Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2014 Apr 24:10:93.
doi: 10.1186/1746-6148-10-93.

Why do farmers and veterinarians not report all bovine abortions, as requested by the clinical brucellosis surveillance system in France?

Affiliations

Why do farmers and veterinarians not report all bovine abortions, as requested by the clinical brucellosis surveillance system in France?

Anne Bronner et al. BMC Vet Res. .

Abstract

Background: Since 2005, France has been officially free of brucellosis, an infectious disease that causes abortion in cattle and can be transmitted from cattle to humans. Recent animal and human cases have drawn attention to the need to prevent infection of humans and animals from any primary outbreaks. In order to detect any new outbreaks as soon as possible, a clinical surveillance system requires farmers and veterinarians to report each abortion and to test the aborting cow for brucellosis. However, under-reporting limits the sensitivity of this system. Our objective was to identify the barriers and motivations influencing field actors in their decision to report or not to report bovine abortions. We used a qualitative approach with semi-structured interviews of 12 cattle farmers and their eight veterinarians.

Results: Our analysis showed that four main themes influence the decision-making process of farmers and veterinarians: 1) the perceived risk of brucellosis and other abortive diseases; 2) the definition of a suspected case of brucellosis and other abortive diseases adopted by field actors, which is less sensitive than the mandatory definition; 3) the cost-benefit analysis conducted by actors, taking into account regulatory and health aspects, economic and financial losses, technical and practical factors; 4) the level of cooperation within the socio-technical network. We discussed how early detection may be improved by revising the definition of abortion, extending the time frame for notification and generalising the differential diagnosis of the causes of abortion.

Conclusions: In contrast to quantitative approaches, qualitative studies can identify the factors (including unknown factors) influencing the decision-making process of field actors and reveal why they take those factors into consideration. Our qualitative study sheds light on the factors underlying the poor sensitivity of clinical brucellosis surveillance system for cattle in France, and suggests that early detection may be improved by considering actors' perceptions. We believe our findings may provide further insight into ways of improving other clinical surveillance systems and thus reduce the risk of disease.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Difference between the official definition of abortion and the definition of farmers and veterinarians. Abortion is defined by French regulations as an interruption of pregnancy occurring from 42 days of pregnancy to term, or as the death of a calf within 48 hours of its birth. A recent study of the time between artificial insemination and calving in dairy cattle estimated that the rates of abortion occurring in mid-pregnancy and late pregnancy were about 6.4% and 5.1% respectively [20]. As only 20 to 30% of abortions are detected visually [21], only 70% to 80% of these aborting cows are detected by field actors, i.e. 8 to 9.2% of pregnant cows. Furthermore, the 7.3% or so of calves that die within 48 hours after birth are supposed to be systematically detected [22].

References

    1. Figuié M. Towards a global governance of risks: international health organisations and the surveillance of emerging infectious diseases. J of Risk Res. 2013;17:469–483.
    1. Veterinary pubic health. [ http://www.who.int/zoonoses/vph/en/]
    1. Bronner A, Hénaux V, Vergne T, Vinard J-L, Morignat E, Hendrikx P, Calavas D, Gay E. Assessing the mandatory bovine abortion notification system in France using unilist capture-recapture approach. Plos one. 2013;8:e63246. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0063246. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Doyle TJ, Glynn MK, Groseclose SL. Completeness of notifiable infectious disease reporting in the United States: an analytical literature review. Am J Epidemiol. 2002;155:866–874. doi: 10.1093/aje/155.9.866. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Country reports. [ http://www.oie.int/wahis_2/public/wahid.php/Countryinformation/Countryre...]

LinkOut - more resources