Simple SummaryFurther understanding of why dairy farmers do not engage in disease prevention and control strategies (biosecurity) is required. Using semi-structured interviews informed by a health psychology approach with 25 dairy farmers, a number of barriers, such as disease testing inaccuracies, types of disease transmission, perceived lack of risk and effectiveness of measures, were identified. Motivators included being advised to undertake measures by veterinarians, and the increased threat and severity of the disease in focus. These results suggest there is an advantage to farm advisors and herd health professionals understanding and working with the beliefs of individual dairy farmers to target appropriate communication and advice strategies relating to biosecurity recommendations.AbstractDisease prevention and control practices are frequently highlighted as important to ensure the health and welfare of farmed animals, although little is known as to why not many practices are carried out. The aim of this study was to identify the motivators and barriers of dairy cattle farmers towards the use of biosecurity measures on dairy farms using a health psychology approach. Twenty-five farmers on 24 farms in Great Britain (GB) were interviewed using the Theory of Planned Behaviour framework. Results indicated that farmers perceived they had the ability to control what happened on their farms in terms of preventing and controlling disease, and described benefits from being proactive and vigilant. However, barriers were cited in relation to testing inaccuracies, effectiveness and time-efficiency of practices, and disease transmission route (e.g., airborne transmission). Farmers reported they were positively influenced by veterinarians and negatively influenced by the government (Department for Environment Food & Rural Affairs (DEFRA)) and the general public. Decisions to implement practices were influenced by the perceived severity of the disease in question, if disease was diagnosed on the farm already, or was occurring on other farms. Farmers described undertaking a form of personal risk assessment when deciding if practices were worth doing, which did not always involve building in disease specific factors or opinions from veterinarians or other advisors. These results indicate that further guidance about the intricacies of control and prevention principles in relation to specific animal diseases may be required, with an obvious role for veterinarians. There appears to be an opportunity for farm advisors and herd health professionals to further understand farmer beliefs behind certain attitudes and target communication and advice accordingly to further enhance dairy cattle health and welfare.

It has been recognised that few cattle farmers undertake biosecurity practices on their farms. Approaches that take into consideration individuals' preparedness for change, alongside beliefs thought to motivate the enactment of certain behaviours, may provide a framework for actuating tangible change. The aim of this study was to use a combination of behaviour change models to link beliefs with behaviour and identify possible key interventions to improve the uptake of biosecurity measures by dairy cattle farmers in Great Britain (GB). This is the first study to explore farmers' practices and attitudes in relation to the prevention of direct (animal to animal contact); indirect (via fomites); and other biosecurity measures using a multitheory approach. A cross-sectional study was carried out, with postal questionnaires sent to 2505 dairy cattle farmers. Questions were asked about the extent to which a host of biosecurity measures were used, the influence of various stakeholders (e.g. veterinarians, industry bodies) in informing biosecurity choices, and the perceived control farmers felt they had over biosecurity on their farms. Farmer attitudes towards biosecurity were also explored. Two behaviour change models, the Transtheoretical Model, and the Theory of Planned Behaviour, were utilised. A variety of analysis methods were used to interrogate the data, including multivariable logistic regression. A total of 908/2505 (36.2%) farmers responded, with 757 responses (30.2%) deemed eligible for inclusion. Farmers generally fell into one of two categories: those that reported not applying biosecurity measures with no intention of doing so in the future, and those that reported undertaking biosecurity measures for some time. Farmers felt that biosecurity improved cattle health and welfare, but also felt that disease was inevitable. More farmers agreed with statements relating to their ability to control, rather than prevent disease. Analysis suggested a difference between influencing beliefs and whether specific types of measure were more likely to be undertaken. For example, farmers' beliefs about other stakeholders appeared to play a role in influencing the utilisation of measures preventing direct contact (e.g. nose to nose contact), rather than indirect contact (e.g. fomite transmission). The use of a combination of behaviour change models has identified key variables to use for interventional approaches targeted towards the different type of biosecurity measure (preventing direct or indirect transmission) to improve the uptake of biosecurity on dairy cattle farms in GB. Other industry stakeholders should be aware of these variables when working with farmers to achieve optimal cattle herd health.

There is limited research investigating the motivators and barriers to vaccinating dairy cattle. Veterinary surgeons have been identified as important sources of information for farmers making vaccination and disease control decisions, as well as being farmers’ preferred vaccine suppliers. Vets’ perception of their own role and communication style can be at odds with farmers’ reported preferences. The objective of this study was to investigate how dairy farmers perceived the role of vets in implementing vaccination strategies on their farm. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 24 dairy farmers from across Britain. The data were analysed using thematic analysis. Analysis revealed that farmers perceive vets to have an important role in facilitating decision-making in all aspects of vaccination, including the aspects of vaccine distribution and advice on implementation. This important role is acknowledged by farmers who have regular veterinary contact, but also farmers with solely emergency veterinary contact. Given this finding, future work should investigate the attitudes of vets towards vaccination and how they perceive their role. Combining this knowledge will enable optimisation of vaccination strategies on British dairy farms.

Vaccination is a commonly used disease control strategy in dairy farming in the UK. Farmers perceive their veterinarian to be the most important source of information for vaccination advice. However, poor compliance and perceived confusion on appropriate vaccination strategies suggest that there is variation in the advice that farmers are receiving. This study compared veterinarians', veterinary students' and farmers' perceptions and approach to vaccination strategies on dairy farms through the use of survey questions, discussion groups and a posed case scenario. The vaccination advice for one case scenario was variable between many participants in this study. Results suggest that although veterinarians are aware of suboptimal farmer compliance, and they recognise the motivators and barriers of farmers to comply with vaccination, actions to improve farmer compliance could be improved. Suggestions are given to provide veterinarians with, currently lacking, information which is helpful in the decision‐making process to achieve the best vaccination advice. The study also addresses potential areas which may aid communication and compliance when implementing vaccination strategies on UK dairy farms.

The use of vaccines in the cattle industry is widespread; however, there is limited published guidance for use by decision-makers such as farmers and vets. To best support vets in advising dairy farmers on the optimisation of vaccination strategies, it is important to understand how and why vets make decisions about recommending the vaccination of cattle. The objective of this study was to explore in-depth farm animal vets' motivators and barriers to the implementation of vaccination strategies on British dairy farms. Semistructured interviews were conducted with 15 vets. Results indicated that vets have a positive attitude towards the use of vaccination and have few barriers to advising its implementation. Vets appear to group farmers into three 'character types'. This characterisation influences the vet-farmer relationship and how the vet communicates with the farmer. Vets required evidence of disease or a risk of disease as a motivator to advise vaccination. However, this seemed to be sometimes overruled by a risk-averse attitude; resulting in vaccination being advised 'just in case'. Crucially, the need for resources to support and build on the vet-farmer relationship is highlighted as an area requiring further exploration in order to optimise vaccination strategies on farm.