major risk factors for prrs in colombian farms
DESCRIPTION
Major risk factors for PRRS in Colombian farms . Dr. Derald Holtkamp Cartagena, July 16, 2014. Outline. Importance of biosecurity and need for tools to assess risk Production Animal Disease Risk Assessment Program (PADRAP) Assessment of risks in Colombian sow farms. - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
Major risk factors for PRRS in Colombian farms Dr. Derald Holtkamp
Cartagena, July 16, 2014
Outline
• Importance of biosecurity and need for tools to assess risk
• Production Animal Disease Risk Assessment Program (PADRAP)
• Assessment of risks in Colombian sow farms
In the U.S. PRRSV had been the primary disease that motivated producers to
improve biosecurity• Introduction of porcine circovirius type 2 (PCV2) and
porcine epidemic diarrhea virus (PEDV) has been a real “wake up call”
Biosecurity! Biosecurity! Biosecurity!
Photo: Courtesy of Dr. Matt Ackerman
PEDV spread rapidly between and within regions of the U.S.
Biosecurity as currently practiced in the U.S. was NOT effective at slowing the spread of the virus
Source: Swine Enteric Coronavirus Disease Testing Summary Report, USDA Animal Plant & Health Inspection Service, May 15, 2014.
And now porcine deltacoronavirus (PDCoV)
Source: Swine Enteric Coronavirus Disease Testing Summary Report, USDA Animal Plant & Health Inspection Service, May 15, 2014.
~50% of sow herds infected with PEDV
Source: Swine Health Monitoring Report, University of Minnesota, College of Veterinary Medicine. March 7, 2014.
~50%
But… PRRSV was relatively quiet this year
Source: PRRS incidence study update, University of Minnestota, March 19, 2014
The slow down in PRRS dates back to July 2013
July 2013
Source: PRRS incidence study update, University of Minnestota, March 19, 2014
Biosecurity is the primary tool to slow herd-to-herd transmission and prevent
outbreaks
Biosecurity! Biosecurity! Biosecurity!
But – making continuous improvements in biosecurity is hard
Disease risk is complicated (and frequently overwhelming)
Requires effort and costs money – must be tailored to circumstances of farm
Can’t do everything – have to start somewhere
Giving producers published lists of biosecurity recommendations or “page-after-page” of protocols doesn’t work!
Need tools to assess risks and implement biosecurity that is tailored for farms or production
systems
Outline
• Importance of Biosecurity and need for tools to assess risk
• Production Animal Disease Risk Assessment Program (PADRAP)
• Assessment of risks in Colombian sow farms
Production Animal Disease Risk Assessment Program (PADRAP) is a program through which a set of disease risk assessment surveys are delivered
PADRAP is owned by The American Association of Swine Veterinarians (AASV) and is used by veterinarians who are members
www.padrap.org
Surveys can be delivered through PADRAP
“Risk Quadrant” report
Enables benchmarking of disease risksExamples of reports
Enables benchmarking of disease risksExamples of reports
“Individual Risk Factor” report
PADRAP is provided as a benefit to members of AASV
• No fees for using PADRAP
• Must be an AASV member to access it– International (Associate) members are eligible to use the program
History of Development• Fall-2002: Design and development of the PRRS Risk Assessment for the
Breeding Herd was done at Boehringer Ingelheim Vetmedica Inc. (BIVI)
• March 2005: BIVI offered to gift the tool to the American Association of Swine Veterinarians (AASV)
• March 2006: AASV, with support from National Pork Board (NPB) and USDA accepted the gift
• September 2006: Iowa State University College of Veterinary Medicine, Food Supply Veterinary Medicine entered into an agreement with AASV to establish the Production Animal Disease Risk Assessment Program (PADRAP)
History of Development
• November 2007: Launch of web version – “PADRAP-Online”
• February 2008: PADRAP Advisory Committee created
• March 2009: Growing Pig Assessment introduced
• December 2011: Boehringer Ingelheim, Harrisvaccines, NPPC and Newport Laboratories become sponsors of PADRAP
Collaborative effort
– American Association of Swine Veterinarians (AASV)
– Iowa State University (ISU) providing program coordination and web hosting
• Director: Derald Holtkamp• Associate Director: Chris Mowrer
– Financial support• National Pork Board (NPB)• Boehringer Ingelheim Vetmedica Inc. (BIVI)• Harrisvaccines• National Pork Producers Council (NPPC)• Newport Laboratories
Training sessions conducted• 363: Number of veterinarians that have been trained
– 67 training sessions (33 online; 34 face-to-face) have been conducted in the U.S., Canada, Mexico, Colombia, Serbia and online
– Used primarily by veterinarians and researchers in the U.S, Mexico and Canada
– Veterinarians from Australia, Bermuda, Chile, Colombia, Germany, Italy, Japan, Netherlands, Philippines, Serbia, South Korea and UK have also been trained
Veterinarians are provided a username and password for the web version that is activated upon completion of training
• Database of PRRS Risk Assessment for the Breeding Herd (version 2) continues to grow– 3,678: Number of assessments completed (as of February 2014)
– 1,878: Number of breeding herd sites assessed (as of February 2014)
PRRS Risk Assessment for the Breeding Herd
PRRS Risk Assessment for the Growing Pig Herd
• Database of PRRS Risk Assessment for the Growing Pig Herd (version 1) – 1,120: Number of assessments completed (as of February 2014)
– 982: Number of growing pig sites assessed (as of February 2014)
Ways veterinarians have applied the PRRS Risk Assessment for the Breeding Herd
• Evaluate current biosecurity protocols and/or to develop new biosecurity protocols
• Demonstrate improvement in biosecurity over time to help justify expenditure of resources on biosecurity
• An aid in the decision to initiate a project to eliminate PRRSV from a breeding herd site
• Regional PRRS Elimination / control projects utilizing PADRAP
Steps to get access to and use PADRAP
Become member of
AASV
Attend an AASV training session (username and password provided at
end of training)
Set up “production
system(s)” and “site(s)” in
PADRAP
Create and complete risk
assessment surveys
View risk benchmarking
reports
Outline
• Importance of Biosecurity and need for tools to assess risk
• Production Animal Disease Risk Assessment Program (PADRAP)
• Assessment of risks in Colombian sow farms
PRRS Control and Monitoring Program in Colombia
• Coordinated by the Technical Area of the Colombian Association of Pork Producers (Asociación Colombiana de Porcicultores)– Jose Fernando Naranjo– Diego Rodriguez – Mayra Aguirre– Natalia Toro
• A PADRAP training session was conducted in Colombia– Lilly Urizar with Centre de développement du porc du Québec (CDPQ)
72 sow herds in Colombia were assessed between July of 2013 and June of 2014
Not Identified, 7
ANT, 27
ARA, 1CAL, 4QUI, 1
RIS, 7
VAC, 25
Number of assessments by department
Average risk scores for Colombian farms assessed vs. average of all sites in the database
(Benchmarked Against)
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Exte
rnal
Ris
k In
dex
Scor
e
Internal Risk Index Score
Benchmarked Against Colombian Farms Assessed
External Risks: HighInternal Risks: High
External Risks: HighInternal Risks: Low
External Risks: LowInternal Risks: Low
External Risks: LowInternal Risks: High
“Biosecurity” terminologyExternal Risks => Bioexclusion – keeping pathogens out of a population
Internal Risks => Biomanagement – managing pathogens already in a population to minimize the negative consequences
Dr. Butch Baker, National Hog Farmer, 10/15/2009
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45Av
erag
e Ri
sk In
dex
Scor
eBenchmarked AgainstColombian Farms Assessed
Average risk scores for Colombian farms assessed vs. average of all sites in the database
(Benchmarked Against)
“Big bar bad --- little bar good”
Opportunity is to improve bioexclusion
Size of sow herd
<300 >= 300 and < 800 >= 800 and < 2000
0 77% 75% 100%
1 to 3 10% 25% 0%
3 to 5 8% 0% 0%
more than 5 4% 0% 0%
Number of herds 48 16 8
Out
brea
ks in
la
st 3
yea
rs
Smaller and mid-size sow herds tended to have more frequent outbreaks
Farrow-to-finish farms had more frequent outbreaks
Stages of Production
Farrow to wean Farrow to feeder Farrow to finish
0 94% 100% 63%
1 to 3 6% 0% 21%
3 to 5 0% 0% 11%
more than 5 0% 0% 5%
Number of herds 16 18 38
Out
brea
ks in
la
st 3
yea
rs
Most of the sow herds that were assessed were PRRSV “naïve” or “negative”
Current PRRSV Status of the Herd
Naïve (AASV Category IV)
Negative (AASV Category III)
Postitive stable (AASV Category II)
Positive unstable (AASV Category I)
0 94% 80% 20% 0%
1 to 3 6% 7% 60% 67%
3 to 5 0% 10% 20% 0%
more than 5 0% 3% 0% 33%
Number of herds 34 30 5 3
Out
brea
ks in
la
st 3
yea
rs
Holtkamp et. al. 2011. Terminology for classifying swine herds by PRRS virus status. J. Swine Health Prod. 19:1 44-56.
Closed herds (produce their own gilts) and farms with more sources of replacement
gilts had more frequent outbreaks
Sources of replacement gilts (number of sow farms)Closed herd = 1 = 2 = 3 >= 4
0 43% 89% 82% 67% 71%
1 to 3 14% 6% 12% 33% 29%
3 to 5 43% 0% 6% 0% 0%
more than 5 0% 6% 0% 0% 0%
Number of herds 7 35 17 6 7
Out
brea
ks in
la
st 3
yea
rs
PRRS virus status of sow farms from which gilts are sourced
All currently naïve
All currently negative
One or more is positive unstable
One or more unknown, none
positive unstable0 97% 77% 0% 45%
1 to 3 3% 16% 100% 18%
3 to 5 0% 0% 0% 36%
more than 5 0% 6% 0% 0%
Number of herds 29 31 1 11
Out
brea
ks in
la
st 3
yea
rs
Sow herds that obtained gilts from herds that were positive unstable or unknown
status had more frequent outbreaks
Sow herds that enter gilts without routinely testing for PRRSV by PCR or ELISA
had more frequent outbreaks
All tested prior to entry into
sow herd
A subset tested prior to entry into sow herd
No routine testing done
Not Applicable
(closed site)
0 100% 80% 74% 71%
1 to 3 0% 20% 13% 29%
3 to 5 0% 0% 9% 0%
more than 5 0% 0% 4% 0%
Number of herds 14 5 46 7
Testing of replacement animals for PRRS by PCR or ELISA prior to entry
Out
brea
ks in
la
st 3
yea
rs
Just over ½ of the sow herds assessed are bringing semen in from outside the farm
2
32
15
23
Not Applicable (100%natural insemination)
All semen collectedfrom boars at this site
Some or all from othersites(s) that are part ofsame productionsystemSome or all sourcedfrom other site(s) notpart of same productionsystem
PRRSV status of site(s) from which semen is sourced
All currently
naive
All currently negative
One or more with unknown
status
One or more
positive unstable
Not Applicable (100% natural
insemination or collected from
boars at this site)= 0 93% 80% 45% 100% 83%
>= 1 and < 3 7% 20% 18% 0% 11%
>= 3 and < 5 0% 0% 36% 0% 0%
>= 5 0% 0% 0% 0% 6%
Number of herds 15 10 11 1 35
Out
brea
ks in
la
st 3
yea
rs
Sow herds that received semen from boar studs with unknown PRRSV status had
more frequent outbreaks
Sow herds that did not know when the most recent outbreak had occurred at the boar stud(s) had more frequent outbreaks
Most recent PRRS outbreak at boar stud(s)
Never
Less than 12
months ago
Unknown
Not Applicable (100% natural
insemination or collected from
boars at this site)= 0 95% 100% 53% 82%
>= 1 and < 3 5% 0% 24% 12%
>= 3 and < 5 0% 0% 24% 0%
>= 5 0% 0% 0% 6%
Number of herds 20 1 17 34
Out
brea
ks in
la
st 3
yea
rs
Of the assessed sow farms that are bringing in semen from outside the farm, very few
are testing boars for PRRSV by PCR
1 22
41
Every collection tested
Approximately monthly
Approximatelyquarterly or lessfrequentlyNo serum testing orunknown
When sow herds did not wash vehicles that hauled pigs between every load they had
more frequent outbreaks
Between every load
At least once per 10 loads
Never, rarely or unknown
Not Applicable (vehicle is
dedicated to this site)
0 90% 50% 63% 68%
1 to 3 5% 50% 25% 16%
3 to 5 0% 0% 13% 16%
more than 5 5% 0% 0% 0%
Number of herds 41 4 8 19
Out
brea
ks in
la
st 3
yea
rsWashing frequency of vehicles used to transport
weaned pigs (5kg) and feeder pigs (25kg)
When sow herds did not allow vehicles that hauled genetic replacements to dry after
washing they had more frequent outbreaks
Assisted drying technology is used to dry
washed vehicles
Vehicles allowed to dry
completely before next load
No requirements
Not Applicable (vehicle is
dedicated to this site)
= 0 100% 86% 75% 33%
>= 1 and < 3 0% 14% 10% 17%
>= 3 and < 5 0% 0% 5% 50%
>= 5 0% 0% 10% 0%
Number of herds 2 44 20 6
Drying time of vehicles used to transport genetic replacements
Out
brea
ks in
la
st 3
yea
rs
No Yes
0 67% 80%
1 to 3 33% 12%
3 to 5 0% 6%
more than 5 0% 3%
Number of herds 3 69
Out
brea
ks in
la
st 3
yea
rs
Dead animals disposed of on-site (e.g. buried, composted or incinerated)
Nearly all of the sow farms assessed disposed of dead animals on-site
Sow farms that only required a boot wash / disinfection or with unrestricted entry had
more frequent outbreaks
Shower in and clothes changed
prior to entry
Coverall and boot change, hands
are washed prior to entry
Boot wash / disinfection
prior to entry
Unrestricted entry
0 85% 81% 0% 63%
1 to 3 10% 14% 100% 0%
3 to 5 0% 5% 0% 38%
more than 5 5% 0% 0% 0%
Number of herds 41 21 2 8
Sanitation procedure for employees and visitors entering site
Out
brea
ks in
la
st 3
yea
rs
Sow farms with high employee turnover had more frequent outbreaks
< 0.25 0.25 to 0.5 0.5 to 0.75 >= 0.75
0 84% 69% 57% 100%
1 to 3 8% 23% 29% 0%
3 to 5 6% 0% 14% 0%
more than 5 2% 8% 0% 0%
Number of herds 51 13 7 1
Average annual employee turnover
Out
brea
ks in
la
st 3
yea
rs
Sow farms located in areas with more swine farms had more frequent outbreaks
= 0 1 to 3 3 to 5 >= 50 86% 81% 78% 76%
1 to 3 14% 13% 22% 6%
3 to 5 0% 6% 0% 18%
more than 5 0% 0% 0% 0%
Number of herds 14 16 9 17
Pig density - number of swine sites in a 1.6 to 4.8 km radius
Out
brea
ks in
la
st 3
yea
rs
Sow farms located on flat land or gentle rolling hills had more frequent outbreaks
Flat Gentle rolling hills
Steep hills Mountains
0 60% 79% 100% 84%
1 to 3 33% 21% 0% 3%
3 to 5 7% 0% 0% 8%
more than 5 0% 0% 0% 5%
Number of herds 15 14 5 38
Topography at the site
Out
brea
ks in
la
st 3
yea
rs
Acknowledgements• American Association
of Swine Veterinarians• National Pork Board
• PADRAP Sponsors– Boehringer Ingelheim
Vetmedica, Inc.– Harrisvaccines– NPPC– Newport Laboratories
• Asociación Colombiana de Porcicultores– Jose Fernando Naranjo – Diego Rodriguez – All the veterinarians and
producers that completed the PADRAP questionnaires