How does reviewing the evidence change veterinary surgeons' beliefs regarding the treatment of ovine footrot? A quantitative and qualitative study

Can lameness prevalence in dairy herds be predicted from farmers' reports of their motivation to control lameness and barriers to doing so? An observational study from New Zealand

Understanding what motivates and prevents behavioral change in farmers is a critical step in disease control in dairy cattle. A total of 101 New Zealand dairy farmers across 8 regions were randomly enrolled into a cross-sectional study to investigate farmer barriers and motivators to lameness control for cows managed 100% at pasture and the relationship between these responses and the true lameness status on farm. Trained technicians lameness scored all lactating cows on the enrolled farms on 2 occasions during one lactation. Farm-level prevalence proportions were calculated as the mean of the 2 lameness scores. Enrolled farmers were asked their perception of lameness in the current milking season and responded to 26 ordinal Likert-type items with 5 options ranging from not important at all to extremely important. The questions were grouped under 3 categories; barriers to lameness control (n = 9), impacts of lameness (n = 10), and motivators to control lameness (n = 7). The association between farmer perception of lameness and lameness prevalence was reported using linear regression. Multiple-factor analysis was conducted to identify latent variable themes within the responses. Linear discriminant analysis was used to assess whether barriers, impacts, and motivators could be used to predict farmer perception of lameness and lameness prevalence. Lameness prevalence was 0.8% greater on farms where farmers perceived lameness as a moderate or a major problem compared with farms where the farmer perceived lameness as a minor problem or not a problem. Farmers ranked all potential motivators to lameness control as important and declared few barriers to be important at preventing them from controlling lameness. Feeling sorry for lame cows and pride in a healthy herd were the most important motivators, with lack of time and skilled labor the most important barriers. The most important effects of lameness were cow-related factors such as pain and production, with farm and industry impacts of less importance. Farmers place different weightings of importance on barriers to lameness control compared with motivators for lameness control. The impacts and motivators were strongly correlated with the first dimension from the multiple-factor analysis, with only weak correlation between barriers and the first dimension. Linear discriminant analysis identified that the importance that farmers place on barriers, motivators, and impacts of lameness were poor predictors of farmers' belief in regard to their lameness problem or actual lameness prevalence (above or below the median lameness prevalence for the study cohort). Despite relatively low lameness prevalence, many New Zealand dairy farmers believe lameness is a problem on their farm, and they rank welfare effects of lameness of high importance. To investigate how farmer behavior change can be used to manage lameness, future studies should consider theoretical social science frameworks beyond the theory of planned behavior or involve prospective interventional studies investigating farmer actions instead of beliefs.

Interspecies encounters with endemic health conditions: co-producing BVD and lameness with cows and sheep in the north of England

This paper focuses on the relationships between people and farmed nonhuman animals, and between these animals and the farmed environments they encounter, in the enactment of interspecies endemic disease situations. It examines how the nonhuman embodied capacities, agency and subjectivities of cows and sheep on farms in the north of England make a difference to how the endemic conditions of lameness and bovine viral diarrhoea (BVD) are encountered and responded to by farmers and advisers. The paper draws on empirical research with farmers and their advisers, and explores three key, inter-related, themes: first, the importance of intersubjective relationships between people and animals on farms; second, the nonhuman components of the 'disease situations' associated with endemic diseases, including animals' embodied characteristics and behaviours and the relationships between bodies and environments on different farms; and finally the ways in which animal agency and resistance makes a difference to on-farm interventions aiming to prevent or treat lameness and BVD. The paper concludes by arguing that animals' capacities, and nonhuman difference, should be taken further into account in future policy and practice interventions in endemic disease in farmed animals.

Evaluation of the Role of Veterinarians for Outcomes Related to the Health and Production of Dairy Small Ruminants in Greece

The objective of the present study was to evaluate the potential benefits of veterinarians in improving the health and welfare of dairy sheep and goats by studying the associations of management practices employed in the farms with production- or health-related outcomes in sheep and goat farms in Greece. This work explored associations with 'professional relationship with a veterinarian' at 444 small ruminant dairy farms in an investigation performed around Greece, where 106 variables, related to infrastructure, animals, production outcomes, health management, health problems and human resources, were assessed. In 384 (86.5%) farms, a professional relationship with a veterinarian was maintained. The median value of visits made annually by veterinarians to these farms was five. In farms with a professional relationship with a veterinarian, significant differences were found in 24 variables (35.8%) related to management practices and 6 (30.0%) production- or health-related outcomes. In multivariable analysis, the following emerged with a significant association: epg counts in faecal samples (p = 0.014), average annual milk production per ewe/doe (p = 0.015), somatic cell counts in bulk-tank milk (p = 0.037), and annual incidence of clinical mastitis (p = 0.044). Moreover, associations of the characteristics of veterinarians emerged with somatic cell counts in bulk-tank milk: the gender (p < 0.0001) and the age (p = 0.004) of the veterinarians. The results attest that the application of veterinary advice and clinical services in sheep and goat dairy farms contributes to the improved health, production and welfare of animals.

"I didn't see a sheep": perspectives of lecturers and students at veterinary schools in Great Britain on learning about lameness in sheep

Introduction

Great Britain has over 15 million ewes. Lameness is one of the top three most economically important diseases for the sheep industry, costing about £80 million per annum. The prevalence of lameness reduced from 10% to 5% between 2004 and 2013 but further reduction is unlikely because many farmers and agricultural students still believe in, and use, ineffective practices to control lameness. Unfortunately, many veterinary practitioners consider themselves insufficiently knowledgeable to work confidently with sheep farmers, and many sheep farmers agree with them. Another route to improve control of lameness is to ensure that all new veterinary graduates are competent to advise farmers.

Methods

Our study investigated how veterinary students are taught about management of lameness in sheep. Ten lecturers from eight veterinary schools were interviewed, and 33 students from four veterinary schools participated in four focus groups; all were recorded, transcribed, and analysed using directed qualitative content analysis.

Results

Teaching time and opportunities for students to gain clinical experience of lameness were very limited. Students were not confident they could diagnose causes of lameness and listed many practices, including ineffective ones, to manage footrot.

Discussion

We conclude that GB veterinary students are graduating without evidence-based understanding and clinical experience necessary to advise farmers on management of lameness in sheep. Given the importance of lameness in sheep in GB we conclude that an alternative approach to education on lameness in sheep could help to ensure that new graduate veterinarians can contribute to control of lameness in sheep.

Field Validation of a Non-carcinogenic and Eco-Friendly Disinfectant in a Stand-In Footbath for Treatment of Footrot Associated With aprV2-Positive Strains of Dichelobacter nodosus in Swiss Sheep Flocks

A national control program for virulent footrot is currently planned in Switzerland. Since commonly used disinfectants either contain heavy metals or are carcinogenic, the aim of this study was to verify the effectiveness of an eco-friendly and non-carcinogenic candidate disinfectant against aprV2-positive strains of Dichelobacter nodosus. Additionally, the effect of the selective use of long-acting oxytetracyclines was evaluated. A total of 18 farms with confirmed footrot infection, randomly allocated to two treatment groups: (1) with antibiotics (AB; n = 9) and, (2) no antibiotics (NAB; n = 9), were included. Claws were carefully trimmed and scored using a scale from 0 (clinically healthy) to 5 (complete loss of the horn capsule) and a prewash waterbath was implemented on 11 farms. Twice-weekly, repeated whole-flock stand-in footbaths with the candidate disinfectant (6%) were performed. Additionally, animals of group AB with a score ≥ 3 were administered oxytetracyclines by injection. On all farms, 10 days after last treatment, aprV2-positive strains could not be detected by risk-based sampling for real-time PCR analysis after 7–21 (median = 12) footbaths with a minimal culling rate of non-responders on nine farms. Farms without contact to other sheep remained without clinical signs of footrot for a minimum of 245 days (mean ± standard deviation: 293.6 ± 23.6). Antibiotic treatment did not reduce the number of footbaths needed. In contrast, a mean of 3.3 disinfecting footbaths could be saved by implementing a prewash waterbath. At animal level, individual and selective use of oxytetracyclines lead to a higher chance (odds ratio = 9.95; 95% CI: 3.54–27.95; p < 0.001) for a lesion score ≥ 3 to improve to a lesion score < 3 within 2 weeks compared to treatment without antibiotics. The test disinfectant is an effective and eco-friendly alternative for the planned Swiss footrot control program and selective use of oxytetracycline has a beneficial impact on the recovery of animals with lesion scores ≥ 3.

Antimicrobial use in agriculture: critical review of the factors influencing behaviour

Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a global health emergency affecting humans and animals, diminishing the effectiveness of medication used to treat illness. The agri-food sector has attracted increased attention for imprudent antimicrobial use (AMU) and its contribution to AMR. Thus, ascertaining farmers' and veterinarians' behaviours surrounding AMU is essential to address imprudent AMU and generate behaviour change within the agri-food sector. Therefore, the aim of this critical review is to investigate, assess and collate the current body of evidence to identify psychosocial factors including knowledge, understanding, perceptions, attitudes and behaviours surrounding AMU. Database searches were limited to articles utilizing qualitative and quantitative methodologies, available in English with no restriction on publication year. Of the 1156 articles identified, 103 were retained for this review. Findings on the psychosocial aspects were thematically analysed. Five key themes emerged from the data: (i) knowledge and awareness of antimicrobials; (ii) attitudes towards antimicrobials; (iii) influential relationships; (iv) resources; and (v) factors influencing AMU. Results indicated that to overcome barriers experienced by key stakeholders, a carefully considered, evidence-based approach, incorporating behaviour change theory, is required when designing intricate interventions/strategies, in order to elicit successful and sustained AMU behaviour change.

Factors related to infertility in Brazil and their relationship with success rates after assisted reproduction treatment: an integrative review

This integrative review evaluated the most commonly diagnosed causes of infertility in men and women in Brazil, as well as the medically assisted reproduction technologies regularly employed in these cases. We searched in four electronic databases (PubMed, including Medline; Scopus; Web of Science and LILACS), and two grey literature (Google Scholar and OpenGrey), guided by the focused question: "What are the main factors responsible for male and female infertility in Brazil, and what are its relationships with success rates after assisted reproduction treatment?". We included interventional or observational studies, without limitation by language or year of publication. Our searches in the electronic indexers recovered 1,119 articles, and after analyzing the inclusion and exclusion criteria, 27 articles composed the body of analysis for this review. We grouped the studies into four themes: factors responsible for male and female infertility, assisted reproductive technologies (ART) used in the infertility treatment, assisted reproduction procedures, and clinical predictors of success rates in ART. Despite the scarcity of studies analyzing the association between infertility and assisted reproductive technologies in Brazil, it was possible to infer that the most prevalent infertility cause in women was endometriosis, while in men it was azoospermia. The most widely assisted reproductive technology applied in the country is the intracytoplasmic injection of spermatozoa (ICSI), ensuring better success rates in the treatment of infertility for men and women.

Quantifying the beliefs of key players in the UK sheep industry on the efficacy of two treatments for footrot

Clinical trials have demonstrated that sheep with footrot treated with parenteral and topical antibiotics without foot trimming (treatment A), cure faster than sheep treated with foot trimming and topical antibiotics (treatment B). We investigated how key players in the UK sheep industry recommended treating footrot, and tested whether reviewing the evidence surrounding treatment of footrot changed their beliefs. Eight key players attended a workshop to investigate their current practices, and their perceived efficacy of treatments, using probabilistic elicitation. At the start of the study, all participants recommended use of antibiotic injection but only four recommended not foot trimming feet with footrot. Initial beliefs in the difference in cure rate within five days of treatment ranged from 30 to 97% in favour of treatment A (true difference 60%); this heterogeneity reduced after reviewing the evidence. Participants who believed the cure rate differed by >60% over-estimated the cure rate of treatment A whilst participants who believed the difference was <60% over-estimated the efficacy of treatment B. During discussions, participants stated that parenteral antibiotics had always been recommended as a treatment for footrot but that the new research clarified when to use them. In contrast, it was highly novel to hear that foot trimming was detrimental to recovery, and key players and farmers are taking longer to accept this evidence. Three months after the workshop, two participants stated that they now placed greater emphasis on rapid individual antibiotic treatment of lame sheep and one was no longer recommending trimming feet.

Broken biosecurity? Veterinarians' framing of biosecurity on dairy farms in England

There is seen to be a need for better biosecurity - the control of disease spread on and off farm - in the dairy sector. Veterinarians play a key role in communicating and implementing biosecurity measures on farm, and little research has been carried out on how veterinarians see their own and farmers' roles in improving biosecurity. In order to help address this gap, qualitative interviews were carried out with 28 veterinarians from Royal College of Veterinary Surgeon farm accredited practices in England. The results were analysed using a social ecology framework and frame analysis to explore not only what barriers vets identified, but also how vets saw the problem of inadequate biosecurity as being located. Veterinarians' frames of biosecurity were analysed at the individual, interpersonal and contextual scales, following the social ecology framework, which see the problem in different ways with different solutions. Farmers and veterinarians were both framed by veterinarians as individualised groups lacking consistency. This means that best practice is not spread and veterinarians are finding it difficult to work as a group to move towards a "predict and prevent" model of veterinary intervention. But diversity and individualism were also framed as positive and necessary among veterinarians to the extent that they can tailor advice to individual farmers. Veterinarians saw their role in educating the farmer as not only being about giving advice to farmers, but trying to convince the farmer of their perspective and values on disease problems. Vets felt they were meeting with limited success because vets and farmers may be emphasising different framings of biosecurity. Vets emphasise the individual and interpersonal frames that disease problems are a problem on farm that can and should be controlled by individual farmers working with vets. According to vets, farmers may emphasise the contextual frame that biosecurity is largely outside of their control on dairy farms because of logistical, economic and geographical factors, and so some level of disease on dairy farms is not entirely unexpected or controllable. There needs to be a step back within the vet-farmer relationship to realise that there may be different perspectives at play, and within the wider debate to explore the question of what a biosecure dairy sector would look like within a rapidly changing agricultural landscape.

Sheep farmer opinions on the current and future role of veterinarians in flock health management on sheep farms: a qualitative study

A 2009 UK Government report on veterinary expertise in food animal production highlighted that there was insufficient herd health expertise among veterinarians and lack of appropriate business models to deliver veterinary services to the livestock sector. Approximately two thirds of sheep farmers only contact their veterinarian for emergencies and one fifth have all year round contact. The aim of the current study was to understand sheep farmers' perception, the current and future role of veterinarians in flock health management using qualitative methodology. The eligibility criteria were male farmers with a flock size of at least 200 adult sheep. Seven focus groups of farmers (n=45) stratified by three regions and two age groups (≤50 and >50) were conducted. Thematic analysis of the discussions indicated that most farmers considered and used their veterinarian as a fire-fighter, whilst other advice was gathered free of charge when the veterinarian was on the farm for other reasons (typically seeing cattle) or by telephone. A small group of farmers were using their veterinarian or a sheep consultant proactively with regular contact and found this financially beneficial. Farmers indicated that the key barriers to using a veterinarian proactively were inconsistent service, high turnover of veterinarians, lack of expertise of sheep farming among veterinarians and concern about independence of advice. Although economics was also mentioned as a key barrier to using veterinarians more proactively, most farmers did not know where they gained and lost income from their flock; there was heavy reliance on the single farm payment scheme (SPS) and very few farmers kept records from which they could investigate where there were inefficiencies in production. Overall sheep farmers considered sheep farming complex and that each farm was unique and that they themselves were the experts to manage their flock. We conclude that there is an impasse: veterinarians might need to provide consistency and wide expertise beyond knowledge of disease and a model of how flock planning would be financially beneficial but until sheep farmers keep production records flock health planning cannot be rigorous and the financial benefits cannot be evaluated. Given the reliance on SPS by farmers an alternative model would be to require farmers to keep production records to comply with SPS. This might lead to flock health planning being adopted at a faster rate and so develop the UK sheep industry and make it more environmentally sustainable by reducing waste from disease and low productivity.