TABLE 4:

​Mean score of importance given by the responses from different types of practitioners and from practitioners from seven different countries for the factors influencing prescribing behaviour suggested on a scale of 0–4 (0 – not important; 4 – most important)

	Factor	All responses mean (95% CIs)	CA Practitioners	FP animal Practitioners	E Practitioners	Belgium	Czech Republic	France	Germany	Spain	Sweden	UK
Responsible use factors	Sensitivity	3.19 (3.15 to 3.23)	3.21	3.10	3.4	3.14	2.92	3.18	3.26	2.98	3.56	3.11
	AMR risk	2.98 (2.94 to 3.02)	3.03	2.89	3.0	2.80	2.75	2.98	3.02	2.73	3.39	2.91
	Legal restrictions	2.67 (2.63 to 2.71)	2.63	2.79	2.5	2.60	2.81	2.56	2.21	2.74	3.15	2.72
	SPC responsible use warnings	2.57 (2.53 to 2.61)	2.64	2.55	2.2	2.52	2.67	2.52	2.60	2.64	2.67	2.38
	Formulary/prescription guidelines	2.43 (2.39 to 2.47)	2.48	2.34	2.4	2.25	2.39	2.12	2.62	2.37	2.69	2.91
Professional judgement factors	SPC	2.72 (2.68 to 2.76)	2.75	2.80	2.3	2.61	2.81	2.76	2.87	2.72	2.60	2.59
Convenience factors	Ease of admin	2.82 (2.78 to 2.86)	2.80	2.87	2.8	2.93	2.56	2.97	3.03	2.97	2.11	2.89
	Ease to obtain	2.17 (2.13 to 2.21)	2.23	2.05	2.2	2.19	2.56	2.01	2.07	2.52	2.06	2.38
Cultural/society ­factors	Practice policy	2.39 (2.35 to 2.43)	2.43	2.44	2.0	2.27	2.33	2.60	2.36	2.07	2.67	1.87
	Owner demand	1.02 (0.98 to 1.06)	1.02	1.31	1.0	1.04	1.53	1.15	0.67	1.01	0.78	1.16
	Advertisement	0.82 (0.79 to 0.86)	0.85	0.86	0.5	0.98	1.44	0.65	0.55	1.05	0.92	0.65
	Culture	0.84 (0.80 to 0.88)	0.75	1.03	0.8	0.73	1.19	0.77	0.79	0.81	1.13	0.69
Economic factors	Price	2.0 (1.96 to 2.04)	1.94	2.11	2.0	2.05	2.44	2.22	1.46	2.21	1.30	2.21
	Withdrawal period	1.75 (1.69 to 1.80)	1.22	2.90	1.5	1.92	2.36	1.96	1.52	1.77	1.13	1.53
	Profit margin	0.72 (0.68 to 0.76)	0.72	0.77	0.5	0.97	1.78	0.69	0.57	1.17	0.31	0.42
	Marketing offers	0.77 (0.74 to 0.81)	0.80	0.79	0.5	0.97	1.58	0.74	0.64	1.19	0.40	0.56

AMR, Antimicrobial resistance; CA, Companion animal; E, Equine; FP, Food producing; SPC, Summary of product characteristics