Search

In the Surveillance Tool for Outcome-based Comparison of FREEdom from infection (STOC free) project (https://www.stocfree.eu), a data collection tool was constructed to facilitate standardised collection of input data, and a model was developed to allow a standardised and harmonised comparison of the outputs of different control programmes (CPs) for cattle diseases. The STOC free model can be used to evaluate the probability of freedom from infection for herds in CPs and to determine whether these CPs comply with the European Union's pre-defined output-based standards. Bovine viral diarrhoea virus (BVDV) was chosen as the case disease for this project because of the diversity in CPs in the six participating countries. Detailed BVDV CP and risk factor information was collected using the data collection tool. For inclusion of the data in the STOC free model, key aspects and default values were quantified. A Bayesian hidden Markov model was deemed appropriate, and a model was developed for BVDV CPs. The model was tested and validated using real BVDV CP data from partner countries, and corresponding computer code was made publicly available. The STOC free model focuses on herd-level data, although that animal-level data can be included after aggregation to herd level. The STOC free model is applicable to diseases that are endemic, given that it needs the presence of some infection to estimate parameters and enable convergence. In countries where infection-free status has been achieved, a scenario tree model could be a better suited tool. Further work is recommended to generalise the STOC free model to other diseases.

Countries have implemented control programmes (CPs) for cattle diseases such as bovine viral diarrhoea virus (BVDV) that are tailored to each country-specific situation. Practical methods are needed to assess the output of these CPs in terms of the confidence of freedom from infection that is achieved. As part of the STOC free project, a Bayesian Hidden Markov model was developed, called STOC free model, to estimate the probability of infection at herd-level. In the current study, the STOC free model was applied to BVDV field data in four study regions, from CPs based on ear notch samples. The aim of this study was to estimate the probability of herd-level freedom from BVDV in regions that are not (yet) free. We additionally evaluated the sensitivity of the parameter estimates and predicted probabilities of freedom to the prior distributions for the different model parameters. First, default priors were used in the model to enable comparison of model outputs between study regions. Thereafter, country-specific priors based on expert opinion or historical data were used in the model, to study the influence of the priors on the results and to obtain country-specific estimates. The STOC free model calculates a posterior value for the model parameters (e.g. herd-level test sensitivity and specificity, probability of introduction of infection) and a predicted probability of infection. The probability of freedom from infection was computed as one minus the probability of infection. For dairy herds that were considered free from infection within their own CP, the predicted probabilities of freedom were very high for all study regions ranging from 0.98 to 1.00, regardless of the use of default or country-specific priors. The priors did have more influence on two of the model parameters, herd-level sensitivity and the probability of remaining infected, due to the low prevalence and incidence of BVDV in the study regions. The advantage of STOC free model compared to scenario tree modelling, the reference method, is that actual data from the CP can be used and estimates are easily updated when new data becomes available. European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) Dutch Ministry of Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality

Countries have implemented control programmes (CPs) for cattle diseases such as bovine viral diarrhoea virus (BVDV) that are tailored to each country-specific situation. Practical methods are needed to assess the output of these CPs in terms of the confidence of freedom from infection that is achieved. As part of the STOC free project, a Bayesian Hidden Markov model was developed, called STOC free model, to estimate the probability of infection at herd-level. In the current study, the STOC free model was applied to BVDV field data in four study regions, from CPs based on ear notch samples. The aim of this study was to estimate the probability of herd-level freedom from BVDV in regions that are not (yet) free. We additionally evaluated the sensitivity of the parameter estimates and predicted probabilities of freedom to the prior distributions for the different model parameters. First, default priors were used in the model to enable comparison of model outputs between study regions. Thereafter, country-specific priors based on expert opinion or historical data were used in the model, to study the influence of the priors on the results and to obtain country-specific estimates. The STOC free model calculates a posterior value for the model parameters (e.g. herd-level test sensitivity and specificity, probability of introduction of infection) and a predicted probability of infection. The probability of freedom from infection was computed as one minus the probability of infection. For dairy herds that were considered free from infection within their own CP, the predicted probabilities of freedom were very high for all study regions ranging from 0.98 to 1.00, regardless of the use of default or country-specific priors. The priors did have more influence on two of the model parameters, herd-level sensitivity and the probability of remaining infected, due to the low prevalence and incidence of BVDV in the study regions. The advantage of STOC free model compared to scenario tree modelling, the reference method, is that actual data from the CP can be used and estimates are easily updated when new data becomes available.

For endemic infections in cattle that are not regulated at the European Union level, such as bovine viral diarrhea virus (BVDV), European Member States have implemented control or eradication programs (CEP) tailored to their specific situations. Different methods are used to assign infection-free status in CEP; therefore, the confidence of freedom associated with the “free” status generated by different CEP are difficult to compare, creating problems for the safe trade of cattle between territories. Safe trade would be facilitated with an output-based framework that enables a transparent and standardized comparison of confidence of freedom for CEP across herds, regions, or countries. The current paper represents the first step toward development of such a framework by seeking to describe and qualitatively compare elements of CEP that contribute to confidence of freedom. For this work, BVDV was used as a case study. We qualitatively compared heterogeneous BVDV CEP in 6 European countries: Germany, France, Ireland, the Netherlands, Sweden, and Scotland. Information about BVDV CEP that were in place in 2017 and factors influencing the risk of introduction and transmission of BVDV (the context) were collected using an existing tool, with modifications to collect information about aspects of control and context. For the 6 participating countries, we ranked all individual elements of the CEP and their contexts that could influence the probability that cattle from a herd categorized as BVDV-free are truly free from infection. Many differences in the context and design of BVDV CEP were found. As examples, CEP were either mandatory or voluntary, resulting in variation in risks from neighboring herds, and risk factors such as cattle density and the number of imported cattle varied greatly between territories. Differences were also found in both testing protocols and definitions of freedom from disease. The observed heterogeneity in both the context and CEP design will create difficulties when comparing different CEP in terms of confidence of freedom from infection. These results highlight the need for a standardized practical methodology to objectively and quantitatively determine confidence of freedom resulting from different CEP around the world.

Bovine viral diarrhea virus (BVDV) is endemic in many parts of the world, and multiple countries have implemented surveillance activities for disease control or eradication. In such control programs, the disease-free status can be compromised by factors that pose risks for introduction or persistence of the virus. The aim of the present study was to gain a comprehensive overview of possible risk factors for BVDV infection in cattle herds in Europe and to assess their importance. Papers that considered risk factors for BVDV infection in cattle were identified through a systematic search. Further selection of papers eligible for quantitative analysis was performed using a predefined checklist, including (1) appropriate region (i.e., studies performed in Europe), (2) representativeness of the study population, (3) quality of statistical analysis, and (4) availability of sufficient quantitative data. In total, 18 observational studies were selected. Data were analyzed by a random-effects meta-analysis to obtain pooled estimates of the odds of BVDV infection. Meta-analyses were performed on 6 risk factors: herd type, herd size, participation in shows or markets, introduction of cattle, grazing, and contact with other cattle herds on pasture. Significant higher odds were found for dairy herds (odds ratio, OR = 1.63, 95% confidence interval, CI: 1.06–2.50) compared with beef herds, for larger herds (OR = 1.04 for every 10 extra animals in the herd, 95% CI: 1.02–1.06), for herds that participate in shows or markets (OR = 1.45, 95% CI: 1.10–1.91), for herds that introduced cattle into the herd (OR = 1.41, 95% CI: 1.18–1.69), and for herds that share pasture or have direct contact with cattle of other herds at pasture (OR = 1.32, 95% CI: 1.07–1.63). These pooled values must be interpreted with care, as there was a high level of heterogeneity between studies. However, they do give an indication of the importance of the most frequently studied risk factors and can therefore assist in the development, evaluation, and optimization of BVDV control programs. Dutch Ministry of Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality European Food Safety Authority