Perceptions of veterinarians in bovine practice and producers with beef cow-calf operations enrolled in the US Voluntary Bovine Johne's Disease Control Program concerning economic losses associated with Johne's disease

Bhattarai, Bikash; Fosgate, Geoffrey T.; Osterstock, Jason B.; Fossler, Charles P.; Park, Seong C.; Roussel, Allen J.

doi:10.1016/j.prevetmed.2013.08.009

Cited by 11 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Chi et al (2002) reported a total cost of $49.24 per cow for a 50-cow dairy herd with an apparent within-herd prevalence of 7%, while Tiwari et al (2008) reported a total cost of $49.05 per cow for a 61-cow dairy herd with an apparent prevalence of 12.7%. Our findings fall within similar ranges to those published from the United States (Can$21 to Can$43/cow; Ott et al, 1999;Bhattarai et al, 2013) and the UK (Can$41.65/cow; Gunn et al, 2004). Some of the primary differences observed relate to other models considering mortality and reproductive losses due to MAP infection, where our model did not.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

Cost-benefit of implementing a participatory extension model for improving on-farm adoption of Johne's disease control recommendations

Roche

Massow

Renaud

et al. 2020

Journal of Dairy Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The objective of this study was to perform a costbenefit analysis (CBA) of a participatory extension model, called Ontario Focus Farms (FF), which was designed to facilitate the adoption of on-farm management practices to control Johne's disease (JD) on Ontario (ON) dairy farms. Partial budget models were developed to estimate the annual herd cost of JD on an average 78-cow Ontario dairy herd and the annual herd cost of neonatal calf diarrhea (NCD). With these estimates, a CBA was developed to assess the simulated net benefits of implementing various on-farm management scenarios (i.e., implementing 1, 2, or 3 of the following: calf feeding, maternity pen management, maternity area structure changes), where the benefits represent a reduction in the annual cost of JD and NCD. These models informed the final CBA assessing the net benefits of FF implementation over a 10-yr period. All monetary values are reported in Canadian dollars (Can$; where 1 Can$ = 0.823 US$ at the time of the study). The annual herd cost of JD was estimated to be $3,242 ($41.56/cow), and that of NCD was estimated to be $1,390 ($36/heifer calf). When farms were expected to have both JD and NCD, all scenarios, when implemented over a 10-yr period, yielded positive net benefits ranging from $439 to $2,543 per farm when changes to maternity area structure were combined with calf feeding changes. These effects were sensitive to changes in level of disease (JD and NCD) on the farm, and the costs and effects of making changes. The NPV of making any on-farm change when JD was not present on the farm was negative. Overall, FF implementation yielded positive net benefits of $426,351 or $749,808, depending on whether a veterinarian or non-veterinarian served as the facilitator. The NPV was most sensitive to changes in burden of disease, the cost of implementing changes, and the proportion of FF participants that had JD and NCD on the farm. Benefits of FF implementation are also likely to accrue to veterinarians, as a result of professional facilitator training, and the Ontario dairy industry, as a byproduct of improved milk quality and safety; therefore, the true net benefits of FF implementation are likely underestimated. Overall, the FF process should be considered an economically viable program and worthy of investment as part of a JD control strategy, as it demonstrates potential to yield positive net benefits for the Ontario dairy industry.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

Cost-benefit of implementing a participatory extension model for improving on-farm adoption of Johne's disease control recommendations

Roche

Massow

Renaud

et al. 2020

Journal of Dairy Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This list is likely not exhaustive, perhaps due to a lack of representation from certain countries, or as Nielsen noted, a lack of knowledge and available literature on these programmes (Nielsen, ). The main drivers for adoption of these mostly voluntary on‐farm programmes are potential direct and indirect economic benefits to the agricultural from improved animal health and productivity and perceived enhanced product quality from M. paratuberculosis ‐free sources (Sorge et al., ,b; Bhattarai et al., ). Many of these on‐farm programmes focus on management recommendations to reduce the spread of infection among ruminants (e.g.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The potential Public Health Impact of Mycobacterium avium ssp. paratuberculosis: Global Opinion Survey of Topic Specialists

Waddell

Rajić

Stärk

et al. 2015

Zoonoses and Public Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Global research knowledge has accumulated over the past few decades, and there is reasonable evidence for a positive association between Mycobacterium avium spp. paratuberculosis and Crohn's disease in humans, although its role as a human pathogen has not been entirely accepted. For this reason, management of public health risk due to M. paratuberculosis remains an important policy issue in agri-food public health arenas in many countries. Responsible authorities must decide whether existing mitigation strategies are sufficient to prevent or reduce human exposure to M. paratuberculosis. A Web-based questionnaire was administered to topic specialists to elicit empirical knowledge and opinion on the overall public health impact of M. paratuberculosis, the importance of various routes of human exposure to the pathogen, existing mitigation strategies and the need for future strategies. The questionnaire had four sections and consisted of 20 closed and five open questions. Topic specialists believed that M. paratuberculosis is likely a risk to human health (44.8%) and, given the paucity of available evidence, most frequently ranked it as a moderate public health issue (40.1%). A significant correlation was detected between topic specialists' commitment to M. paratuberculosis in terms of the number of years or proportion of work dedicated to this topic, and the likelihood of an extreme answer (high or low) to the above questions. Topic specialists identified contact with ruminants and dairy products as the most likely routes of exposure for humans. There was consensus on exposure routes for ruminants and what commodities to target in mitigation efforts. Described mandatory programmes mainly focused on culling diseased animals and voluntary on-farm prevention programmes. Despite ongoing difficulties in the identification of subclinical infections in animals, the topic specialists largely agreed that further enhancement of on-farm programmes in affected commodities by the agri-food industry (68.4%) and allocation of resources by governments to monitor the issue (92%) are most appropriate given the current state of evidence.

show abstract

“…Reminder post-cards were mailed 8 days after the questionnaire. Additional details on questionnaire development and administration have been described elsewhere [15]. …”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Perceptions of veterinarians and producers concerning Johne’s disease prevalence and control in US beef cow-calf operations

et al. 2014

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundEfforts to educate producers and veterinarians in the United States regarding the management, prevention and control of Mycobacterium avium subspecies paratuberculosis (MAP) infection have increased over recent years. While nationwide awareness about MAP infection is improving, current level of awareness among beef producers and veterinarians is largely unknown. This study compares the perceptions of beef producers and veterinarians on the burden of MAP infection in cow-calf herds and on measures to control new infections. Questionnaires were mailed to 989 US beef producers through state Designated Johne’s Coordinators and to 1080 bovine veterinarians belonging to a US nationwide professional association.ResultsTwenty-two percent (34/155) of producers reported having infected animals in their herds. The mean (minimum, median, maximum) prevalence reported by producers was 0.8% (0, 0, 10). Twenty-seven percent (27/100) of producers had at least one clinical animal during the previous year. Compared to the small herds (<50 head), the mean test-positive percentages and estimated prevalences were higher in medium (50–149) and highest in large (≥150) herds. Seedstock herds had a lower prevalence and these producers were more likely to enroll in Johne’s disease (JD) control programs and test their herds. Veterinarians reported a mean overall animal level prevalence in their client herds of 5% (0, 2, 60). Similarly, 26% (0, 10, 100) of client herds had at least one infected animal. Mean percentage of infected cows within infected herds was 9% (0.01, 5, 80). Producers generally performed activities to control MAP transmission more frequently than perceived by veterinarians. Compared to veterinarians’ opinions, producers were less likely to cull cows with signs consistent with JD (P < 0.01), but more likely to test purchased additions (P < 0.01). Testing recommendations by veterinarians (n = 277) for beef cow-calf herds were bacterial culture of feces (3%), PCR (14%), ELISA (35%) and a combination of these tests (47%). Seventy-nine percent of veterinarians recommended a 12-month interval between testing.ConclusionsSeedstock producers who had had JD risk assessments performed on their farms were more supportive of JD control programs and had a correspondingly lower prevalence. It is important to increase educational activities to provide relevant information to veterinarians and producers for better management and control of JD. Educational programs should target larger herds to maximize the impact.

show abstract

Perceptions of veterinarians in bovine practice and producers with beef cow-calf operations enrolled in the US Voluntary Bovine Johne's Disease Control Program concerning economic losses associated with Johne's disease

Cited by 11 publications

References 20 publications

Cost-benefit of implementing a participatory extension model for improving on-farm adoption of Johne's disease control recommendations

Cost-benefit of implementing a participatory extension model for improving on-farm adoption of Johne's disease control recommendations

The potential Public Health Impact of Mycobacterium avium ssp. paratuberculosis: Global Opinion Survey of Topic Specialists

Perceptions of veterinarians and producers concerning Johne’s disease prevalence and control in US beef cow-calf operations

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About