, 67.7%). The median distance from the nearest drug shop was 2 km (interquartile range: 1–5 km). Most farmers had good awareness on AMR (158, 64.2%), with more than half of the farmers ( n = 134, 54.5%) having heard of AMR, but only 48 (35.8%) understood its correct meaning. Most farmers ( n = 220, 89.4%) noted AMR as an important issue in farming, with many farmers ( n = 133, 54.5%) opting to seek veterinary advice for prevention. Most farmers had appropriate AMU (219, 89.0%), with 203 (82.5%) having used antimicrobials in the last 12 months. Most farmers ( n = 184, 74.8%) obtained drugs and dosage from veterinary doctors, with majority following the recommended dosage ( n = 227, 92.3%) and proper withdrawal periods ( n = 221, 89.8%). Overall, few farmers ( n = 81, 32.9%) received training on AMR, with more than half getting training from veterinary professionals ( n = 41, 55.4%). The major source of information was veterinary professionals ( n = 181, 73.6%), followed by radio stations ( n = 160, 65.0%). Using logistic regression where P 0.05 was considered statistically significant, secondary education was the only factor significantly influencing AMR awareness at multivariable analysis (aOR: 1.85, 95% CI: 0.80–4.26, P = 0.030), while age group 52–85 years was the only factor significantly associated with appropriate practices at both bivariate analysis (cOR: 8.10, 95% CI: 1.07–61.37, P = 0.043) and multivariable analysis with a stronger significance (aOR: 11.19, 95% CI: 1.50–83.36, P = 0.018). A chi-square analysis was done where P 0.05 was considered statistically significant, and it showed that there was a significant difference to access to veterinary services across districts ( P = 0.014) and a highly significant association between training and appropriate practices in farmers ( X 2 (1) = 13.048, P = 0.000). Conclusion Most livestock farmers had limited understanding of what AMR precisely means, which highlights a significant knowledge gap.