Search PubMed⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

D Kooij

Publications and source records attributed to D Kooij.

5 recordsLinked to original sources

Economic analysis of alternative AD control programmes.

The threat imposed by its virulence brings a presumption that Aujeszky's disease (AD) must be controlled because potential losses are high. Viewed as an economic problem, the decision on whether and how to control AD hinges on comparing the costs of doing so with the benefits (in terms of reduced production losses) to be gained. Four strategies are considered: (a) doing nothing, (b) suppressing and maintaining the disease at low prevalence levels by vaccination, (c) suppressing to low levels and then eradicating by culling remaining positive animals and (d) eradicating in one step by means of a test-and-slaughter policy. The net economic merits of each strategy are examined using data derived from specific vaccination studies established in Germany and the Netherlands. A computer model is developed to estimate disease costs under different technical, epidemiological and economic assumptions, allowing the economically optimal strategies to be explored. In general no single strategy can be recommended as the 'best' for dealing with AD, since it depends on a host of factors relating to pig density, prevalence levels, production system, trade relations, etc. As usual, economic realities complicate the quest for operational simplicity in disease control. However, for the regions of high pig density studied the most economic AD control strategy is to lower herd prevalence by intensive vaccination before completing eradication by test-and-removal of remaining positive animals.

Animals↗

Effect of vaccination against Aujeszky's disease compared with test and slaughter programme: epidemiological and economical evaluations.

In January 1990, a 6-year program was initiated to eliminate endemic Aujeszky's Disease virus (ADV) infection from the pig herds in an area of Northern Germany, bordering Southern Denmark, with intensive pig farming. In the first 3 years of the campaign, an intensive compulsory vaccination program, with glycoprotein I (gI)-deleted vaccines, of all pigs in the area was employed. Beginning in June 1990 and for the first 3 years of the project, approximately 200 herds randomly selected from all herds in the area, were serologically tested each quarter. In each farrow-to-feeder (FAFE), feeder-to-finish (FEFI) and farrow-to-finish (FAFI) herd, 20 female breeding pigs, 20 finishing pigs (> or = 50 kgs liveweight) and 10 female breeding pigs and 10 finishing pigs, respectively, were blood sampled. The sera were tested by the Herd-Check Anti-PRV(S) ELISA test (IDDEX Inc., ME). Sera positive to this test were examined by the HerdCheck Anti-ADV gI-ELISA test (IDDEX Inc., ME). Data on potentially confounding management factors were collected through a pilot-tested questionnaire, administered to farmers by 2 veterinarians who blood sampled the pigs. For fattening herds (FEFI and fattening sections of FAFI herds), the association between the odds of > or = 1 gI+ finishing pigs and the time between initiation of the program in the area and sampling date (a surrogate for the effect of the program) was modelled using ordinary logistic regression. The association between the odds of gI+ females in seropositive (> or = gI+ females) FAFE and FAFI herds and time since initiation of the program was investigated with logistic-binomial regression models. Results of the study show that the longer the period from the beginning of compulsory vaccination to the date the herd was sampled the lower the odds of gI+ fattening herds and gI+ female breeding pigs in herds of the area. The beneficial effect of mass vaccination on the reduction of ADV spread was accounted for by this relationship. For fattening herds this relationship appeared curvilinear, with the reduction in the log-odds being more rapid in the 1st year of the program. This non-linear pattern indicates that for the elimination of the risk of ADV-infection from fattening herds of the area, the mass vaccination program should be complemented with additional measures such as test-and-slaughter of infected breeding pigs. A computerized economical model to estimate the effects of ADV-infection at the herd and area level has been developed. The analytical structure consists of a basic epidemiological model linked to an economic estimation framework. The economic model predictions allow priorities to be given to alternative control strategies. Mass vaccination of all pigs in regions with endemically infected herds followed by test-and-removal of seropositive animals is the most cost-effective way to control the spread of ADV within the swine population. Other possible control strategies such as intensive vaccination or complete test-and-removal all had higher overall costs, either because of the less efficient production, or because of the high costs of straight test-and-removal.

Abattoirs↗

Economic aspects of the control of Aujeszky's disease in the European Community.

Aujeszky's disease (AD) is as much an economic problem as an epidemiological one. Several strategies are available for controlling the disease, and it is the task of the economist to compare all control options; the "best" strategy may differ depending on whether it is defined at the farm, regional, national or European Community (EC) level. After taking into account both the production losses due to the impact of the AD virus, and the expenditures for the control programme, the strategy which is most efficient from an economic point of view can be determined. However, the most efficient control strategy in one region cannot be chosen solely on the basis of the characteristics of that region, and circumstances in neighbouring regions have to be taken into account as well. Therefore, linkages between neighbouring EC regions are built into the economic model being developed in the EC-funded research project on Aujeszky's disease.

Animals↗

Economic progress.

Explore the source record for details and available documents.

Animal Welfare↗