Assessment of farmer recognition and reporting of lameness in adults in 35 lowland sheep flocks in England

King, Elisabeth M.; Green, Laura

doi:10.1017/s0962728600002888

Cited by 15 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Accurate assessment of lameness prevalence is important for ensuring appropriate prevention measures and prompt treatment ( 14 ). Studies have shown that farmers can have a low awareness or knowledge of lameness, underestimate lameness in their herd or flock, or becoming desensitized to lame animals ( 14 , 37 , 39 , 40 ). Previous research has shown that the emotional aspects of motivation affect behavior ( 13 ) and that habit is often a barrier to changing farmer behavior ( 80 ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Furthermore, there is evidence to suggest that perceptions and understandings of lameness present particular challenges for its effective management. A lack of awareness of lameness (37), inaccurate perceptions of lameness levels (38), or underestimated levels all make early identification and treatment difficult (24,(39)(40)(41). Moreover, for some farmers, lameness is simply accepted as an inevitable part of farming process (29,32,42).…”

Section: Challenges In Lameness Managementmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Exploring farmer and advisor lameness management behaviors using the COM-B model of behavior change

Clark,

Proctor,

Mahon

et al. 2024

Front. Vet. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionThis paper applies the COM-B framework to farmer and farm advisor understandings and responses to lameness in sheep, beef, and dairy systems. It reflects on how farmers' and advisors' capability, opportunity, and motivation (COM-B) influence lameness management practices in these farming systems, and considers the interaction between these three factors, and stakeholders' behavior.MethodsInterviews with 29 farmers and 21 farm advisors in the north of England were conducted. Thematic analysis was undertaken with results categorized in relation to the COM-B framework focusing on barriers and enablers of lameness management. Use of the COM-B model provides a useful means of understanding the underlying behavioral mechanisms that contribute toward the persistence of lameness. This includes the complexities and interactions which hamper implementation of lameness management best practice.Results and discussionThe findings highlight three key areas to address with interventions to improve lameness management on farm: (1) removing physical and social barriers for lameness management; (2) improving psychological capability and motivation for lameness management; and (3) facilitating relationships and developing communication between farmers and advisors. In particular, the value of exploring both farmer and advisor perspectives on behavior in the animal health context is demonstrated. Future interventions should look to target these three areas to overcome barriers and focus on factors that enable positive lameness practices to occur.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Challenges In Lameness Managementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Exploring farmer and advisor lameness management behaviors using the COM-B model of behavior change

Clark,

Proctor,

Mahon

et al. 2024

Front. Vet. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Changes in prevalence of, and risk factors for, lameness in random samples of English sheep flocks: 2004–2013

Winter

Kaler

Ferguson

et al. 2015

Preventive Veterinary Medicine

141

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

1The aims of this study were to update the prevalence of lameness in sheep in England 2 and identify novel risk factors. A total of 1260 sheep farmers responded to a postal 3 survey. The survey captured detailed information on the period prevalence of 4 lameness from May 2012 -April 2013 and the prevalence and farmer naming of 5 lesions attributable to interdigital dermatitis (ID), severe footrot (SFR), contagious 6 ovine digital dermatitis (CODD) and shelly hoof (SH), management and treatment 7 of lameness, and farm and flock details. 8The global mean prevalence of lameness fell between 2004 and 2013 from 10.6% to 9 4.9% and the geometric flock mean period prevalence of lameness fell from 5.4% 10 (95% CL: 4.7-6.0%) to 3.5% (95% CI: 3.3%-3.7%). In 2013, more farmers were 11 using vaccination and antibiotic treatment for ID and SFR and fewer farmers were 12 using foot trimming as a routine or in therapeutic treatment than in 2004. 13Two over-dispersed Poisson regression models were developed with the outcome the 14 period prevalence of lameness, one investigated associations with farmer estimates of 15 prevalence of the four foot lesions and one investigated associations with 16 management practices to control and treat lameness and footrot. A prevalence of ID 17 >10%, SFR >2.5% and CODD >2.5% were associated with a higher prevalence of 18 lameness compared with those lesions being absent, however, the prevalence of SH 19was not associated with a change in risk of lameness. 20 A key novel management risk associated with higher prevalence of lameness was the 21 rate of feet bleeding / 100 ewes trimmed / year. In addition, vaccination of ewes once 22 per year and selecting breeding replacements from never-lame ewes were associated 23 with a decreased risk of lameness. Other factors identified as associated with a lower 24 3 risk of lameness, for the first time in a random sample of farmers and a full risk 25 model, were recognising lameness in sheep at locomotion score 1 compared with 26 higher scores, treatment of the first lame sheep in a group compared with >5, 27 treatment of lame sheep within 3 days, ease of catching lame sheep and quarantine 28 for >21 days. A previously known factor associated with a lower risk of lameness 29 was footbathing to prevent ID. We conclude that the prevalence of lameness in sheep 30 in England has fallen and that this might be in part because of increased uptake of 31 managements previously reported as beneficial to control lameness. Routine foot 32 trimming should be avoided. 33 4

show abstract

Associations between sheep farmer attitudes, beliefs, emotions and personality, and their barriers to uptake of best practice: The example of footrot

O’Kane

Ferguson

Kaler

et al. 2017

Preventive Veterinary Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is interest in understanding how farmers’ behaviour influences their management of livestock. We extend the theory of planned behaviour with farmers attitudes, beliefs, emotions and personality to investigate how these are associated with management of livestock disease using the example of footrot (FR) in sheep.In May 2013 a one-year retrospective questionnaire was sent to 4000 sheep farmers in England, requesting data on lameness prevalence, management of footrot, farm/flock descriptors, and farmer-orientated themes: barriers to treating footrot, opinions and knowledge of footrot, relating to other people and personality. Principal component analysis (PCA) was used to make composite variables from explanatory variables and latent class (LC) analysis was used to subgroup farmers, based on nine managements of FR. Associations between LC and composite variables were investigated using multinomial logistic regression. Negative binomial regression was used to investigate associations between the proportion of lame sheep and composite and personality variables.The useable response rate was 32% and 97% of farmers reported having lame sheep; the geometric mean prevalence of lameness (GMPL) was 3.7% (95% CI 3.51%–3.86%).Participants grouped into three latent classes; LC1 (best practice—treat FR within 3 days of sheep becoming lame; use injectable and topical antibiotics; avoid foot trimming), 11% farmers), LC2 (slow to act, 57%) and LC3 (slow to act, delayed culling, 32%), with GMPL 2.95%, 3.60% and 4.10% respectively.Farmers who reported the production cycle as a barrier to treating sheep with FR were more likely to be in LC2 (RRR 1.36) than LC1. Negative emotions towards FR were associated with higher risk of being in LC2 (RRR 1.39) than LC1. Knowledge of preventing FR spread was associated with a lower risk of being in LC2 (RRR 0.46) or LC3 (RRR 0.34) than LC1. Knowledge about FR transmission was associated with a lower risk of being in LC3 (RRR 0.64) than LC1.An increased risk of lameness was associated with the production cycle being a barrier to treating sheep with FR (IRR 1.13), negative emotions towards FR (IRR 1.13) and feelings of hopelessness towards FR (IRR 1.20). Conscientiousness (IRR 0.95) and understanding the importance of active control of lameness (IRR 0.76) were associated with reduced risk of lameness.We conclude that emotions and personality are associated with differences in farmer management of FR and prevalence of lameness. Further understanding how personality and emotions influence change in behaviour is key to increasing uptake of new information.

show abstract

Assessment of farmer recognition and reporting of lameness in adults in 35 lowland sheep flocks in England

Cited by 15 publications

References 15 publications

Exploring farmer and advisor lameness management behaviors using the COM-B model of behavior change

Exploring farmer and advisor lameness management behaviors using the COM-B model of behavior change

Changes in prevalence of, and risk factors for, lameness in random samples of English sheep flocks: 2004–2013

Associations between sheep farmer attitudes, beliefs, emotions and personality, and their barriers to uptake of best practice: The example of footrot

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About