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
. 2020 Aug 20:7:542.
doi: 10.3389/fvets.2020.00542. eCollection 2020.

Profiling Detection and Classification of Lameness Methods in British Dairy Cattle Research: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Affiliations

Profiling Detection and Classification of Lameness Methods in British Dairy Cattle Research: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

João Sucena Afonso et al. Front Vet Sci. .

Abstract

Lameness is a serious concern in the dairy sector, reflecting its high incidence and impact on animal welfare and productivity. Research has provided figures on its frequency using different methodologies, making it difficult to compare results and hindering farm-level decision-making. The study's objectives were to determine the frequency levels of lameness in British dairy cattle through a meta-analysis approach, and to understand the chronological patterns of how lameness cases are detected and classified in scientific research. A systematic review was conducted using PRISMA-P guidelines for article selection. Random-effects models estimated the pooled frequency measure of lameness with heterogeneity managed through subgroup analysis and meta-regression. Sixty-eight papers were identified, 50 included prevalence and 36 incidence data. The pooled prevalence of lameness in British dairy cattle was estimated at 29.5% (95% CI 26.7-32.4%) whilst all-cause lameness incidence rate indicated 30.9 cases of lameness per 100 cow-years (95% CI 24.5-37.9). The pooled cause-specific lameness incidence rate per 100 cow-years was 66.1 (95% CI 24.1-128.8) for white line disease, 53.2 (95% CI 20.5-101.2) for sole ulcer, 53.6 (95% CI 19.2-105.34) for digital dermatitis, with 51.9 (95% CI 9.3-129.2) attributable to other lameness-related lesions. Heterogeneity levels remained high. Sixty-nine papers contributed to a chronological overview of lameness data source. Although the AHDB Dairy mobility scoring system (MSS) was launched in the UK in 2008 and adopted shortly after by the British Dairy sector as the standard tool for assessing lameness, other methods are used depending on the investigator. Automated lameness detection systems may offer a solution for the subjective nature of MSSs, yet it was utilized in one study only. Despite the recognition of under-reporting of lameness from farm records 22 (31.9%) studies used this data source. The diversity of lameness data collection methods and sources was a key finding. It limits the understanding of lameness burden and the refinement of policy making for lameness. Standardizing case definition and research methods would improve knowledge of and ability to manage lameness. Regardless of the measurement method lameness in British dairy cattle is high.

Keywords: British; cattle; classification; dairy; lameness; locomotion; meta-analysis.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Flow diagram of studies identified by the systematic review and their selection process and inclusion for the meta-analysis on lameness frequency levels in British dairy cattle (*short communications, letters, self-assessments, and review articles were excluded, **if lameness frequency levels were reported but no information on population at risk/denominator was provided/retrievable the paper was excluded).
Figure 2
Figure 2
The number of publications in each year, according to the start of the data collection period, and specific lameness detection and classification methods used in research in British dairy cattle since 1975 (each bar represents a paper and the color the method used).
Figure 3
Figure 3
Meta-analysis on reported lameness prevalence in British dairy cattle from identified studies.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Subgroup analysis of reported prevalence of lameness in British dairy cattle at cow level with Start of data collection (year) 2 as a moderator (year 2000 as cut-off).
Figure 5
Figure 5
Meta-analysis on reported lameness incidence rate (100 cow-years) in British dairy cattle from identified studies after outlier removal.
Figure 6
Figure 6
Subgroup analysis of reported incidence rate of lameness in British dairy cattle at cow level with Sample Size a as a moderator.

References

    1. FAO The State of Food and Agriculture: Livestock in the Balance. Report. Rome: FAO; (2009).
    1. Thornton PK. Livestock production: recent trends, future prospects. Philos Trans R Soc B. (2010) 365:2853–67. 10.1098/rstb.2010.0134 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. González LA, Tolkamp BJ, Coffey MP, Ferret A, Kyriazakis I. Changes in feeding behavior as possible indicators for the automatic monitoring of health disorders in dairy cows. J Dairy Sci. (2008) 91:1017–28. 10.3168/jds.2007-0530 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Bruijnis MRN, Meijboom FLB, Stassen EN. Longevity as an animal welfare issue applied to the case of foot disorders in dairy cattle. J Agric Environ Ethics. (2013) 26:191–205. 10.1007/s10806-012-9376-0 - DOI
    1. Oltenacu PA, Hultgren J, Algers B. Associations between use of electric cow-trainers and clinical diseases, reproductive performance and culling in Swedish dairy cattle. Prev Vet Med. (1998) 37:77–90. 10.1016/S0167-5877(98)00109-3 - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources