Table 2.
Summary of main barriers to infection control and Hendra virus management in private veterinary practices in Queensland, Australia, up until September 2010
| Main issues | Related barriers |
|---|---|
| Work culture | • Longstanding observance of suboptimal IC practices; |
| • Veterinarians’ perception that zoonotic risks in equine veterinary practice were low; | |
| • Veterinarians’ perception that they are more likely to be exposed to injury risks than infectious risks in equine practice; | |
| • Mitigation of injury risks more readily implemented by veterinarians than mitigation of infectious risks in equine practice; | |
| • Inadequate veterinary work habits perpetrated in some instances by poor professional mentorship during extramural undergraduate placement or during early career experiences. | |
| Role of Government | • Suboptimal HeV testing pathways |
| • Slow response from government authorities to the emergence of HeV and to HeV outbreaks | |
| • Suboptimal and conflicting communication of risk and risk mitigation from government authorities to veterinarians | |
| • Inconsistent government support for veterinarians throughout the state, with rural remote areas receiving less skilled technical support | |
| • Difficulties in complying and collaborating with WHS legislation and authorities | |
| Managing animal and public health issues and a private business | • The logistical, financial and work time costs of implementing infection control changes within the context of running small private businesses |
| • Difficulty in interpreting and enforcing WHS regulation | |
| • Mitigation of zoonotic risks interfering with the mitigation of injury risks | |
| • Lack of WHS legal protection when a third party breaches the legislation | |
| • Veterinarians’ lack of experience choosing and using some of the PPE recommended | |
| • Inadequate, insufficient and inconsistent training of undergraduate veterinarians about IC and HeV management | |
| • Difficulty in implementing IC behavioural changes amongst veterinary staff | |
| • Difficulty inefficiently communicating with clients about HeV-related risks and risk mitigation recommendations | |
| Uncertainty about the epidemiology of an emerging disease | • Slow emergence and sporadic nature of HeV outbreaks |
| • Slow gathering and dissemination of epidemiological information | |
| • Misinterpretation of epidemiological information | |
| • Non-specific HeV case definition |