Journal of Veterinary Clinics (한국임상수의학회지)

The Korean Society of Veterinary Clinics (한국임상수의학회)
권호 표지

Evaluation of Serological Surveillance System for Improving Foot-and-Mouth Disease Control

구제역 관리를 위한 혈청학적 예찰계획 평가

  • Pak, Son-Il (College of Veterinary Medicine and Institute of Veterinary Science, Kangwon National University) ;
  • Shin, Yeun-Kyung (Animal and Plant Quarantine Agency)
  • 박선일 (강원대학교 수의과대학 및 동물의학종합연구소) ;
  • 신연경 (농림축산검역본부)
  • Accepted : 2013.08.10
  • Published : 2013.08.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The primary goal of this study was to compute sample sizes required to achieve the each aim of a variety of foot-and-mouth disease (FMD) surveillance programs, using a statistically valid technique that takes the following factors into account: sensitivity (Se) and specificity (Sp) of diagnostic test system, desired minimum detectable prevalence, precision, population size, and desired power of the survey. In addition, sample sizes to detect FMD if the disease is present and also as proof of freedom were computed. The current FMD active surveillance programs consist of clinical, virological, and serological surveillance. For the 2012 serological surveillance, annual sample sizes (n = 265,065) are planned at four separate levels: statistical (n = 60,884) and targeted (n = 115,232) at breeding pig farms and slaughter house, in together with the detection of structural proteins (SP) antibodies against FMD (n = 88,949). Overall, the sample size was not designed taking the specific aims of each surveillance stream into account. The sample sizes for statistical surveillance, assuming stratified two-stage sampling technique, was based to detect at least one FMD-infected case in the general population. The resulting sample size can be used to obtain evidence of freedom from FMD infection, not for detecting animals that have antibodies against FMD virus non-structural proteins (NSP). Additionally, sample sizes for targeted surveillance were not aimed for the population at risk, and also without consideration of statistical point of view. To at least the author's knowledge, sampling plan for targeted, breeding pig farms and slaughter house is not necessary and need to be included in the part of statistical surveillance. Assuming design prevalence of 10% in an infinite population, a total of 29 animals are required to detect at least one positive with probability of 95%, using perfect diagnostic test system (Se = Sp = 100%). A total of 57,211 animals needed to be sampled to give 95% confidence of estimating SP prevalence of 80% at the individual animal-level with a precision of ${\pm}5%$, assuming 800 herds with an average 200 heads per farm, within-farm variance of 0.2, between-farm variance of 0.05, cost ratio of 100:1 of farm against animals. Furthermore, 779,736 animals were required to demonstrate FMD freedom, and the sample size can further be reduced depending on the parameters assumed.

Keywords

References

  1. Anonymous. Report on the foot-and-mouth disease epidemic. Ministry of Public Administration and Security, Seoul. 2011; 721-724.
  2. Brocchi E, Bergmann IE, Dekker A, Paton DJ, Sammin DJ, Greiner M, Grazioli S, De Simone F, Yadin H, Haas B, Bulut N, Malirat V, Neitzert E, Goris N, Parida S, Sorensen K, De Clercq K. Comparative evaluation of six ELISAs for the detection of antibodies to the non-structural proteins of footand- mouth disease virus. Vaccine 2006; 24: 6966-6979. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2006.04.050
  3. Cameron AR, Baldock FC. Two-stage sampling in survey to substantiate freedom from disease. Prev Vet Med 1998; 34: 19-30. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-5877(97)00073-1
  4. Cameron AR. Survey toolbox: a practical manual ans software package for active surveillance of livestock diseases in developing countries. Ver 1.0. Australian Center for International Agricultural Research. Canberra, Australia, 1999.
  5. Carpenter TE, Thurmond MC, Bates TW. A simulation model of intraherd transmission of foot and mouth disease with reference to disease spread before and after clinical diagnosis. J Vet Diagn Invest 2004; 16: 11-16. https://doi.org/10.1177/104063870401600103
  6. Davies PR, Wayne SR, Torrison JL, Peele B, de Groot BD, Wray D. Real time disease surveillance tools for the swine industry in Minnesota. Vet Ital 2007; 43: 731-738.
  7. Farver TB. Disease prevalence estimation in animal populations using two-stage sampling designs. Prev Vet Med 1987; 5: 1-20. https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-5877(87)90002-X
  8. Fosgate GT. Modified exact sample size for a binomial proportion with special emphasis on diagnostic test parameter estimation. Stat Med 2005; 24: 2857-2866. https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.2146
  9. McDermott JJ, Schukken YH, Shoukri MM. Study design and analytic methods for data collected from clusters of animals. Prev Vet Med 1994; 18: 175-191. https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-5877(94)90074-4
  10. Paton DJ, de Clercq K, Greiner M. Dekker A, Brocchi E, Bergmann I, Sammin DJ, Gubbins S, Parida S. Application of non-structural protein antibody tests in substantiating freedom from foot-and-mouth disease virus infection after emergency vaccination of cattle. Vaccine 2006; 24: 6503-6512. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2006.06.032
  11. Sobrino F, Saiz M, Jimenez-Clavero MA, Nunez JI, Rosas MF, Baranowski E, Ley V. Foot-and-mouth disease virus: a long known virus, but a current threat. Vet Res 2001; 32: 1-30. https://doi.org/10.1051/vetres:2001106
  12. Tenzin, Dekker A, Vernooij H, Bouma A, Stegeman A. Rate of foot-and-mouth disease virus transmission by carriers quantified from experimental data. Risk Anal 2008; 28: 303-309. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2008.01020.x
  13. Yoon SS, Kim BH, Shin MS, Yoon HC, Kim YJ, Chang WS, Hwang SC, Seo YS, Lee YJ, Jung JW, Kim DK. Epidemiological report of the 2010-2011 foot-and-mouth disease epidemic. Ministry for Food, Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries, Seoul. 2011, 209-274.