Cost-benefit analysis of sheep and goat brucellosis vaccination with Rev.1 in the north of Portugal from 2000 to 2005

Abstract

In the North of Portugal, a mass vaccination programme of small ruminants was conducted from 2001 to 2004. A study of cost-benefit was carried out for the 2000/2005 period to ascertain the economic benefits of this strategy. In order to estimate the cost of the zoonosis, the compensation costs paid to farmers for culled animals in the Brucellosis Eradication Campaign, data from vaccine Rev. 1 costs, and costs of people internment due to brucellosis were studied. An increase in the cost was observed from 2000 to 2001 (aproximately US$ 110,000), essentially due to compensation for culled animals, but also from vaccination and human internment costs. However, a progressive decrease was observed from 2001 to 2004 (from more than US$1,200,000 in 2001 to US$180,000 in 2004), roughly US$ 1,020,000 less. As the main conclusion, the annual cost of this zoonosis decreased by an average of almost US$600,000 per year, and a total of more than three million dollars were saved from 2000 to 2005. The results of this study suggest that mass vaccination with Rev. 1 reduced overall costs and was effective in reducing animal and human brucellosis costs

The Price of a Neglected Zoonosis: Case-Control Study to Estimate Healthcare Utilization Costs of Human Brucellosis

“…Human brucellosis was associated with 7.9 times higher hospitalization costs compared to controls. Similar trend was observed in a study conducted in Portugal [ 17 ] where hospitalization costs had decreased considerably following a five-year brucellosis control program. This higher utilization may be derived from three reasons: First, brucellosis is one of the “great imitators” and patients with the disease frequently present with symptoms and signs mimicking other infectious and non-infectious conditions such as rheumatic diseases, hepatitis, hematological disorders, etc.…”

“…Most of the evidence was based on Delphi expert opinion and population surveys [ 16 , 19 ]. To the best of our knowledge, a single study examined the actual costs of hospitalizations before and after the implementation of brucellosis control program, yet only on an aggregate level [ 17 ]. The purpose of the current study was to examine annual HCU of patients with brucellosis before and after diagnosis and compared to healthy controls from the insurer perspective.…”

Financial analysis of brucellosis control for small-scale goat farming in the Bajío region, Mexico

“…However, these scenarios were associated with high costs and our estimations show that they are not economically profitable at the current milk price. In a small ruminant brucellosis control programme in Portugal, compensating farmers for culling test-positive animals contributed most to all costs (Coelho et al, 2011). Testand-slaughter has high initial costs and the benefits of this control strategy are not seen in the short term.…”

“…Pioneer studies of cost-benefit analysis of brucellosis control in cattle were done in the UK and in Spain (Hugh-Jones et al, 1976;Bernués et al, 1997). More recently Coelho et al (2011) reported a cost-benefit analysis of brucellosis control in small ruminants in the North of Portugal. Roth et al (2003) provided the most comprehensive study on the economics of brucellosis control by estimating the benefits for the livestock sector and for public health in Mongolia.…”

Importance of brucellosis control programs of livestock on the improvement of one health

“…Although this approach is expensive for farmers and governments, it represents an effective protocol for eradicating all emerging and re-emerging zoonotic livestock diseases when the disease prevalence is low (not exceeding 2%) (Zamri-Saad and Kamarudin 2016). The screening test for identification of infected herd or farm is the RBT, although the complement fixation test (CFT) is often applied as a complementary confirmation test (Coelho et al 2011;Zamri-Saad and Kamarudin 2016).…”