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
. 2021 Jul 19:8:689375.
doi: 10.3389/fvets.2021.689375. eCollection 2021.

Existence and Quality of Data on Control Programs for EU Non-regulated Cattle Diseases: Consequences for Estimation and Comparison of the Probability of Freedom From Infection

Egle Rapaliute  1 , Annika van Roon  2 , Gerdien van Schaik  2   3 , Inge Santman-Berends  2   3 , Xhelil Koleci  4 , Madalina Mincu  5 , Jörn Gethmann  6 , Beate Conrady  7   8   9 , Tanja Knific  10 , Jaka Jakob Hodnik  10 , John Berezowski  11 , Luís Pedro Carmo  11 , Aurélien Madouasse  12 , Attila Tarpai  13 , Anton Gerilovych  14 , Alvydas Malakauskas  1 , Blagica Sekovska  15 , Christine Fourichon  12 , Emmanouil Kalaitzakis  16 , Franz-Ferdinand Roch  7 , Hans Houe  9 , Katarzyna Dudek  17 , Kerli Mõtus  18 , László Ózsvári  19 , Lina Costa  20 , Maria Guelbenzu-Gonzalo  21 , Madeleine K Henry  22 , Mentor Alishani  23 , Nicola Pozzato  24 , Petter Hopp  13 , Ramon Juste  25 , Sam Strain  26 , Rene Mandelik  27 , Štefan Vilček  27 , Tiina Autio  28 , Lena-Mari Tamminen  29 , Céline Faverjon  30
Affiliations

Existence and Quality of Data on Control Programs for EU Non-regulated Cattle Diseases: Consequences for Estimation and Comparison of the Probability of Freedom From Infection

Egle Rapaliute et al. Front Vet Sci. .

Abstract

Some European countries have successfully implemented country-specific control programs (CPs) for infectious cattle diseases that are not regulated or are regulated only to a limited extent at the European Union (EU) level. Examples of such diseases include bovine viral diarrhea (BVD), infectious bovine rhinotracheitis (IBR), and Johne's disease (JD). The CPs vary between countries in the design and quality of collected data as well as methods used to detect infection and estimate prevalence or probability of freedom from infection. Differences in disease status between countries and non-standardized approaches to assess freedom from infection pose a risk for countries with CPs for non-regulated diseases as infected animals may influence the progress of the disease control or eradication program. The implementation of output-based standards allows estimation and comparison of the probability of freedom for non-regulated cattle diseases in European countries. The aim of the current study was to assess the existence and quality of data that could be used for estimating freedom from infection in European countries. The online data collection tool was sent to 32 countries participating in the SOUND control COST Action and was completed by 24 countries. Data on cattle demographics and data from CPs of IBR and BVD exist in more than 50% of the response countries. However, data describing risk factors and CP of JD was reported as existing in <25% of the countries. The overall quality of data in the sections on demographics and CPs of IBR and BVD were evaluated as "good", but risk factors and JD data were mostly evaluated as "fair." Data quality was considered less good mainly due to two quality criteria: accessibility and accuracy. The results of this study show that the quantity and quality of data about cattle populations and CPs are relatively similar in many surveyed countries. The outcome of this work provides an overview of the current situation in the European countries regarding data on EU non-regulated cattle diseases and will further assist in the development and implementation of output-based standards.

Keywords: animal health data; cattle; control programs; non-regulated diseases; output-based; proof of freedom.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

CFa was employed by the company Ausvet Europe. The remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
The structure of the online data collection tool that was used to overview data related to control programs of infectious cattle diseases among 32 SOUND control COST Action member countries. *, mandatory part; n, number of variables per section.
Figure 2
Figure 2
The response to an online questionnaire study on data collection related to EU non-regulated cattle diseases among 32 SOUND control COST Action member countries.
Figure 3
Figure 3
The existence of data relevant for estimating probability of freedom from infection in cattle in an online questionnaire study among 24 European countries. The answers are presented by country and variable. *free from disease status. FI, Finland; SK, Slovakia; CH, Switzerland; HU, Hungary; IE, Ireland; NIR, Northern Ireland (UK); SI, Slovenia; NO, Norway; SCT, Scotland (UK); SE, Sweden; ES, Spain; IT, Italy; NL, Netherlands; EE, Estonia; DE, Germany; LT, Lithuania; AT, Austria; RO, Romania; AL, Albania; UA, Ukraine; GR, Greece; PL, Poland; MK, North Macedonia; KS, Kosovo.
Figure 4
Figure 4
The overall quality of data relevant for estimating probability of freedom from infection in cattle in an online questionnaire study among 24 European countries. The answers are presented by country and variable. *free from disease status. FI, Finland; SK, Slovakia; CH, Switzerland; HU, Hungary; IE, Ireland; NIR, Northern Ireland (UK); SI, Slovenia; NO, Norway; SCT, Scotland (UK); SE, Sweden; ES, Spain; IT, Italy; NL, Netherlands; EE, Estonia; DE, Germany; LT, Lithuania; AT, Austria; RO, Romania; AL, Albania; UA, Ukraine; GR, Greece; PL, Poland; MK, North Macedonia; KS, Kosovo.
Figure 5
Figure 5
Sources used to obtain data relevant for estimating probability of freedom from infection in cattle in an online questionnaire study among 24 European countries. The answers are presented aggregated per part in the questionnaire.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. World Trade Organisation (WTO) . The WTO Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS Agreement). (1995). Available online at: www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/sps_e/spsagr_e.htm (accessed December 20, 2020).
    1. World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE) . Terrestrial Animal Health Code. (2019). Available online at: https://www.oie.int/index.php?id=169&L=0&htmfile=titre_1.5.htm (accessed December 17, 2020).
    1. European Commission. Regulation (EU) 2016/429 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 March 2016 on transmissible animal diseases and amending and repealing certain acts in the area of animal health (“Animal Health Law”). Official J Europ Union. (2016). 208. Available online at: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2016/429/oj
    1. Thiermann AB. Globalization, international trade and animal health: the new roles of OIE. Prev Vet Med. (2005) 67:101–8. 10.1016/j.prevetmed.2004.11.009 - DOI - PubMed
    1. World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE) . OIE-Listed Diseases, Infections and Infestations in Force in 2021. (2021). Available online at: https://www.oie.int/animal-health-in-the-world/oie-listed-diseases-2021/ (accessed March 19, 2021).