Table 4.

Students' perceptions on the importance of potential strategies to address antimicrobial resistance.

	Level of perceived importance of potential strategies			Statistical analyses between levels of perceived importance of potential strategies
	I (%)	S (%)	U (%)	P (I vs S)	P (I v U)	p (S vs U)
Local and national AMR surveillance data	98.9	0	1.1	<0.0001	<0.0001	ns
AMU data in humans, livestock and companion animals	96.7	2.2	1.1	<0.0001	<0.0001	ns
Research to examine strategies to combat AMR	97.8	1.1	1.1	<0.0001	<0.0001	ns
Improving existing guidelines on antimicrobial prescribing with research and evidence	97.8	1.1	1.1	<0.0001	<0.0001	ns
Education sessions on appropriate antimicrobial prescribing for practitioners	96.7	2.2	1.1	<0.0001	<0.0001	ns
Education programs to raise awareness in the community and public	96.7	2.2	1.1	<0.0001	<0.0001	ns
Changing client expectations about antimicrobials	95.5	3.4	1.1	<0.0001	<0.0001	ns
Better hand hygiene in veterinary and human hospitals	93.4	3.3	3.3	<0.0001	<0.0001	ns
More effective cleaning in human and veterinary hospitals	92.1	4.5	3.4	<0.0001	<0.0001	ns
Improving diagnostic methods	91.2	4.4	4.4	<0.0001	<0.0001	ns
Better availability of local and national guidelines and protocols	93.3	5.6	1.1	<0.0001	<0.0001	ns
Development of new antimicrobials	93.4	4.4	2.2	<0.0001	<0.0001	ns
Fewer antimicrobial prescriptions	92.3	4.4	3.3	<0.0001	<0.0001	ns
Reducing or restricting use of antimicrobials in livestock feed	87.8	3.3	8.9	<0.0001	<0.0001	ns
Using alternative treatments to antimicrobials (e.g. probiotics)	87.7	6.7	5.6	<0.0001	<0.0001	ns
Prescribing narrowest spectrum antimicrobials	82.2	5.6	12.2	<0.0001	<0.0001	ns
Restricting veterinary use of antimicrobials considered to be of critical importance in human health	58.9	22.2	18.9	<0.0001	<0.0001	ns

I = moderately / very / extremely important; S = slightly / not important; U = unsure; ns = not significant.