Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 9 de 9
Filtrar
Más filtros











Base de datos
Intervalo de año de publicación
2.
Front Vet Sci ; 9: 854052, 2022.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35211546

RESUMEN

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.3389/fvets.2021.688936.].

5.
Front Vet Sci ; 8: 670419, 2021.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34490388

RESUMEN

Within the European Union, infectious cattle diseases are categorized in the Animal Health Law. No strict EU regulations exist for control, evidence of disease freedom, and surveillance of diseases listed other than categories A and B. Consequently, EU member states follow their own varying strategies for disease control. The aim of this study was to provide an overview of the control and eradication programs (CPs) for six cattle diseases in the Netherlands between 2009 and 2019 and to highlight characteristics specific to the Dutch situation. All of these diseases were listed as C,D or E in the New Animal Health Law. In the Netherlands, CPs are in place for six endemic cattle diseases: bovine viral diarrhea, infectious bovine rhinotracheitis, salmonellosis, paratuberculosis, leptospirosis, and neosporosis. These CPs have been tailored to the specific situation in the Netherlands: a country with a high cattle density, a high rate of animal movements, a strong dependence on export of dairy products, and a high-quality data-infrastructure. The latter specifically applies to the dairy sector, which is the leading cattle sector in the Netherlands. When a herd enters a CP, generally the within-herd prevalence of infection is estimated in an initial assessment. The outcome creates awareness of the infection status of a herd and also provides an indication of the costs and time to achieve the preferred herd status. Subsequently, the herd enrolls in the control phase of the CP to, if present, eliminate the infection from a herd and a surveillance phase to substantiate the free or low prevalence status over time. The high-quality data infrastructure that results in complete and centrally registered census data on cattle movements provides the opportunity to design CPs while minimizing administrative efforts for the farmer. In the CPs, mostly routinely collected samples are used for surveillance. Where possible, requests for proof of the herd status are sent automatically. Automated detection of risk factors for introduction of new animals originating from a herd without the preferred herd status i.e., free or unsuspected, is in place using centrally registered data. The presented overview may inspire countries that want to develop cost-effective CPs for endemic diseases that are not (yet) regulated at EU level.

6.
Front Vet Sci ; 8: 688078, 2021.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34395571

RESUMEN

The COST action "Standardising output-based surveillance to control non-regulated diseases of cattle in the European Union (SOUND control)," aims to harmonise the results of surveillance and control programmes (CPs) for non-EU regulated cattle diseases to facilitate safe trade and improve overall control of cattle infectious diseases. In this paper we aimed to provide an overview on the diversity of control for these diseases in Europe. A non-EU regulated cattle disease was defined as an infectious disease of cattle with no or limited control at EU level, which is not included in the European Union Animal health law Categories A or B under Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2020/2002. A CP was defined as surveillance and/or intervention strategies designed to lower the incidence, prevalence, mortality or prove freedom from a specific disease in a region or country. Passive surveillance, and active surveillance of breeding bulls under Council Directive 88/407/EEC were not considered as CPs. A questionnaire was designed to obtain country-specific information about CPs for each disease. Animal health experts from 33 European countries completed the questionnaire. Overall, there are 23 diseases for which a CP exists in one or more of the countries studied. The diseases for which CPs exist in the highest number of countries are enzootic bovine leukosis, bluetongue, infectious bovine rhinotracheitis, bovine viral diarrhoea and anthrax (CPs reported by between 16 and 31 countries). Every participating country has on average, 6 CPs (min-max: 1-13) in place. Most programmes are implemented at a national level (86%) and are applied to both dairy and non-dairy cattle (75%). Approximately one-third of the CPs are voluntary, and the funding structure is divided between government and private resources. Countries that have eradicated diseases like enzootic bovine leukosis, bluetongue, infectious bovine rhinotracheitis and bovine viral diarrhoea have implemented CPs for other diseases to further improve the health status of cattle in their country. The control of non-EU regulated cattle diseases is very heterogenous in Europe. Therefore, the standardising of the outputs of these programmes to enable comparison represents a challenge.

7.
Front Vet Sci ; 8: 688936, 2021.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34395573

RESUMEN

Animal disease control has a long tradition in Finland. The country is free of all EU-regulated cattle diseases of categories A and B. Infectious bovine rhinotracheitis, enzootic bovine leucosis, bovine viral diarrhea, bluetongue, bovine genital campylobacteriosis, and trichomoniasis do not currently exist in the country. The prevalence of paratuberculosis, Mycoplasma bovis, salmonella infection, and Q-fever is low. The geographic location, cold climate, low cattle density, and limited animal imports have contributed to the favorable disease situation. Besides screening for selected regulated diseases, the national disease-monitoring program includes periodic active monitoring of non-regulated diseases, which allows assessment of the need for new control measures. The detection of diseases through efficient passive surveillance also plays an important part in disease monitoring. The Finnish cattle population totals 850,000 animals kept on 9,300 cattle farms, with 62,000 suckler cows in 2,100 herds and 260,000 dairy cows in 6,300 herds. Animal Health ETT, an association owned by the dairy and meat industry, keeps a centralized cattle health care register. Animal Health ETT supervises cattle imports and trade within the country and runs voluntary control programs (CP) for selected diseases. Active cooperation between authorities, the cattle industry, Animal Health ETT, and herd health experts enables the efficient planning and implementation of CPs. CPs have been implemented for cattle diseases such as salmonella, Mycoplasma bovis, ringworm, and Streptococcus agalactiae. The CP for salmonellosis is compulsory and includes all Salmonella serotypes and all cattle types. It has achieved the goal of keeping the salmonella prevalence under 1% of cattle herds. CPs for M. bovis, ringworm, and S. agalactiae are on a voluntary basis and privately funded. The CP for Mycoplasma was designed in collaboration with national experts and has been implemented since 2013. The CP includes observation of clinical signs, nasal swab sampling from calves, and bulk tank milk and clinical mastitis samples for M. bovis. M. bovis-negative herds gradually achieve lower status levels for M. bovis infection. The general challenge facing voluntary CPs is getting farms to join the programs.

8.
Front Vet Sci ; 8: 656336, 2021.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33981745

RESUMEN

Various European Member States have implemented control or eradication programmes for endemic infectious diseases in cattle. The design of these programmes varies between countries and therefore comparison of the outputs of different control programmes is complex. Although output-based methods to estimate the confidence of freedom resulting from these programmes are under development, as yet there is no practical modeling framework applicable to a variety of infectious diseases. Therefore, a data collection tool was developed to evaluate data availability and quality and to collect actual input data required for such a modeling framework. The aim of the current paper is to present the key learnings from the process of the development of this data collection tool. The data collection tool was developed by experts from two international projects: STOC free (Surveillance Tool for Outcome-based Comparison of FREEdom from infection, www.stocfree.eu) and SOUND control (Standardizing OUtput-based surveillance to control Non-regulated Diseases of cattle in the EU, www.sound-control.eu). Initially a data collection tool was developed for assessment of freedom of bovine viral diarrhea virus in six Western European countries. This tool was then further generalized to enable inclusion of data for other cattle diseases i.e., infectious bovine rhinotracheitis and Johne's disease. Subsequently, the tool was pilot-tested by a Western and Eastern European country, discussed with animal health experts from 32 different European countries and further developed for use throughout Europe. The developed online data collection tool includes a wide range of variables that could reasonably influence confidence of freedom, including those relating to cattle demographics, risk factors for introduction and characteristics of disease control programmes. Our results highlight the fact that data requirements for different cattle diseases can be generalized and easily included in a data collection tool. However, there are large differences in data availability and comparability across European countries, presenting challenges to the development of a standardized data collection tool and modeling framework. These key learnings are important for development of any generic data collection tool for animal disease control purposes. Further, the results can facilitate development of output-based modeling frameworks that aim to calculate confidence of freedom from disease.

9.
Front Vet Sci ; 8: 665607, 2021.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33981747

RESUMEN

The cattle industry is a major driving force for the Italian agricultural sector totalling about 5. 6 million heads for dairy and meat production together. It is particularly developed in the northern part of the country, where 70% of the whole Italian cattle population is reared. The cattle industry development in the rest of the country is hampered by the hard orography of the territories and a variety of socioeconomic features leading to the persistence of the traditional rural farming systems. The differences in the farming systems (industrial vs. traditional) also affect the health status of the farms. Whereas, Enzootic Bovine Leukosis (EBL) is almost eradicated across the whole country, in Southern Italy where Bovine Tuberculosis and Brucellosis are still present and Bluetongue is endemic due to the presence of the competent vector (Culicoides imicola), less investments are aimed at controlling diseases with economic impact or at improving farm biosecurity. On the other hand, with the eradication of these diseases in most part of the country, the need has emerged for reducing the economic burden of non-regulated endemic disease and control programs (CPs) for specific diseases have been implemented at regional level, based on the needs of each territory (for instance common grazing or trading with neighboring countries). This explains the coexistence of different types of programs in force throughout the country. Nowadays in Italy, among cattle diseases with little or no EU regulations only three are regulated by a national CP: Enzootic Bovine Leukosis, Bluetongue and Paratuberculosis, while Bovine Genital Campylobacteriosis and Trichomonosis are nationwide controlled only in breeding bulls. For some of the remaining diseases (Infectious Bovine Rhinotracheitis, Bovine Viral Diarrhea, Streptococcus agalactiae) specific CPs have been implemented by the regional Authorities, but for most of them a CP does not exist at all. However, there is a growing awareness among farmers and public health authorities that animal diseases have a major impact not only on the farm profitability but also on animal welfare and on the use of antibiotics in livestock. It is probable that in the near future other CPs will be implemented.

SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA