No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the authors.
Biosecurity measures on swine farms in Spain: Perceptions by farmers and their relationship to current on-farm measures
Abstract
A survey was conducted on 172 farms belonging to the same company in order to ascertain the biosecurity measures applied and the importance that farmers attributed to each measure. A questionnaire about general data, the opinions of farmers about biosecurity measures, and a detailed checklist of the biosecurity measures actually applied on the farm was completed for each one of the participating farms. Opinion data were initially analysed by means of a cluster analysis (multidimensional scaling method); then, a logistic regression was used to analyse the relationship between the perceptions of the farmer and the measures applied on the farm. In general, farmers implemented measures to reduce risks of contamination from people and animals other than pigs. In contrast, biosecurity measures related to replacement stock were not applied as often. On average, the farmers scored the biosecurity on their own farms as 6.7 on a scale of 0-10. The most important measures, according to the farmers' perceptions, were the availability of a sanitary ford, a fence around the farm, the restriction of visits and vehicles, using bird-proof nets in windows, having changing facilities, applying quarantines, and the use of other measures related to replacement stock. The perception of a given measure was strongly influenced by the measures actually applied on the farm. Thus, for example, those who did not have a sanitary ford highlighted the importance of disinfecting vehicles while those who had one neglected this type of disinfection. In conclusion, knowledge of the relationships between perceptions and measures taken is important in developing effective biosecurity strategies on pig farms.
... In Europe, biosecurity measures on pig farms vary across countries and regions, as there are no standardized procedures or regulations [2,14,22]. Each country typically has its own national guidelines or codes of practice for biosecurity, and the implementation of these measures depends on factors like geographical location, farm size, production type, techno-managerial capabilities, and the epidemiological situation [16,17,23,24]. Moreover, there is a scarcity of data regarding the level of implementation of biosecurity measures on conventional indoor pig farms in various European countries [6,10,23,25]. ...
... Each country typically has its own national guidelines or codes of practice for biosecurity, and the implementation of these measures depends on factors like geographical location, farm size, production type, techno-managerial capabilities, and the epidemiological situation [16,17,23,24]. Moreover, there is a scarcity of data regarding the level of implementation of biosecurity measures on conventional indoor pig farms in various European countries [6,10,23,25]. ...
... In general, motivating farmers to adopt a standard hygiene protocol and alter their daily routines poses a well-known challenge [23,36,37]. As reported by Garforth et al. (2013) many farmers believe they are already taking all reasonable measures to minimize disease risk, considering other practices irrelevant [38]. ...
This study delves into the assessment of cleaning and disinfection (C&D) measures within the context of European pig farming, employing the Biocheck.UGent™ tool as an effective instrument for evaluation. A comprehensive set of relevant parameters was examined to enable meaningful comparisons across farms from 10 European countries during four years (2019–2022). Findings indicate a notable increase in C&D measure implementation in select countries (Belgium, Finland, Italy, and Spain), reflecting heightened awareness and responsibility among farmers. Additionally, the overall score for the C&D subcategory highlights variation across countries, with Italy (75), Poland (74), and Belgium (72) displaying the highest scores, while Ireland (56), Slovenia (55), and Serbia (50) reported the lowest scores. However, the considerable variation in the number of participating farms necessitates cautious comparisons. The study identifies well-implemented C&D measures in the frame of external biosecurity but underscores gaps in the application of C&D measures for the material introduction practices across farms (22% of farms), which are attributed to awareness gaps and resource limitations. In the areas of internal biosecurity, strong points include C&D procedures after each production cycle (79%), implementing different stages in the C&D process (65%) and sufficient sanitary break (82%), while gaps are evident in the presence and using of hand hygiene stations (19% of farms) and boots disinfection equipment (40% of farms) between compartments/units. Notably, the study reveals a lack of evaluation of hygiene after C&D procedures (only 1% of farms), signaling critical knowledge gaps among farmers regarding proper assessment tools and methods. In conclusion, this comprehensive analysis sheds light on the implementation status of C&D measures in European pig farming, offering insights into both areas of progress and those requiring improvement. The findings emphasize the need for targeted awareness campaigns and training initiatives to bolster biosecurity practices within the industry.
... The concept of on-farm biosecurity categorizes these procedures into two components: external biosecurity, which consists of measures aimed at preventing the introduction of a disease into a farm, and internal biosecurity, which involves practices intended at controlling the spread of already present diseases within a farm (3). Previous studies described the importance of biosecurity in disease prevention and control and highlighted the benefits of adopting effective biosecurity plans and practices for swine producers (2, 3,[16][17][18][19][20]. However, a lack of knowledge about these practices feeds the resistance to their adoption. ...
... Previous studies have shown the significance of educating farmers on effective disease prevention and control practices for maintaining farm biosecurity (17). Moreover, educating swine producers on diseases and biosecurity measures is vital for shaping a positive perspective toward biosecurity (16,18). ...
... The study team developed the questionnaire consulting existing literature on biosecurity practices and evaluation (2, 18,[33][34][35][36][37][38] and by seeking advice from experts in swine biosecurity and survey research methodology from Illinois. Additionally, two board members from the IPPA reviewed the questionnaire and provided feedback. ...
There is a growing risk to the health and productivity of the Illinois and United States swine population from foreign and endemic infectious diseases. Effective on-farm biosecurity practices play a pivotal role in preventing these high-consequence pathogens from affecting swine farms. Veterinarians are essential in providing disease prevention advice to swine producers that can help them implement effective biosecurity practices on their farms. Our descriptive study objectives were to assess Illinois swine producers’ and veterinarians’ biosecurity perception, knowledge, and practices to identify knowledge gaps and address these by developing an online educational website. We developed two independent online questionnaires using QualtricsXM software. Swine producer members of the Illinois Pork Producers Association and veterinarians registered with the Illinois State Veterinary Medical Association were contacted via e-mail through their associations and asked to complete an online survey. In total, 13 swine producers across 9 Illinois counties operating 82 farms (8 managed single farms and 5 managed multiple farms) responded to the swine producer survey. Despite some biosecurity awareness among swine producers, the need for a biosecurity-related outreach program was evident. Among the 7 swine veterinarian responders, 5 predominantly treated swine (oversaw an average of 21.6 farms), and 2 were mixed animal practitioners. The swine veterinarian survey showed a disconnect between their biosecurity perception and practices. We developed a biosecurity educational website and used Google Analytics to collect website traffic and user data. The 4 months of data showed good coverage that included the highest proportion of users from the Midwest and North Carolina, the largest swine-production regions in the US, and China and Canada, the leading producers of swine worldwide. The most accessed webpage was the resources page, and the swine diseases page had the highest engagement time. Our study highlights the effectiveness of combining online surveys with an educational website to assess and improve the biosecurity knowledge of swine producers and veterinarians that can be applied to assess and improve the biosecurity knowledge and practices of other livestock farmers.
... The improvement of hygiene management was the first practice aimed at decreasing the persistence of pathogens, supporting the importance of personnel training (lectures and practical assistance on-farm) that was included in the tailor-made biosecurity plans of the present study. Over the past few years, some studies explored the factors that affect the decision making of swine farmers and their attitude towards biosecurity [11,42]. All the authors agreed that biosecurity practices and hygiene procedures are often adopted by pig farmers with low perseverance and consistency, although their importance in preventing and controlling diseases is acknowledged. ...
... All the authors agreed that biosecurity practices and hygiene procedures are often adopted by pig farmers with low perseverance and consistency, although their importance in preventing and controlling diseases is acknowledged. Failure to comply with biosecurity measures seems to be frequently associated with inadequate training of farm personnel and their poor communication with the advisors [11,43], in particular, as regards the understanding of the significance of each measure in terms of disease transmission. In the present study, it was supposed that the training of the personnel and the application of a tailor-made biosecurity plan increased the communication between farmers and biosecurity advisors, in particular on those measures most related to the training scope (i.e., hygiene procedures). ...
... Precisely in this regard, some authors have recently strengthened the positive effects of tailor-made plans on biosecurity in pig farms by using antimicrobial use and economic and technical performances as output parameters. Following interventions, a substantial reduction in antimicrobial use was achieved, maintaining the overall farm technical performance, and a possible link between biosecurity and lung lesions and scars at slaughter has been proposed [9][10][11][12]. ...
In livestock, the importance of hygiene management is gaining importance within the context of biosecurity. The aim of this study was to monitor the implementation of biosecurity and hygiene procedures in 20 swine herds over a 12-month period, as driven by tailor-made plans, including training on-farm. The measure of adenosine triphosphate (ATP) environmental contents was used as an output biomarker. The presence of livestock-associated methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (LA-MRSA) and extended-spectrum β-lactamase producing Escherichia coli (ESBL-E. coli) was also investigated as sentinels of antibiotic resistance. A significant biosecurity improvement (p = 0.006) and a reduction in the ATP content in the sanitised environment (p = 0.039) were observed. A cluster including 6/20 farms greatly improved both biosecurity and ATP contents, while the remaining 14/20 farms ameliorated them only slightly. Even if the ESBL-E. coli prevalence (30.0%) after the hygiene procedures significantly decreased, the prevalence of LA-MRSA (22.5%) was unaffected. Despite the promising results supporting the adoption of tailor-made biosecurity plans and the measure of environmental ATP as an output biomarker, the high LA-MRSA prevalence still detected at the end of the study underlines the importance of improving even more biosecurity and farm hygiene in a one-health approach aimed to preserve also the pig workers health.
... Knowledge is often seen as key to changing behaviour; if individuals do not know the impacts of their actions, then they cannot be expected to change their attitude toward a certain challenge [34]. For example, farmers are likely to be more motivated to implement biosecurity measures if such measures can be expected to be beneficial for their farm performance [35][36][37]. ...
... In fact, the biosecurity score of the professional zone at the beginning of the study was lower than the score in the public and in the herd zone. Moreover, Casal et al. [35] stated that farmers are likely to implement the biosecurity measures they perceive as important. The awareness of biosecurity has traditionally been focused on external biosecurity by farmers to avoid non-endemic diseases entering their farms [37]. ...
... In recent years, some studies explored the factors influencing decision-making for pig farmers, as well as their attitude towards biosecurity [35,36]. Most authors agreed on the evidence that biosecurity measures are sometimes inconsistently applied on commercial farms, despite most farmers being concerned about biosecurity and aware of its importance in preventing and controlling diseases. ...
Limited data are available regarding animal-based biomarkers over time as outcomes of biosecurity in pig farms. The aim of this study was to gain an insight into the biosecurity implementation in a convenience sample of 15 swine herds, and to describe potential biomarkers of interest; inputs from a systematic evaluation of biosecurity implementation were used to develop tailor-made biosecurity protocols monitored over a 12-month period. The farms’ implementation was then described, and animal-based biomarkers were explored as output parameters. A significative biosecurity improvement was observed at the end of the study (p = 0.047), in particular in the professional zone (p = 0.012). Four clusters of farms were identified for their progress on biosecurity implementation by means of Principal Component Analysis (PCA) and Hierarchical Cluster Analysis (HCA): 4/15 farms improved their biosecurity only in the professional zone, 8/15 showed scarce/null improvement of total biosecurity, 2/15 worsened their biosecurity, and 1/15 greatly improved biosecurity. The farm biosecurity profiles showing an improvement included farms with a reduction in lung lesions and scars at slaughter at the end of the study. The results suggest that a systematic evaluation of biosecurity is a useful approach to formulate tailor-made biosecurity plans and monitor their implementation; biomarkers might bring insight into the outcomes of biosecurity.
... The most common way to evaluate the biosecurity level in swine farms described in the literature is by creating scores, where the combination of several practices generates a score able to quantify biosecurity. Some methods were already described with that aim and the majority of them applied multivariate analyses (Boklund et al., 2004;Bottoms et al., 2013;Casal et al., 2007;Ribbens et al., 2008), risk-based scoring system (Holtkamp et al., 2011;Laanen et al., 2010;Silva et al., 2018;Zang et al., 2012) or merely the sum of the practices adopted at herd-level (Pinto and Urcelay, 2003). These scores have been commonly used to classify and identify herds' vulnerabilities to diseases (Bottoms et al., 2013;Laanen et al., 2013), but these type of methods may have the disadvantage of using extensive questionnaires and redundant questions. ...
... From the original questionnaire, the most common biosecurity practices (n = 35) were selected considering scientific articles (Amass and Clark, 1999;Casal et al., 2007;Food and Agriculture Organization, 2010;Laanen et al., 2011) and common biosecurity practices applied in Brazil (Barcellos et al., 2008;Sobestiansky, 2002). All practices were dichotomous variables, where the value "1" means the presence of the practice and "0" otherwise. ...
... These findings are opposing to a European study where the external biosecurity scores on average were higher than the internal (Laanen et al., 2013). Possible explanations would be the need of investments in the farm structure to adopt segregation and sanitation practices (Food and Agriculture Organization, 2010), lack of farmers knowledge about the benefit of external biosecurity practices (Nöremark and Sternberg-Lewerin, 2014;Simon-Grifé et al., 2013) and risk perception of the farmers against pathogens introduction (Casal et al., 2007). ...
... The Irish pig sector includes mostly closed herds, resulting in less animal movements with 94.5% of the farms reported to buy only semen from genetic companies and not purchasing gilts. In other countries, gilts are purchased and quarantined on farm before introducing them to the herd [3,18,19]. This is a risk for external biosecurity not existing in Ireland. ...
... It is likely that farmers do not valorise the pertinence of internal biosecurity. Casal et al. [18] states that farmers are likely to implement biosecurity measures they perceive as important. However, the awareness towards biosecurity has traditionally been focused on external biosecurity by farmers to avoid those diseases not endemic to their farms. ...
... Although this study accounts for almost 30% of all the breeding sows in Ireland, these herds were likely to represent a better end of the Irish pig farms, as suggested by Staaveren et al. [26]. Also, the biosecurity data was collected in a cross-sectional study in in-office interviews which may have led to bias towards answers stating measures believed to be applied on farm rather than stating measures applied [18]. Contributing to this bias was also the different interviewees with farm owners being less likely to be aware of the daily management practices and actual cleaning routines in their farms when compared to farm managers and other workers. ...
Background
Biosecurity is one of the main factors affecting disease occurrence and antimicrobial use, and it is associated with performance in pig production. However, the importance of specific measures could vary depending on the (national) context. The aim of this study was to describe the biosecurity status in a cohort of Irish pig farms, to investigate which of those biosecurity aspects are more relevant by using the Biocheck.UGent™ scoring system, and to study the impact of such aspects on farm performance.
Results
External biosecurity score was high compared to most countries due to the characteristics of the Irish pig sector (i.e. purchasing only semen and breeding gilts on farm). The internal biosecurity score was lower and had greater variability among farms than other EU countries. Using multivariable linear regression, the biosecurity practices explained 8, 23, and 16% of variability in piglet mortality, finisher mortality, and average daily gain, respectively. Three clusters of farms were defined based on their biosecurity scores (0 to 100) using principal components and hierarchical clustering analysis. Scores for clusters 1, 2 and 3 were (mean ± SD) 38 ± 7.6, 61 ± 7.0 and 66 ± 9.8 for internal and 73 ± 5.1, 74 ± 5.3 and 86 ± 4.5 for external biosecurity. Cluster 3 had lower piglet mortality (P = 0.022) and higher average daily gain (P = 0.037) when compared to cluster 2.
Conclusions
Irish farms follow European tendencies with internal biosecurity posing as the biggest liability. Our results suggest that practices related to the environment and region, feed, water and equipment supply, and the management of the different stages, need to be addressed in lower performing farms to improve productive performance. Further studies on the economic impact of these biosecurity practices including complementary data on herd health, gilt rearing, piglet management, vaccination and feeding strategies are needed.
... The application of biosecurity measures largely depends on farmers' attitudes and understanding of infectious diseases and their prevention [40]. Farmers' understanding of the importance of different biosecurity measures is a complicated process related to many factors and can be influenced by farm characteristics, measures implemented or taken by neighbouring farms, veterinary advice, and existing scientific and technical information [41]. Ribbens et al. [8] showed that the type and scale of a farm influence that farm's biosecurity application degree. ...
... Ribbens et al. [8] showed that the type and scale of a farm influence that farm's biosecurity application degree. Casalet al. [41] reported that on more specialized farms, farmers pay more attention to disease prevention. Laanen et al. [35] noted that the larger the herd size, the higher the external biosecurity score, with a negative correlation between farmer experience and internal score; the younger the farmer, the higher the biosecurity level. ...
Background
Animal diseases have always been a serious threat to livestock breeding, and the establishment of a biosecurity barrier is important for disease prevention and control. Based on the investigations conducted in seven provinces located farms, this study aimed to explore the current biosecurity levels of farms in China, construct a biosecurity evaluation system, calculate the biosecurity levels of farms using the rank sum ratio comprehensive evaluation method, and develop an empirical analysis of the factors influencing biosecurity levels.
Results
The results show that the greater the cost of biosecurity invested, the greater the level of biosecurity. Male farmers, educational attainment and participation in technical training had a significant positive effect on biosecurity levels. In addition, biosecurity levels first decreased and then increased as the scale of farming increased. The study also found that the more people in the household engaged in farming, the higher the biosecurity level of the farm. And farms that joined cooperatives had higher levels of biosecurity.
Conclusion
The rank sum ratio method can evaluate the index system, so as to obtain a comprehensive index RSR value that can be compared, and the operation steps are simple and effective. By taking measures such as improving the comprehensive quality of farmers and increasing the investment in human, material and financial resources for biosecurity, the biosecurity level of farms can be effectively improved and animal diseases can be effectively prevented and controlled.
... According to research works done in the United Kingdom, on 34% of farmers, biosecurity practices (BPs) among cattle producers were almost non-existent (Anon 2007) which is similar to the current findings in the majority of farms. A study conducted by Casal et al. (2007) indicated a score of 6.7 on a scale of 0-10, where the worst score was 3 and the best was 10. Different factors that contributed to unsuccessful BPs were reported by various authors. ...
... The result was higher than the finding of Nöremark et al. (2010) who reported that 50% of producers mixed new animals into the herd without isolation and less than the finding by USDA (2002) who indicated 20% quarantined or tested new additions to the farm. About 13% (USDA 2002) and 55% (Casal et al. 2007) of producers reported that restriction of visiting practices have been carried out in the farms which is better than the current finding. In this study, about 53.3% of the farms introduced manure from other areas and showed a risk of feed (44%) and water (58.7%) ...
Biosecurity is a series of management practices used to minimize, prevent or control the introduction of infectious agents into a farm and within a farm. With the objectives of identifying the current bio-security practices and the level of risks in dairy farms, a cross sectional study was conducted from 2019 to 2020. A total of 75 dairy farms from 5 districts were evaluated using WASDA risk assessment tools and data analysis was made using IBM SPSS V20. The finding showed that all (100%) farms did not have biosecurity plan, and majority (88% to 96%) didn't perform disease prevention and control techniques. The outputs also indicated about 89.3% of the farms need intervention on animal health management biosecurity. However, about 9.3% of the farms performed something good but could stand for improvement and Adea berga dairy research farm (1.3%) performed well. With regard to feed monitoring, 100% of the farms needed attention as those farms (57.3% to 98.7%) didn't not follow standard feeding systems which were risky for health. Majority of the farms (83.3% to 100%) did not have established farm security which were risks for health and stability of the farm. About 93.3% of the farms required help on risk management of drought preparedness. 69.3% to 97.7% of the farms did not have preplanned activity to drought prevention before its occurrence. With regard to human health risk assessment, about 61.3% to 100% of the farms did not perform major activities to prevent and control risks. About (42.7 %) farms performed well but could make improvement while 57.3% performed to reduce risk. Statistically significant (p<0.05) difference was observed among districts and farm type in this case (p<0.05). The study illustrated that all components used to evaluate the level of risks on biosecurity practices were substantial on smallholder dairy farms. This finding also indicated that majority of the farms were undertaking little or no preventive measures to combat disease 2 transmission. Hence, intervention is needed to apply mitigation measures well as inform this result to policy makers for immediate action is quite important. Further studies on the use of different modeling systems to quantify the level of risks should be performed at each farm.
... Although the benefits and usefulness of biosecurity are known, some studies demonstrated that pig farmers do not implement adequate biosecurity measures [29,31]. The implementation of BP and MP depends on numerous factors, including the owner perception, the farm production type and the size of the production [31][32][33][34]. In this matter, few information is available regarding BP and MP that are implemented in tropical settings such as the Colombian pig farms. ...
... Also, the survey data was collected in a crosssectional study from interviews which may have led to bias towards answers stating measures believed to be applied on farm rather than confirming measures really applied. It is known that perception of a given biosecurity measure apply can be also strongly influenced by multiple factors [32]. When survey respondents were overseeing multiple swine farms limitations on the data analysis was taken into account by analyzing the data only from the sites where the target piglets were sampled for IAV detection. ...
Biosecurity protocols (BP) and good management practices are key to reduce the risk of introduction and transmission of infectious diseases into the pig farms. In this observational cross-sectional study, survey data were collected from 176 pig farms with inventories over 100 sows in Colombia. We analyzed a complex survey dataset to explore the structure and identify clustering patterns using Multiple Correspondence Analysis (MCA) of swine farms in Colombia, and estimated its association with Influenza A virus detection. Two principal dimensions contributed to 27.6% of the dataset variation. Farms with highest contribution to dimension 1 were larger farrow-to-finish farms, using self-replacement of gilts and implementing most of the measures evaluated. In contrast, farms with highest contribution to dimension 2 were medium to large farrow-to-finish farms, but implemented biosecurity in a lower degree. Additionally, two farm clusters were identified by Hierarchical Cluster Analysis (HCA), and the odds of influenza A virus detection was statistically different between clusters (OR 7.29, CI: 1.7,66, p=<0.01). Moreover, after logistic regression analysis, three important variables were associated with higher odds of influenza detection: (1) “location in an area with a high density of pigs”, (2) “farm size”, and (3) “after cleaning and disinfecting, the facilities are allowed to dry before use”. Our results revealed two clustering patterns of swine farms. This systematic analysis of complex survey data identified relationships between biosecurity, husbandry practices and influenza status. This approach helped to identify gaps on biosecurity and key elements for designing successful strategies to prevent and control swine respiratory diseases in the swine industry.
... De façon générale, les perceptions des éleveurs sur le coût de la biosécurité sont importantes à considérer pour l'adoption de ces mesures. Si les coûts perçus sont excessifs, les producteurs peuvent préférer ne pas appliquer les mesures (Casal et al. 2007). D'autres études ont aussi constaté que l'estimation des coûts/bénéfices de la biosécurité contribuent à l'adoption de mesures de biosécurité (Fraser et al. 2010;Niemi et al. 2016;Toma et al. 2013;Valeeva, Van Asseldonk et Backus 2011). ...
... Seulement 65 % des éleveurs affirmaient appliquer les dix mesures de biosécurité porcins » Version finale page 60 / 133 Juillet 2021 considérées importantes (véhicules interdits, désinfection des véhicules, rotoluve, barrière à l'entrée, restriction des visites, port de bottes et de vêtements de la ferme, sas sanitaire, contrôle des nuisibles et des oiseaux sauvages et connaissance du statut sanitaire des troupeaux reproducteurs). Seulement deux de ces mesures semblaient appliquées par tous les éleveurs sondés : le port de bottes et de vêtements de l'exploitation et la connaissance du statut sanitaire des troupeaux reproducteurs (Casal et al. 2007). À noter que d'autres auteurs ont bien démontré que l'observance concernant les bottes et les vêtements supplémentaires de protection laissait souvent à désirer (Racicot et al. 2011). ...
... In recent years, several studies explored the factors influencing decision-making by pig farmers, as well as their attitude towards biosecurity [156][157][158][159][160][161]. Some of the reported factors could be classified as "personal" including knowledge about the transmission of diseases and about biosecurity, gender (often women do a better implementation of biosecurity programs), age and years of experience, the personality, as well as the connection of people to sources of information (technical advice, producer network, etc.) [160][161][162][163][164]. ...
... Part of this failure is due to the low confidence on government institutions. Likewise, part of the producers believes that the responsibility for the application of the measures lies with the health organizations, particularly when the measures are intended to zoonosis control or are applied by international legal or market pressures [156,166]. ...
The perception of the importance of animal health and its relationship with biosecurity has increased in recent years with the emergence and re-emergence of several diseases difficult to control. This is particularly evident in the case of pig farming as shown by the recent episodes of African swine fever or porcine epidemic diarrhoea. Moreover, a better biosecurity may help to improve productivity and may contribute to reducing the use of antibiotics. Biosecurity can be defined as the application of measures aimed to reduce the probability of the introduction (external biosecurity) and further spread of pathogens within the farm (internal biosecurity). Thus, the key idea is to avoid transmission, either between farms or within the farm. This implies knowledge of the epidemiology of the diseases to be avoided that is not always available, but since ways of transmission of pathogens are limited to a few, it is possible to implement effective actions even with some gaps in our knowledge on a given disease. For the effective design of a biosecurity program, veterinarians must know how diseases are transmitted, the risks and their importance, which mitigation measures are thought to be more effective and how to evaluate the biosecurity and its improvements. This review provides a source of information on external and internal biosecurity measures that reduce risks in swine production and the relationship between these measures and the epidemiology of the main diseases, as well as a description of some systems available for risk analysis and the assessment of biosecurity. Also, it reviews the factors affecting the successful application of a biosecurity plan in a pig farm.
... Lo esencial es que se busque y adapte alguna forma de modificar el tipo de sistema de producción, en especial si se mantiene a las cerdas confinadas en jaulas; el cambio de tipo de alojamiento originará grandes beneficios para la salud y el bienestar de los animales, sin diferencias significativas en su rendimiento, lográndose, al final, un equilibrio con el medio ambiente. Introducción L a estructura de la producción en la industria porcina, ahora, que hay un gran movimiento de los cerdos de una región a otra y entre las granjas de cada región, se requiere la aplicación de medidas preventivas para evitar la introducción de enfermedades a las granjas y para contener la propagación de las infecciones ya presentes (Casal et al., 2007;Laanen et al., 2013). Este tipo de riesgos son patentes en cualquier tipo de granjas: industriales, semitecnificadas y también en granjas a pequeña escala. ...
... Conforme se vayan bajando los animales del remolque, se inmovilizan y se toman las siguientes muestras: exudado nasal con la ayuda de un hisopo y sanguínea de la vena cava anterior o yugular exterior (Figura 8.2) con aguja calibre 18, se identifican las muestras y se remiten al laboratorio de diagnóstico con la intención de determinar la ausencia o presencia de los patógenos más importantes como serían: Síndrome Reproductivo y Respiratorio Porcino (PRRS), Gastroenteritis transmisible (GET), Diarrea Epidémica Porcina (DEP), Enfermedad de Aujeszky, Ojo Azul y Erysipelothrix rhusiopathiae o el agente de riesgo dependiendo la zona o región en que se encuentre la unidad de producción. Si los resultados serológicos de los cerdos son negativos, el siguiente paso es la inmunización contra las enfermedades presentes en la granja (Casal et al., 2007). Al menos se deberá aplicar la vacuna triple (que contiene Leptospira spp, Parvovirus porcino y Erysipelothrix rhusiopathiae) y su respectivo refuerzo 15 días después de la primera aplicación. ...
... Although the average BS scores obtained for the enterprises and Turkey are not very low, they are below the scores that developed countries have [23,24]. However, it is known that even developed countries have some important problems regarding BS at the farm level [13,25,26]. ...
... In addition, with the financial support to be provided by the public, it can be ensured that breeders are directed to low-cost and easy BS practices. The findings revealed that practices such as "vaccination, " "cleaning and disinfection of barns, " and "treatment process of the sick animals" are frequently or always preferred, which coincides with previous studies [5,23,26]. Offering positive results in the short term is among the most important factors for the preference of these practices at a high rate. At this point, it will be useful to point out a reality observed in the field. ...
Biosecurity (BS) is a multidimensional preventive medicine approach that has health, technical, and financial aspects.The purpose of this study was to determine the differences of the BS scores belonging to the livestock enterprises depending on the
geographical region and breeding types and to predict the socioeconomic factors having an impact over the BS level. The study was conducted with 517 breeders who live in 7 different regions of Turkey. The results have revealed that the enterprises performing “beef cattle fattening and dairy cattle breeding together” have higher BS scores than the enterprises in the other breeding category (P < 0.01). The differences between the technical and financial scores according to geographical regions were statistically significant (P < 0.01). The regions categorized as “west” have the highest score and “south” have the lowest score. It was determined that as the “educational level of the breeder” and “enterprise scale” increased, the BS score significantly went up. The regression model was found significant as a whole (P < 0.01) and the independent variables explained the variation in the technical and financial BS scores to be 14.6% and 12.7%, respectively. Dissemination of education/training practices and increasing enterprise scales will positively affect the level of BS in the sector.
... At the forefront of disease prevention are people involved with daily onfarm practices or decisions regarding the biosecurity standards on a farm. However, not everybody perceives disease risk in the same way (20,22) and biosecurity practices are not applied homogenously and at the same level across farms (23,24). Critical research on human decision-making shows that behaviors are not immutable and can be nudged toward standards that are more beneficial both for the individual and the larger community (25). ...
... Human behavior and decision making represent a challenge in the animal production industry because of their complex interconnectedness with protection from disease (18,19,23,43,44). By weaving human behavioral components into epidemiological processes, our ABM is a unique tool for evaluating the effects and efficacy of disease control strategies compared to more traditional epidemiological models that lack social dynamics. ...
Hog producers' operational decisions can be informed by an awareness of risks associated with emergent and endemic diseases. Outbreaks of porcine epidemic diarrhea virus (PEDv) have been re-occurring every year since the first onset in 2013 with substantial losses across the hog production supply chain. Interestingly, a decreasing trend in PEDv incidence is visible. We assert that changes in human behaviors may underlie this trend. Disease prevention using biosecurity practices is used to minimize risk of infection but its efficacy is conditional on human behavior and risk attitude. Standard epidemiological models bring important insights into disease dynamics but have limited predictive ability. Since research shows that human behavior plays a driving role in the disease spread process, the explicit inclusion of human behavior into models adds an important dimension to understanding disease spread. Here we analyze PEDv incidence emerging from an agent-based model (ABM) that uses both epidemiological dynamics and algorithms that incorporate heterogeneous human decisions. We investigate the effects of shifting fractions of hog producers between risk tolerant and risk averse positions. These shifts affect the dynamics describing willingness to increase biosecurity as a response to disease threats and, indirectly, change infection probabilities and the resultant intensity and impact of the disease outbreak. Our ABM generates empirically verifiable patterns of PEDv transmission. Scenario results show that relatively small shifts (10% of the producer agents) toward a risk averse position can lead to a significant decrease in total incidence. For significantly steeper decreases in disease incidence, the model's hog producer population needed at least 37.5% of risk averse. Our study provides insight into the link between risk attitude, decisions related to biosecurity, and consequent spread of disease within a livestock production system. We suggest that it is possible to create positive, lasting changes in animal health by nudging the population of livestock producers toward more risk averse behaviors. We make a case for integrating social and epidemiological aspects in disease spread models to test intervention strategies intended to improve biosecurity and animal health at the system scale.
... Wearing the hoods of C-Coveralls (certified PPE group) prevented hair contamination, in contrast to that observed in the non-certified PPE group. These results indicate that contamination of non-covered body parts is possible and suggest the need to use more adequate PPE or the establishment of routines such as having a shower after a visit or compulsory down times to prevent carry over of viruses [28,29]. ...
... Thus, the use of PPE for visitors is not compulsory and relies on farmers' willingness, which may be variable. Most of the farmers are concerned about biosecurity and were aware of its importance in preventing and controlling diseases; nevertheless, biosecurity measures are sometimes inconsistently applied on commercial farms [28], or farmers can have a low intention to make visitors to use PPE [32]. Besides, the application of these elements is also influenced by their cost. ...
Personal protective equipment (PPE) is an element of biosecurity intended to prevent the access or spread of diseases in farms. Nevertheless, to date no extensive reports exist about the effectiveness of different available PPE on farms. Thus, our aim was to estimate the degree of protection of PPE from viral contamination during farm visits. Two farms, infected with Aleutian mink disease virus and porcine circovirus–2 respectively, were visited by six visitors wearing different combinations of PPE: coveralls with hood and bootcovers, both with a certified barrier to infective agents (certified PPE group) and non-certified bootcover and coverall without hood (non-certified PPE group). Seventy-two swab samples from PPE and both hair and street clothes under PPE were taken after the visit and analysed by qPCR. Our results reveal viral exposure during visits, and the external protections of body and shoes were contaminated in all cases (24/24). In addition, protection from viral contamination varied noticeably according to the biosecurity elements used. A higher number of positives were detected in the non-certified PPE group than in the certified PPE group, both in elements under external protections (14/18 vs 3/18) and also in hair (4/6 vs 0/6). In fact, non-certified bootcovers broke during visits, resulting in viral contamination of the internal elements under them; these are consequently not suitable for using with wrinkled surfaces usually found in farm facilities. Thus, certified coveralls should be used in order to prevent contaminations, and workers and personnel of farms should be trained in their proper use. qPCR is a useful tool in the risk management of biosecurity programmes, and our results may serve as a model to evaluate different biosecurity measures.
... The key findings are discussed below. Although technical reports on biosecurity measures have been available for some time [23,24], few studies have focused on their effectiveness in reducing the risk of disease introduction [25,26]. Notably, 75% of the farms studied (60 out of 80) had at least one sample positive by qPCR, classifying them as PCV2 positive. ...
The modernization of pig production has led to increasingly larger populations of pigs. This dynamic allows for accelerated production and ensures a steady pork supply but also facilitates the spread of infections. PCV2 is a ubiquitous virus and can cause PCV2-associated diseases, depending on production practices. This study aimed to evaluate the conditions of pig production in the state of Jalisco, Mexico, and correlate them with PCV2. A total of 4207 serum samples from 80 farms were analyzed. Epidemiological data were collected and used to investigate factors associated with PCV2 detection. A relative frequency of approximately 30% was detected, primarily in grower pigs maintained on multisite farms. Several production practices, particularly biosecurity measures, were associated with PCV2 on the analyzed farms.
... Awareness of risks among farmers may not always lead to risk reduction behavior [52,53], mainly due to insufficient knowledge of measures against disease transmission, poor train-ing, and lack of communication between workers and technical service providers [54]. According to a recent study [55], cattle farmers were less likely to change with regard to biosecurity due to satisfaction with their present situation and a tendency to underestimate the impact of the issue [56]. ...
Poultry producers’ attitudes towards biosecurity practices were assessed by using the ADKAR® (Awareness, Desire, Knowledge, Ability, and Reinforcement) behavioral change model. Conventional poultry producers (n = 155) from different production types including broilers (n = 35), layers (n = 22), breeders (n = 24), turkeys (n = 19), ducks (n = 23), free-range broilers (n = 11), free-range layers (n = 11), and hatcheries (n = 10) from seven European countries were scored for each ADKAR element (1 = total absence to 5 = perfect fulfilment). Each country performed selected interventions (e.g., coaching, participatory meetings, etc.) to improve biosecurity compliance. After the interventions, significant change was observed in three of the four attitude elements. The overall mean scores (x¯ ± SD) obtained during the initial assessment (n = 130) were 4.2 ± 0.6 for Awareness, 4.1 ± 0.7 for Desire, 3.8 ± 0.8 for Knowledge, and 4.0 ± 0.7 for Ability, whereas after intervention, the scores were A = 4.3 ± 0.6, D = 4.2 ± 0.7, K = 4.1 ± 0.7, and Ab = 4.1 ± 0.7. The Reinforcement component was only evaluated after the change and obtained a score of 3.7 ± 0.7 on average. Identifying the elements influencing poultry producers and their behavior related to farm management decisions was useful in guiding our educational interventions to effectively change their behavior.
... In fact, wise investment in biosecurity measures has been associated with a higher economic return (Casal et al. 2007;Valeeva et al. 2011;Laanen et al. 2014;Dewulf and Van Immerseel 2019). However, the economic balance can still be improved by giving special focus to preventive measures, as it has been reported that several rabbitries still overuse prophylactic antimicrobials to compensate for the inadequate implementation of safety programs regarding cleaning and disinfection procedures, for example (Murphy et al. 2017). ...
The success of any animal production system is strictly related to the best practices in preventive medicine regarding rabbit welfare, biosecurity, prophylaxis, and technical-economic management. These four pillars are essential to reduce the risk of introducing, establishing, and spreading animal diseases, contributing to farms’ success from a One Health perspective. Biosecurity programs must be implemented in each rabbitry, according to the specific epidemiological conditions, available resources, and production objectives, but the main goal is always the same: ensure the best rabbit health status by reducing the entry of pathogens into the farm, their potential transmission among animals, and disease development. Thus, a protocol based on systematic hygienic and sanitary measures involving animal management; appropriate infrastructures, equipment, and procedures; and responsible conduct of farm personnel and visitors, in association with adequate prophylaxis protocols, is always highly recommended. In this chapter, the currently recommended best practices in biosecurity, preventive medicine, and rabbit husbandry will be explored in detail.
... Penerapan biosekuriti pada suatu peternakan merupakan aspek penting untuk mencegah penularan penyakit yang disebabkan oleh bakteri, virus, jamur, dan parasit. Prinsip-prinsip biosekuriti diperlukan tidak hanya untuk membatasi penyebaran patogen antar hewan, tetapi juga dari hewan ke manusia dan dari manusia ke hewan (Dewulf dan Immerseel, 2019 (Casal et al., 2007). ...
Until now, pig farming in Bali has a very important role in supporting the economy of the local community. However, the management of pig farms in Bali cannot be separated from the obstacles faced, namely the outbreak of disease agents. Biosecurity is considered a fundamental cornerstone of all disease control programs. The aim of this research is to determine the relationship between the application of biosecurity and morbidity and mortality. This research uses an observational design. The number of respondents used in this research was 40 breeders. Data collection in this research was carried out by conducting surveys and interviews with farmers regarding the implementation of biosecurity and the incidence of morbidity and mortality on the farms they own. The data obtained is presented in tabular form. Chi-square test analysis was carried out to compare data from farms that implemented biosecurity with those that did not implement biosecurity. The research results found that farms that implemented biosecurity experienced 6 incidents of morbidity and 3 incidents of mortality. Meanwhile, farms that did not implement it experienced 15 morbidity incidents and 11 mortality incidents. The conclusion of this research is that implementing biosecurity on a farm can reduce the incidence of morbidity and mortality. The advice that can be given is that preventive efforts such as implementing biosecurity should not only be carried out if a case has occurred but must continue to be carried out on an ongoing basis.
... However, it can be assumed from the results that farmers tended to make more mentions of biosecurity measures that were the cause of uncertainties and questions (e.g., fences and shoe hygiene) and spoke less about measures they had implemented and considered a matter of course (e.g., feed storage and hygiene measures at the loading ramp). This was also observed by Casal et al. in their research on pig farms in Spain, where pig farmers mostly mentioned biosecurity measures they had not yet implemented on their farms [49]. Thus, this study complements recent studies on pig farmers' attitudes and motivational goals in the context of disease prevention. ...
Background
Since its first introduction into the German wild boar population in 2020, African swine fever (ASF) has been spreading slowly from the eastern border westwards and has been introduced into eight domestic pig farms thus far. The European Food Safety Authority has named deficits in farm biosecurity and increased human activity as major risk factors for the introduction of the ASF virus into pig farms. Studies have shown that pig farms in Germany generally have a high level of biosecurity. However, veterinary practitioners and policy-makers have expressed concerns that not all pig farmers are appropriately prepared to deal with the threat of ASF. This study aimed to evaluate the level of biosecurity on pig farms in Lower Saxony and explore the reasons for deficits in the implementation of biosecurity measures. For this purpose, pig farmers were interviewed in open structured face-to-face interviews about their perception of ASF and biosecurity, and the implemented measures on their farms were assessed with a checklist. In the data analysis, the farmers’ answers and the results of the biosecurity check were compared to gain further insights into the factors influencing the implementation of biosecurity measures on the farms.
Results
The biosecurity check showed that on most farms, a high level of biosecurity had been implemented. Nevertheless, deficits were found concerning the fences and the delimitation of clean and dirty areas on farm grounds and in the anteroom. Overall, the farmers were well informed about ASF and had a realistic perception of their own biosecurity. They considered the farm layout, financial means and practicality of hygiene measures to be the main barriers to implementing biosecurity measures against ASF. However, the results also suggested that farmers’ attitudes and legal regulations were major influencing factors.
Conclusion
The results indicated a high level of biosecurity against ASF on most pig farms and a realistic perception of their own biosecurity by the farmers. Current knowledge transfer and information should focus on building upon the farmers’ own motivation and expertise and supporting them to put existing knowledge into practice.
... Infectious diseases like African Swine Fever, Classical Swine Fever, or other viral diseases can be mechanically transmitted to a new farm if due precautions are not followed. Casal et al. (2007) suggest that farm premises should not be accessible by vehicles. It is vital to have a parking lot, a loading dock for trucks and a perimeter fence with gated access. ...
... Several studies indicated that farmers are more inclined to adopt biosecurity and disease control measures when they perceive them as important [44,45]. In another study, it was found that perceived strategy efficacy played a predominant role in the adoption of animal disease management strategies, especially in the context of biosecurity measures [46]. ...
African swine fever (ASF) has posed a significant threat to Ukrainian pig farming since its identification in 2012. In this study, recognising the pivotal role of pigkeepers in disease control, we conducted ten focus groups involving 52 smallholders across eight regions in Ukraine. Using participatory methods, we revealed their awareness of ASF signs, transmission routes, preventive measures, and the perceptions of stakeholders involved in ASF control. Furthermore, we identified the smallholders’ acceptance of eradication and restriction measures, the perceived impact of zoning consequences, and their main sources of ASF information. Smallholders identified fever and skin haemorrhage as the most indicative signs of ASF and highlighted rodents as a primary transmission concern. Disinfection was seen as the most effective measure for preventing the introduction of ASF. Pigkeepers who perceived their stakeholder role in ASF control showed more trust in themselves and veterinarians than in central veterinary authorities. Farm-level ASF eradication measures were generally accepted; however, culling within the protection zone was least accepted, with economic losses listed as the most impactful consequence for pigkeepers. For ASF information, pigkeepers favour web searches and veterinarians, as well as traditional media and word-of-mouth news. This study provides valuable insights into refining the ASF communication strategies in Ukraine.
... A component of veterinary and sanitary work on livestock farms, especially in pig farming, is the need for preventive disinfection (during periods of transportation of animals). This is a critical procedure that reduces the number of infectious microbes that cause diseases in productive animals (Casal et al., 2007;Liu et al., 2021;Zhanabayev et al., 2022). ...
... Past research has examined the consequences of disease outbreaks as well as livestock operation defensive actions to prevent pathogen introduction through improved biosecurity. Defensive actions diminish costs and risks associated with disease transmission; however, not all producers choose to make such efforts (Moore et al. 2008), and those efforts that are undertaken vary in the level of effectiveness (Amass et al. 2000;Casal et al. 2007). ...
Wild pigs (Sus scrofa) can levy substantial costs to domestic livestock operations and global supply chains due to disease introduction. Producers can take defensive action to avert these costs, but the factors influencing these decisions are not well understood. We examined survey data to characterize the type and frequency of contacts between wild pigs and domestic livestock and investigated the determinants of farm operator concern for disease introduction using an ordered logit model. We found that operators with livestock kept in buildings were more concerned about disease than those with livestock kept in fenced areas or that roam free. However, the latter are at greater risk due to more frequent reported contacts with wild pigs. Results indicate that concern is significantly associated with other characteristics of farm operations, such as operation size, perceived change in wild pig populations, and respondent demographics. Developing a better understanding of the factors influencing operator concern for disease spread can contribute to the improved design of prevention policy targeting small-scale livestock producers. This could help ensure the continued safety of livestock supply chains and reduce the risk of disease-related trade restrictions, along with continued support for disease surveillance and monitoring at the national scale, and prolonged control of domestic vectors such as invasive wild pigs, specifically in regions with the most small operations.
... Regarding breeding environment characteristics, farms with a higher level of specialization tend to have a greater awareness of disease control [37]. Farmers who are part of a production organization have access to a wider range of resources, including knowledge, technology, capital, and information, which allows them to improve their biosecurity measures. ...
Simple Summary
African swine fever (ASF) has a significant impact on the pig industry, leading to drastic fluctuations in the supply and price of live pigs on the market, leading to substantial economic losses for farmers. As China enters the ‘post-ASF’ era of regular epidemic prevention and control, the behavior of farmers becomes crucial for effectively preventing and controlling major animal epidemics. To analyze the current situation and factors influencing farmers’ epidemic prevention and control behaviors, survey data were empirically analyzed. The findings indicate that the overall level of biosecurity in pig farms is low. Additionally, factors such as technical training, farm size, income share, production organization, and government inspection significantly influence farmers’ adoption of biosecurity measures.
Abstract
Effective biosecurity measures are crucial in controlling and preventing major pig diseases, ultimately ensuring farm income and social stability. This study extracted data from 205 farmer surveys in Sichuan Province, China, to construct a biosecurity index system for pig farms. The biosecurity levels of pig farms were evaluated using a projection pursuit method to identify weak areas. The Tobit model was then utilized to determine the factors that influenced the biosecurity levels. The results indicated that the overall biosecurity levels of the pig farms were low. The study found that the average biosecurity score among farms was 0.61, with a minimum score of 0.37 and a maximum score of 0.89 (on a scale of 0 to 1). These results suggest that there are significant differences in biosecurity levels among the farms. The study also found that the scores for first-level indicators related to breeding environment management, as well as second-level indicators related to personnel management and awareness of African swine fever prevention and control, were significantly lower than scores for other indicators in the farmers’ biosecurity systems. This study investigated the factors influencing biosecurity on farms and found that technical training, farm size, income share, production organization, and government inspections had a significant impact on the level of biosecurity implemented. This study emphasizes the significance of biosecurity in enhancing pig farm biosecurity and its role in improving farm resilience to major animal diseases like African swine fever. It also provides valuable insights for policymakers to make informed decisions regarding related policies.
... To compare the knowledge of groups with different beliefs and attitudes towards good farming practices, the Mann-Whitney U-Test was used. To perform the test, Likert scale questions were dichotomised by merging "Not at all Important" with "Slightly Important" and "Important" with "Very Important" answers [56,57]. The "Not sure/No opinion/Don't know" answers were treated as blanks. ...
Manure from bovine farms is commonly used as an organic fertiliser. However, if not properly managed, it can spread significant biological and chemical hazards, threatening both human and animal health. The effectiveness of risk control hugely relies on farmers’ knowledge regarding safe manure management and on the application of suitable management practices. This study aims to evaluate the knowledge and practices of Cypriot bovine farmers towards safer manure management, from its generation to its final use, in line with the One Health approach. Factors affecting farmers’ knowledge and applied practices are also investigated through a questionnaire survey. The questionnaire was developed and sent to all eligible bovine farmers in Cyprus (n = 353), and 30% (n = 105) of them returned the completed questionnaire. Results revealed there are some gaps in farmers’ knowledge. The use of manure for fertilising crops dominated. Only half of the farmers stored manure in appropriate facilities, with 28.5% of them using a dedicated area with cement floors and 21.5% utilising leakproof tanks. The majority (65.7%) stored manure for more than three months before its use as a fertiliser in a dried form. In multiple regression analysis, education level and farming purpose were significant determinants of farmer knowledge. In conclusion, Cypriot farmers’ knowledge must be reinforced to ensure proper manure management. The results highlight the importance of providing relevant training to farmers. Although the current practices partially decrease manure pathogens, interventions to promote the use of more effective treatment methods, such as biogas transformation and composting, would be beneficial.
... Also, the survey data was collected in a cross-sectional study from interviews which may have led to bias towards answers stating measures believed to be applied on farm rather than con rming measures really applied. It is known that perception of a given biosecurity measure apply can be also strongly in uenced by multiple factors [75]. Finally, our work was based on a cross-sectional observational study, thus causal relationships should not be inferred from the results presented. ...
Biosecurity protocols and good management practices are key to reduce the risk of introduction and transmission of infectious diseases into the industry. In this observational cross-sectional study, survey data were collected from 176 pig farms with inventories over 100 sows in Colombia. We analyzed a complex survey dataset to explore the structure and identify clustering patterns of swine farms in Colombia, and estimate its association with Swine Influenza. Two principal dimensions contributed to 27.6% of the dataset variation after Multiple Correspondence Analysis. Farms with highest contribution to dimension 1 were larger farrow-to-finish farms, using self-replacement of gilts and implementing most of the measures evaluated. In contrast, farms with highest contribution to dimension 2 were medium to large farrow-to-finish farms, but implemented biosecurity in a lower degree. Additionally, two farm clusters were identified by Hierarchical Cluster Analysis, and the odds of influenza A virus detection was statistically different between clusters (OR 7.29, CI: 1.7,66, p=<0.01). Moreover, after logistic regression analysis, three important variables were associated with higher odds of influenza detection: 1) “location in an area with a high density of pigs”, 2) “farm size”, and 3) “after cleaning and disinfecting, the facilities are allowed to dry before use”. Our results revealed two clustering patterns of swine farms. This systematic analysis of complex survey data identified relationships between biosecurity, husbandry practices and influenza status. This approach helped to identify gaps on biosecurity and key elements for designing successful strategies to prevent and control swine respiratory diseases in the swine industry.
... This study concurred with others that methods other than auditing are required to improve biosecurity compliance. There is a need to improve understanding of biosecurity measures by demonstrating why and how to apply them (24,25,(39)(40)(41). Additionally, there needs to be an educational focus directed at explaining how diseases are introduced to a farm and the significance of each measure in terms of risk reduction, placing special emphasis on measures that are not applied despite their importance and effectiveness. ...
Campylobacter is the leading cause of human bacterial diarrhoeal disease worldwide, with poultry meat products contributing to a large proportion of cases. Due to the ubiquitous presence of Campylobacter in the poultry farm environment, biosecurity is the main area for intervention to prevent colonisation of commercial broiler chicken flocks. However, research has repeatedly demonstrated that farmers' uptake of biosecurity recommendations is often poor. This study explored farmers' attitudes towards biosecurity and identified barriers to effective implementation of biosecurity protocols. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 1–3 members of staff on each of 16 broiler farms; 6 owned by, and 10 contracted to, 3 different UK poultry integrators. In total, 28 interviewees participated, including farm owners, managers, and workers, with a range of industry experience. Thematic analysis of the interviews revealed high levels of recognition amongst broiler farmers of the importance of Campylobacter and the responsibility of the whole farm-to-fork chain within the poultry industry to reduce Campylobacter contamination of chicken meat for the benefit of public health. Participants' self-reported awareness and implementation of biosecurity has improved significantly following the industry-wide focus on Campylobacter control. However, there are frustrations with the industry's approach to tackling Campylobacter and the heavy burden of responsibility that has been put on interventions at the farm-level. There was also scepticism amongst participants as to the effectiveness of current biosecurity measures in the reduction of Campylobacter. Nevertheless, the interviewees' recognition of the benefit of improved biosecurity on broiler health and welfare and other important targets, such as reducing antimicrobial usage, leaves a legacy of which the UK broiler industry can be proud. There is scope for further farmer education about the evidence supporting biosecurity interventions, particularly in the control of Campylobacter, and a need to establish more effective channels of communication. Furthermore, to give all players within the industry agency and investment in industry targets, contributions from all levels should be permitted in the design of future biosecurity interventions. Biosecurity compliance may be improved through collaborative efforts, such as participatory and co-design practises, to facilitate knowledge co-creation and exchange.
... Nuangmek et al. [17] who found that the majority of farmers understood the need for professional antimicrobial prescription but due to ignorance they dis- This is corresponding to a study that was carried out by Casal et al. [18] who suggested that there is a need for efforts to increase farmer's awareness of biosecurity as a major input in stemming antimicrobial resistance in livestock production. Lack of enough veterinary extension officers and consultative services towards the use and preparation of antimicrobial agents among poultry farmers was also immensely experienced by the farmers. ...
Background: Antibiotic resistance is putting the commercial poultry production systems across the globe at risk of losses due to the failure of treatments for animals and human health which has been associated with overuse and misuse of antibiotics in poultry farming. One possible approach to the resistance problem is ensuring adequate knowledge, attitudes, and practices on antimicrobial use by farmers on commercial production systems across the globe are applied. Therefore, the current study was carried out to determine factors that could promote antimicrobial use in commercial poultry production systems of Kiambu County, Kenya. Materials and Methods: A descriptive cross-sectional survey was conducted on commercial poultry production systems of Kiambu County to determine the level of knowledge, attitudes, and practices on antimicrobial use. One hundred and fifty-six (n = 156) semi-structured questionnaires imprinted in a mobile Open data kit were administered to capture the level of knowledge, attitudes, and practices on antimi-crobial usage in commercial poultry production systems of Kiambu County. Results: Out of the 156 commercial poultry farmers who participated in this study, females accounted for (64%) with 51% of them keeping layers between 50-500 birds as medium scale farmers. In the study, most of the farmers were 45 years and above (61%) and they had obtained a secondary level of education (34%). We further noted that 67% of the farmers obtain antibiotics through self-prescription/personal experience. Additional lack of veterinary
... Given their often low biosecurity level, smallholder farms are considered particularly susceptible to ASFV introduction and are of particular interest in disease prevention and control (36). In addition, even though small-scale farming represents a fundamental part of agricultural practices and is common in rural areas (67), biosecurity and management practices have been described mainly for intensive pig farms (68)(69)(70)(71) and focus on backyard farms in non-European countries (35,(72)(73)(74). Due to the spread of ASF in European countries with a relevant backyard pig production, it is likely that this issue is even more widespread (32). ...
African swine fever (ASF) is a viral disease of suids that frequently leads to death. There are neither licensed vaccines nor treatments available, and even though humans are not susceptible to the disease, the serious socio-economic consequences associated with ASF have made it one of the most serious animal diseases of the last century. In this context, prevention and early detection play a key role in controlling the disease and avoiding losses in the pig value chain. Target biosecurity measures are a strong strategy against ASF virus (ASFV) incursions in farms nowadays, but to be efficient, these measures must be well-defined and easy to implement, both in commercial holdings and in the backyard sector. Furthermore, the backyard sector is of great importance in low-income settings, mainly for social and cultural practices that are highly specific to certain areas and communities. These contexts need to be addressed when authorities decide upon the provisions that should be applied in the case of infection or decide to combine them with strict preventive measures to mitigate the risk of virus spread. The need for a deeper understanding of the smallholder context is essential to prevent ASFV incursion and spread. Precise indications for pig breeding and risk estimation for ASFV introduction, spread and maintenance, taking into account the fact that these recommendations would be inapplicable in some contexts, are the keys for efficient target control measures. The aim of this work is to describe the 305 outbreaks that occurred in domestic pigs in Sardinia during the last epidemic season (2010–2018) in depth, providing essential features associated with intensive and backyard farms where the outbreaks occurred. In addition, the study estimates the average of secondary cases by kernel transmission network. Considering the current absence of ASF outbreaks in domestic pig farms in Sardinia since 2018, this work is a valid tool to specifically estimate the risk associated with different farm types and update our knowledge in this area.
... Por esta razón, un operario que utilice alguno de estos elementos también puede contaminar con PCV2 su ropa, manos, calzado, etc., y posteriormente diseminar el virus, aun sin llegar a tener ningún contacto con los cerdos. Además, algunos de estos elementos no se utilizan exclusivamente en áreas ni salas determinadas, sino que se usan de modo general en todas las dependencias (Casal et al., 2007), lo que favorece aún más la dispersión del PCV2. Por estas razones, los almacenes y sus elementos son áreas de las granjas donde los patógenos se tienden a acumular, persistir y desde las que se pueden diseminar hasta los animales. ...
Se han encontrado cantidades relevantes de este virus en utensilios y ropa de trabajo, así como en dependencias normalmente no incluidas en los programas de control como los almacenes y las oficinas.
el conocimiento sobre la aculumación de virus permite valorar la importancia y existencia de fallos en las medidas de bioseguridad interna y externa.
... However, there is general hesitation in monitoring their biosecurity level because few studies have assessed the association of production parameters and practical biosecurity measures. Assessment of the relationship between biosecurity and herd productivity could motivate the implementation of biosecurity measures if such measures can be expected to be beneficial for the farm performance (Casal et al., 2007;Valeeva et al., 2011;Laanen et al., 2014), yet to date there is limited quantitative data available to link biosecurity and production parameters (Armass and Clark, 1999;Laanen et al., 2013;Postma et al., 2016). In addition, quantitative relationships between biosecurity level and disease status have not been fully reported in scientific literature, although a large number of risk factor studies associated to preventive measures is available. ...
It is well known that infectious diseases such as porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome (PRRS) and porcine epidemic diarrhea (PED) decrease herd productivity and lead to economic loss. It is believed that biosecurity practices are effective for the prevention and control of such infectious diseases. Therefore, the objective of the present study was to investigate whether or not an association between biosecurity level and herd productivity, as well as disease status exists on Japanese commercial swine farms. The present study was conducted on 141 farms. Biosecurity in each farm was assessed by a biosecurity assessment tool named BioAsseT. BioAsseT has a full score of 100 and consists of three sections (external biosecurity, internal biosecurity and diagnostic monitoring). Production data for number of pigs weaned per sow per year (PWSY) and post-weaning mortality per year (PWM) were collected for data analysis. Regarding PRRS status, the farms were categorized into two groups: unknown or unstable and stable or negative. In addition, these farms were categorized based on their PED status, either positive or negative. The total BioAsseT score was associated with herd productivity: as total score increased by 1, PWSY increased by 0.104 pigs and PWM decreased by 0.051 % (P < 0.05). Herd productivity was associated with the score of external and internal biosecurity (P < 0.05), but did not correlate with the score of diagnostic monitoring. Regarding PRRS status, farms with an unknown or unstable status had lower total score than those with stable or negative status (P < 0.05). Similarly, PED positive farms had a lower total score compared to PED negative farms (P < 0.05). In conclusion, the present study provides evidence for the association between high biosecurity levels and increased herd productivity as well as a decreased risk for novel introductions of infectious diseases such as PED.
... However, as aforementioned, farm personnel may play a key role in the contamination of these premises. Besides, some utensils stored in warehouses, like sorting panels, come into physical contact with pigs or their excretions, being also common their employment through all farm facilities, not only for a particular production stage 26 . Thus, these circumstances could turn warehouses into a critical point for the accumulation of PCV2. ...
Porcine circovirus type 2 (PCV2) is the aetiological agent of PCV2-Systemic Disease (PCV2-SD) and PCV2-Subclinical Infection (PCV2-SI). PCV2 is highly resistant to environmental conditions, being able to remain in the farm environment and thus represent a risk for infection maintenance. The aim of this study was to identify, under field conditions, the possible critical points in the environment of non-vaccinated farrow-to-weaning swine farms where PCV2 could accumulate and persist. For that, environmental samples from five swine farms with PCV2-SD or PCV2-SI were taken and analysed by qPCR, including different farm areas, farm personnel and management implements. PCV2 DNA was detected in the environment of all farms (42.9% of positive samples). Overall, the PCV2-SD herd seemed to present more positive samples and higher viral loads than the PCV2-SI herds. At individual farm level, weaning areas appeared to be the most contaminated facilities. In addition, PCV2 was found at high levels in most samples from farm workers, especially work boots, suggesting that they may play a role in within-farm transmission. In addition, PCV2 was detected in areas without animals the like warehouses, offices and farm perimeter. Therefore, this study is helpful to improve measures to reduce within-farm PCV2 dissemination.
... There is also a growing body of literature on how farmers cope with biosecurity incursions (Pratt et al., 2017;Simon-Grife et al., 2013) and the identified factors which play a role in the adoption of biosecurity management strategies. A study on farmers' behaviour towards biosecurity incursions on swine farms in Spain, for example, suggested that farmers were inclined to implement the strategies which they considered familiar to them (Casal, De Manuel, Mateu, & Martin, 2007). Meanwhile, sheep and pig farmers in England tended to increase their uptake of risk management strategies if they had adequate information and timely risk communication (Garforth, Bailey, & Tranter, 2013). ...
Plant biosecurity outbreaks are known to disrupt agricultural industries and cause substantial damage to farming businesses. Farmers have been hit particularly hard by such incursions due to loss of production, income, and the risks to their reputation of growing premium produce. To mitigate the negative impact of biosecurity incursions, farmer biosecurity risk management strategies are vital. However, the reasons of why or of which farmers may take actions against biosecurity incursions are not well-understood. In this study, we applied the Protection Motivation Theory to identify factors influencing farmer intention to undertake biosecurity management strategies. A survey was carried out between 2015 and 2016 across 101 Vietnamese farmers in three locations in Australia: the Northern Territory, South Australia, and Western Australia. Following data analysis using factor analysis and stepwise regressions, the results showed that farmer self-efficacy of on-farm risk management strategies, available incentives, and belief in biosecurity threats associated, positively, with the intention to adopt biosecurity risk management strategies, while expected response costs demotivated intention. Farmers with more farming experience were less likely to adopt biosecurity risk management strategies. To effectively facilitate farmer intention to adopt protective biosecurity coping measures, policies need to be targeted at the right farmers. Promotion of farmer uptake of biosecurity risk management strategies is needed to ensure well nurtured and sustainable plant industry in Australia.
... The results obtained allow to identify and quantify some of the most important gaps, e.g. in biosecurity, that would need to be addressed for a better prevention of disease spread. While biosecurity and management practices have already been described for industrial pig farming [12][13][14][15], few studies have focused on traditional production systems, and, except for Relun et al. [16] in Corsica, most of them covered non-European countries [17][18][19][20]. Moreover, no study has looked into the practices by butchers. ...
Background
Georgia is a country in the Caucasus region with a traditional backyard and highly variable pig farming system. The practices of such sectors have seldom been described and analyzed to better understand their implication in the introduction and spread of infectious pig diseases. Moreover, the Georgian pig sector was badly hit by an epidemic of African swine fever in 2007 that quickly spread throughout the region.
Materials and methods
We interviewed 487 pig farmers and 116 butchers using closed questionnaires on socioeconomic issues related to pig production, husbandry practices, biosecurity, marketing and movements, and disease awareness. Surveys were conducted in four regions of Georgia and descriptive statistics were computed. Factorial analyses of mixed data and hierarchical clustering on principal components were applied to study the relationship among collected variables for both farmers and butchers.
Results
Results show that pig farming in Georgia is a non-professional sector, highly heterogeneous by region, characterized by smallholdings of few animals, with low inputs, outdated technologies, and poor biosecurity, which all translates into low outputs and productivity. The hierarchical clustering on principal components confirmed that there are five major production and husbandry strategies, which match the four regions where the study was conducted.
Conclusions
Our results are the first step to quantify biosecurity gaps and risky behaviours, develop risk profiles, and identify critical control points across the market chain where to implement mitigation measures. This study provides the baseline information needed to design realistic and sustainable prevention, surveillance and control strategies.
... Originally, the concept of biosecurity mainly focused on the introduction of new livestock animals to a farm, consequently leading to introduction of new pathogens within the herd (Casal et al. 2007;Moore 1992). To reduce such risks, it was necessary to reduce the number of source farms from which livestock is purchased or to keep new animals under quarantine. ...
In order to prevent direct contact between livestock and pest animals and thus decrease the risk of pathogen transmission, the implementation of preventive or sometimes even curative measures is required. The concept of biosecurity refers to implementation of such measures, but it is difficult to quantify the results as the situation between farms may vary substantially. In this chapter we investigate the position of biosecurity and the evolution of this concept, especially in relation to pest management. We stress the need for such a strategy not only because of the potential transmission of (zoonotic) pathogens to livestock, which can have significant consequences for livestock health and the food chain, but also because of structural damage to buildings and crops. As there are large differences in both farm conditions and between vectors, implementation of a pest management strategy can come with serious difficulties. Thus, we present a generic framework that helps to develop a more tailor-made approach for a pest management strategy on farms, which will hopefully contribute to more effective interventions.
... After all, many biosecurity measures include a structured, repetitive method, which is expected to gain time. Changing the modus operandi seems to be the challenge (Kristensen and Jakobsen, 2011), as farmers are inclined to carry on in the way they are used to (Casal et al., 2007). ...
Farm biosecurity includes the prevention of disease transmission within and between farms. Two studies were set up to investigate what motivates and withholds farmers to implement biosecurity measures. The first study aimed to assess the perception of cattle farmers towards biosecurity and to identify possible reasons for its low application. This study consisted of a focus group discussion, of which the trends were used to develop a questionnaire for Flemish cattle farmers. Although the 91 participating farmers were familiar with several measures, they associated them with disease prevention rather than biosecurity. Nearly all farmers (98%) identified their herd veterinarian as their main source of information. Twenty percent and 32% of the respondents were convinced that the implementation of biosecurity would cost them more money and time, respectively. Finally, 80% of the farmers saw room for improvement of their herd, but indicated a need for practical information. The second study aimed to identify the key elements of twenty preselected biosecurity measures, motivators and obstacles for their implementation. They were judged by twenty-two cattle stakeholders, such as farmers, veterinarians and advisors, on feasibility, efficacy and return on investment. A box for parturition, a plan for rodent control and cleaning and disinfection of the stables scored highest overall. The lowest scoring measures were showering before entering the stables and an animal-free period of 24 hours. Their return on investment scored very low, since high investments are required. For a farmer to understand why biosecurity is beneficial, he must understand all risks and costs of disease and how biosecurity may reduce these risks and costs.
... While wearing safety glasses, flu vaccinations, and disposable boots were seen as efficacious but not used, showering out was often done by those who did not see it as an effective means of preventing cross-species infection. These differences could be due to training both for employers and workers, as the majority of farm biosecurity and disease prevention literature does not discuss worker protection against disease risks [34,38,39]. While not all 12 PPE items studied have proven effect in preventing cross-species infection or improving farm biosecurity, some listed interventions, such as rubber gloves, have shown marked differences in preventing the spread of zoonotic influenza virus [40]. ...
Background
The large livestock operations and dense human population of Southeast Asia are considered a hot-spot for emerging viruses.
Objectives
To determine if the pathogens adenovirus (ADV), coronavirus (CoV), encephalomyocarditis virus (EMCV), enterovirus (EV), influenza A-D (IAV, IBV, ICV, and IDV), porcine circovirus 2 (PCV2), and porcine rotaviruses A and C (RVA and RVC), are aerosolized at the animal-interface, and if humans working in these environments are carrying these viruses in their nasal airways.
Study
This cross-sectional study took place in Sarawak, Malaysia among 11 pig farms, 2 abattoirs, and 3 animal markets in June and July of 2017. Pig feces, pig oral secretions, bioaerosols, and worker nasal wash samples were collected and analyzed via rPCR and rRT-PCR for respiratory and diarrheal viruses.
Results
In all, 55 pig fecal, 49 pig oral or water, 45 bioaerosol, and 78 worker nasal wash samples were collected across 16 sites. PCV2 was detected in 21 pig fecal, 43 pig oral or water, 3 bioaerosol, and 4 worker nasal wash samples. In addition, one or more bioaerosol or pig samples were positive for EV, IAV, and RVC, and one or more worker samples were positive for ADV, CoV, IBV, and IDV.
Conclusions
This study demonstrates that nucleic acids from a number of targeted viruses were present in pig oral secretions and pig fecal samples, and that several viruses were detected in bioaerosol samples or in the nasal passages of humans with occupational exposure to pigs. These results demonstrate the need for future research in strengthening viral surveillance at the human-animal interface, specifically through expanded bioaerosol sampling efforts and a seroepidemiological study of individuals with exposure to pigs in this region for PCV2 infection.
India’s livestock sector has been facing significant losses due to episodes of disease outbreaks since time immemorial. Hence, biosecurity measures are very important to maintain and improve animal health along with prevention of disease outbreak. Keeping these facts into consideration, the study was proposed with an objective to assess the existing biosecurity practices adopted by the commercial dairy, pig and poultry farms. The current study was undertaken in the state of Uttar Pradesh as it is the leading state in milk and meat production. A total of 120 farmers were selected randomly including 40 each practicing commercial dairy, pig and poultry farming. An ex-post facto research methodology was used with face-to-face interview and observation to collect data. The biosecurity practices were assessed under seven dimensions such as, location and design of farm, restricted access, isolation and quarantine, cleaning and disinfection, management of feed and water, disposal of carcass, manure and waste, and health management. Results elicited that about 50% of the farmers had medium level of adoption who adopted 18–34 practices out of 51 practices. The average overall adoption score was 34.17 out of 51 (67%) which makes an overall adoption gap of 33%. Maximum adoption gap was seen in case of restricted access (43%) whereas minimum gap in adoption was seen in case of management of feed and water (27%). Pig and poultry farmers showed significantly higher biosecurity measures than dairy farmers (p < 0.05). The more significant contributors to the adoption of biosecurity measures were the level of knowledge of the farmers (p < 0.01). Other factors such as education, income, herd/flock size, Information and Communication Technology utilization, number of trainings also had a significant contribution (p < 0.05) in actual implementation of biosecurity. Hence, better understanding of these measures among the farmers must be ensured by hands on training along with proper demonstration of various procedures involved in maintaining farm biosecurity is need of the hour.
In recent years, numerous papers have been published that consider indicators of cattle and pig farms biosecurity with the aim of improving it, and therefore their health and productivity. These indicators were presented in international projects published in indexed journals, as well as proceedings from international symposia. On-farm assessments usability of farm production biosecurity is generally well recognized. In the assessments of the farm biosecurity in different systems of rearing and accommodation, the need to determine new indicators in cattle and pig production was observed and discussed, based on a meta-analysis of previously published studies which include the most important papers in indexed journals and proceedings from international symposia that discussed the existing indicators. The analysis of the results of those studies will be used to determine the main characteristics of the existing new farm biosecurity indicators on cattle and pig farms with a focus on their applicability. The results, discussions and conclusions of those papers will be used to generate ideas to define biosecurity indicators on cattle and pig farms.
Swine health management requires diligent observation of animals and the collection and analysis of production records to assess the efficacy of on-farm disease control programs and to plan corrective strategies. Diagnostic testing is used to enhance these monitoring efforts and to guide decision-making associated with disease control interventions as well as inform biosecurity and disease eradication programs. There are constantly new diagnostic tests being developed, and it is now possible to use a wide variety of sample materials including serum, oral fluids, feces, semen, and tissues in monitoring programs. The usefulness and reliability of testing is dependent on several factors including the selection of animals to be tested and the attributes of the test that is used. Decision-making to determine intervention strategies, such as mass medication or vaccination, needs to be carefully evaluated to ensure a cost-benefit, in addition to addressing animal welfare and food safety concerns.
The objective of this work was to develop an index of adequacy to minimum biosecurity conditions (IAB) to express the external biosecurity level of pig farms in the state of Santa Catarina, Brazil. Pig farms of producers registered in the database of Companhia Integrada de Desenvolvimento Agrícola de Santa Catarina were sampled through an online questionnaire, with 76 questions on farm identification, production system, relationship with the agroindustry, herd size, and external biosecurity. One hundred questionnaires were answered by the farmers, showing the existence, partial existence, or absence of biosecurity practices, with scores of 1.0, 0.5, and 0.0, respectively, used to calculate the IAB of each farm. The farrow to weaning farms were grouped into three categories of production units (farrow to finishing, farrow to rearing, or farrow to weaning) and two of relationships with the production chain (integrated or independent). The investments necessary to achieve the ideal biosecurity practices were estimated. The farms with a low IAB (< 40%) represented 33% of the total, and the remaining 67% of the farms were classified with a medium or high index, evidencing a good external biosecurity. The IAB can be used to measure the biosecurity of pig farms and, based on their classification, to support the design of intervention plans.
Expanding wild boar populations associate to conflicts with human activities, being a threat to livestock and public health. Particularly, the emergence of African Swine Fever (ASF) in Europe is of major importance. To better understanding the dynamics at the interface between wild boar and domestic pigs in Europe, which is essential to prevent the risk for ASF spread, this report describes (i) the use of extensive pig farm resources by wildlife (wild boar and other mammals) and domestic pigs, and (ii) the factors involved. We studied two regions of Central-Eastern Europe with different farm management of pigs in Serbia, in low biosecurity farms in forest/bushland habitats, and Hungary, characterized by more industrial and professional farming in fenced pastures. Camera traps (CTs) were placed at a priori risk points for interspecies interactions and in random points in 4 representative outdoor pig farms in different seasons during 2022 (2 farms in Serbia and 2 in Hungary). Also, questionnaires were distributed to 37 farms (17 in Serbia and 20 in Hungary, respectively) to describe the main features and risk factors for wildlife-pigs interaction on outdoor pig farms. CTs revealed that the wild species that more frequently used the study farms resources were golden jackal (Canis aureus) and wild boar in Serbia, and red fox (Vulpes vulpes) and red deer (Cervus elaphus) in Hungary (at the periphery of fenced farms). The use of extensive farm resources by wild boar was frequent and widespread throughout the study area of Serbia (over 33 % of daily presence per farm, 3.70 visits detected per week) whereas it was rarely detected in our sampled Hungarian farms. Wild boar visit frequency (Serbia) peaked during spring (7.5 visits per CT and day, CT*day), mainly associated with water point use (2.1 visits per CT*day). In Hungary, the greater number of direct interactions occurred between pigs and red deer during summer. Even when a higher average number of risk points were identified inside Hungarian farms, they were less permeable due to effective perimeter fencing, which prevented the entrance of wild boar and other big sized terrestrial wildlife. The study exemplifies contrasted outdoor pig farm managements, and associated risks for interaction with wild boar in ASF infected or at-risk regions. Management, characterized by almost absence of external biosecurity in the specific type of production in Serbia raise health concerns, and indicates the need to develop efforts to improve biosecurity. Several strategies and specific measures adapted to environmental conditions and farm management could reduce the interactions at the wild boar-pig interface in Serbia (and similar production systems in Eastern Europe). This should be materialized in farm-specific biosecurity programs and protocols, which requires the evaluation of their effectiveness, costs, and practical value. The type of farming practiced in marginal agricultural/forest lands in Eastern Europe, often connected to backyards production, is a highly priority for biosecurity issues at European level. However, the focus should not be only on improving technical aspects of biosecurity, but also on socioeconomic and educational determinants.
Introduction
Traditionally, it is believed that people's behaviours align with their attitudes; however, during COVID-19 pandemic, an attitude-behaviour gap in relation to preventive measures has been observed in recent studies. As such, the mixed-methods research was used to examine the relationships between farmers' biosecurity attitudes and behaviours in Taiwan's chicken industry based on the cognitive consistency theory.
Methods
Content analysis of face-to-face interviews with 15 commercial chicken farmers identified their biosecurity responses to infectious disease threats.
Results
The results indicated the mismatch of farmers' attitudes and behaviours towards specific biosecurity measures, in that they act differently than they think. The findings of the qualitative research allowed the research team to conduct the subsequent quantitative, confirmatory assessment to investigate the mismatch of farmers' attitudes and behaviours in 303 commercial broiler farmers. Survey data were analyzed to discover the relationships between farmers' attitudes and behaviours in relation to 29 biosecurity measures. The results show a mixed picture. The percentage of the farmers who had the attitude-behaviour gap towards 29 biosecurity measures ranged from 13.9 to 58.7%. Additionally, at the 5% significant level, there is an association between farmers' attitudes and behaviours for 12 biosecurity measures. In contrast, a significant association does not exist for the other 17 biosecurity measures. Specifically, out of the 17 biosecurity measures, the disconnection of farmers' attitudes and behaviours was observed in three specific biosecurity measures such as using a carcass storage area.
Discussion
Based on a fairly large sample of farmers in Taiwan, this study confirms the existence of an attitude-behaviour gap in context and applies social theories to provide an in-depth understanding of how infectious diseases are managed in the animal health context. As the results demonstrate the necessity of tailoring biosecurity strategies to address the gap, it is time to reconsider the current approach by understanding farmers' real attitudes and behaviours in relation to biosecurity for the success of animal disease prevention and control at the farm level.
The Iberian pork industry has proven to be very important in South-Western Europe, not only due its contribution to the economy of the area, but also because of the peculiarities of the farms situated there. These farms raise Iberian pigs in systems ranging from fully outdoor rearing systems to intensive-rearing farms similar to the conventional pig production models. The implementation of biosecurity measures in Iberian pig farms can be complex and, at times, it can be perceived somewhat negatively by farmers, especially those who run more extensive pig production systems. This research attempts to understand the attitudes of Iberian pig farmers in the South-West of Spain towards the adoption of and investment in biosecurity measures. For that purpose, data obtained from 104 online surveys taken by Iberian pig farmers in 2019 was analysed. A correspondence and a cluster analysis were performed, whereby three farm groups were identified according to their features (land area, breeding conditions, availability of facilities, etc.), the existence/use of biosecurity facilities and the adoption of biosecurity measures. The results have shown that most of the analysed farms have the necessary infrastructure to comply with the biosecurity principles and farmers perform basic biosecurity practices. However, farms that are more extensive, mainly those finishing their pigs outdoors (acorn-feed), need to improve their biosecurity. It is necessary therefore to implement an improvement plan following the current regulations in collaboration with policy makers with the purpose of improving the levels of biosecurity and increase disease risk awareness.
The impacts of exotic disease incursions on livestock industries can be mitigated by having robust surveillance systems in place that decrease the time between disease introduction and detection. An important component of this is having farmers routinely observe their animals for indications of clinical disease, recognise the existence of problems, and then decide to notify their veterinarian or animal health authorities. However, as highlighted by this literature review, farmers are believed to be underreporting clinical events due to factors such as (1) uncertainty around the clinical signs and situations that warrant reporting, (2) fear over the social and economic consequences from both positive and false positive reports, (3) negative beliefs regarding the efficacy and outcomes of response measures, (4) mistrust and dissatisfaction with animal health authorities, (5) absence of sufficiently attractive financial and non-financial incentives for submitting reports, and (6) poor awareness of the procedures involved with the submission, processing, and response to reports. There have been few formal studies evaluating the efficacy of different approaches to increasing farmer engagement with disease reporting. However, there is a recognised need for any proposed solutions to account for farmer knowledge and experience with assessing their own farm situation as well as the different identities, motivations, and beliefs that farmers have about their role in animal health surveillance systems. Empowering farmers to take a more active role in developing these solutions is likely to become even more important as animal health authorities increasingly look to establish public-private partnerships for biosecurity governance.
This chapter describes a framework for understanding an infectious disease through knowledge of the pathogen's interaction with the host, the production setting, and its broader environmental landscape, a framework described as “disease ecology.” Through modification of early published insight on the topic of pathogen perpetuation, five categories are proposed and described in order of the least to the most complexity required for pathogen eradication: vector‐ borne pathogens, short‐cycle pathogens, long‐cycle pathogens, resistant pathogens, and commensal pathogens. However, over time and with good compliance, effective control plans can lead to pathogen elimination but with whole herd test and removal procedures often required to identify the last of the persistently infected pigs. Biosecurity plans at their most rudimentary level attempt to manage the risk of introducing new pathogens into farms, livestock industries, or countries and to minimize the transmission of endemic diseases between farms within these levels.
La presencia de signos y síntomas en el personal que se encuentra expuesto a riesgo biológico puede pasar desa-percibida, siendo éstos, el preámbulo de aparición de una infección laboral de tipo superficial y/o sistémica. El artículo determina la asociación entre signos y síntomas clínicos con la exposición al riesgo biológico entre asistentes de laborato-rios. El diseño del estudio es de corte transversal. Variables independientes: características sociodemográficas, infraes-tructura de los laboratorios, prácticas y procedimientos en bioseguridad, documentación y salud e higiene en el trabajo. Variables dependientes: síntomas de cefalea, faringitis a re-petición, hipersensibilidad respiratoria, infecciones respirato-rias y rash. Participaron 19 asistentes de 24 laboratorios de la Facultad de Ciencias Agrarias y del Medio Ambiente de una institución educativa universitaria, la mediana (Me) de edad se encuentra en 36 años con rango intercuartil 30-39, 68.4% mujeres, 73.7% de los asistentes tienen exposición directa al riesgo biológico. Infraestructura, almacenamiento de residuos, uso de elementos de protección personal obtu-vo más del 80% de cumplimiento. No se presentó asociación estadística entre las variables cefalea (p=0.305), faringitis (p=0.345) infecciones respiratorias (p=0.529), infección de oído (p=0.372) rash (p=0,259) con la exposición al riesgo biológico; pero, se determinó que los asistentes expuestos al riesgo biológico tienen un OR= 3.75 en cefalea y OR=2.7 en faringitis. Se concluye que se hace necesario reforzar en medidas preventivas en relación con las prácticas y procedi-mientos en los laboratorios así como iniciar un Sistema de Vigilancia Epidemiológica con miras a la prevención de en-fermedades relacionadas con este tipo de riesgo. Palabras clave: agente biológico, bioseguridad, enfermedad ocupacional, factores de riesgo.
DISEASE imposes considerable constraints on the productivity and profitability of the livestock industry. Pig producers have probably suffered more than other sectors from the devastating effects of a succession of infectious disease outbreaks over the past 30 years. Many of these have been highly contagious viral diseases, including transmissible gastroenteritis (TGE), swine influenza (SI), Aujeszky's disease (AD), and porcine respiratory and reproductive syndrome (PRRS). Postweaning multisystemic wasting syndrome (PMWS), which is linked to porcine circovirus (PCV-2) infection, has challenged the very survival of the pig industry in Britain and elsewhere. Even long established endemic diseases, such as enzootic pneumonia (EP) and swine dysentery (SD), still cause significant losses if introduced into naive herds. The recent reappearances of classical swine fever (CSF) and foot-and-mouth disease (FMD) in Britain were timely reminders that there is no place for complacency in disease prevention programmes at both national and herd level. The concept of biosecurity, which gained prominence in Britain during the FMD epidemic, encompasses the full range of measures aimed at disease prevention. In fact, it is one of the cornerstones of the Government's Animal Health and Welfare Strategy for Great Britain, which aims to promote biosecurity to a livestock industry that, in the past, has not always given it high priority. This article reviews the most important sources of disease on pig units — and, thus, the key areas for consideration in terms of farm biosecurity.
The minimal disease concept is a way of raising pigs so that some specific diseases are absent. Many bacteria and viruses can be transferred by pigs, air, or mechanical contact. To avoid contamination, the herd location should take into consideration disease transmission possibilities. Herd health status and source herd health status should be continuously monitored. To maintain herd health status, specific rules need to be followed for herd construction and establishment, compound perimeter, people movement, down time, animal transportation, feed use and delivery, vehicle movement, material, dead animal disposition, and rodent control. All new incoming animals should go through quarantine, and in some herds, safer methods such as AI, embryo transfer, MEW, or hysterectomy and fostering need to be used.
A questionnaire for farm managers was designed, to obtain information regarding biosecurity on Ontario commercial broiler chicken and turkey operations, and then pre-tested. The questions that could be validated were verifiable by seeing the facility, by using farm records or by interviewing technical personnel other than the survey respondent. The survey was validated using a convenience sample of 24 farms from two companies. For 15 questions with dichotomous responses, the sensitivity ranged from 16.7 to 100%; the specificity ranged from 0 to 100%. For example, fences and gates seen during the farm visit were not accurately reported on the survey (poor sensitivity). Chance-corrected agreement was low (kappa < 0.4) for 34 questions, fair to good (0.4 < kappa < 0.8) for 25 questions, and excellent (kappa > 0.8) for seven questions. The percent agreement for questions where only one of the possible options was observed on validation ranged from 60.9 to 100%. Five questions with continuous numeric variables were analysed. A difference was observed (P < 0.1) between the survey and validation data for three questions regarding the number of birds, the bird sources and the downtime between flocks. In spite of pre-testing, the lack of clear wording and the absence of definitions for technical terms appeared to reduce validity. Response bias seems to be an issue with biosecurity surveys. The value of validating questionnaires before their use in epidemiologic research is confirmed.
Chile eradicated classical swine fever (CSF) in April 1998, following a 17-year eradication programme. The authors describe biosecurity levels of pig farms in Chile after the eradication of CSF. A formal survey was administered to 50 large integrated pig farms, which represented almost 60% of the swine population. The main topics on the questionnaire were production, health management, biosecurity, insurance and information about CSF outbreaks in the past. Biosecurity practices were analysed according to the criteria stated by Barcelo and Marco in 1998. A scoring system to measure biosecurity was designed and pig farms were classified according to this score. An adjusted specific measure is discussed as a potential indicator of risk for disease infections. The authors explore associations between biosecurity herd size and insurance policy against CSF.
Biosecurity measures are important for the herd's protection against diseases and also to provide nationwide protection against the introduction of exotic diseases. In this paper, we describe the farmers' choices and routines regarding biosecurity in Danish fattening herds. Overall, 116 Danish swine fattening herds in three areas of different pig density were interviewed. Of these herds, 78% purchased weaners from one sow herd only, whereas 10% purchased from >5 sow herds during 1 year. Large herds (>500 finishers) purchased weaners more often than smaller herds (< or =500 finishers). Only two swine producers purchased weaners from a market. Almost all herds (95%) received weaners from one sow herd at one time, and only one herd received from >5 sow herds in one batch. Twenty-one percent did not use an effective barrier between the loading area and the stables when delivering pigs for slaughter. Entry rooms (in which clothing and boots are changed) were common at the farm, and the numbers of visitors were generally low (<10 visitors a year). Factor analysis was performed to find underlying structures of the biosecurity measures in the herd; four factors were chosen (eigenvalue > 3.10). A site scoring high on factor 1 was a large SPF herd, which received weaners from a single source, had biosecurity requirements for the transport vehicles, and had a high level of biosecurity for visitors. A site scoring high on factor 2 was a multi-site farm, which had personnel working on more than one of the sites, only received weaners from one sow herd, had delivering herds placed close to the participating site, and transported animals themselves. A site scoring high on factor 3 was a site which hired commercial transport for slaughter, was situated far from the abattoir and had a high level of biosecurity when loading pigs. A production site scoring high on factor 4 was a large site, which used all-in/all-out management, washed and disinfected between each group, and purchased many weaners.
Herds are under constant risk of introducing new pathogens from different sources. In this article we describe biosecurity practices in Danish sow herds. Between December 1, 1999 and February 29, 2000, 121 sow units were interviewed regarding biosecurity on the site. The questionnaire contained 62 questions. The 121 units were situated in three areas with different swine densities. Sow units were described by their sizes (units with >110 sows were regarded as large herds) and health status (SPF herds or conventional herds). Of the 121 sow herds, 63 (52%) sold weaners. Most sow units (71%) used delivery facilities for the picking up of weaners, but half of these did not have a barrier between the loading area and the stable while loading. In 19% of the units, weaners were picked up directly from the stable, and in 10% the truck driver had access to the stables. Most units required the vehicle to be cleaned (16%) or cleaned and disinfected (48%) before the transport; large sites and SPF sites more often required stricter biosecurity measures, for example a quarantine period before the transport of weaners.
Bioseguridad en sistemas de cría de cerdos
- Morillo
Morillo, A., 2002. Bioseguridad en sistemas de cría de cerdos. Revista Anaporc 223, 41-55.
Evaluation du risque de certaines maladies dans les exploitations de porcs en fonction des mesures de biosécurité
- J Casal
- A Manuel-León
- E Mateu
- M Martin
Casal, J., Manuel-León, A., Mateu, E., Martin, M., 2002. Evaluation du risque de certaines maladies dans les exploitations
de porcs en fonction des mesures de biosécurité. Epidemiol. Santé Anim. 42, 89-93.
Evaluation du risque de certaines maladies dans les exploitations de porcs en fonction des mesures de biosécurité
- Casal