Epidemiological factors and mitigation measures influencing production losses in cattle due to bovine viral diarrhoea virus infection: A meta‐analysis

Abstract

Infection with bovine viral diarrhoea virus (BVDV) is associated with a loss in productivity in cattle farms. Determining which factors influence monetary losses due to BVDV could facilitate the implementation of mitigation measures to reduce the burden of BVDV. Mixed‐effect meta‐analysis models were performed to estimate the extent to which the costs of mean annual BVDV production losses per animal may be influenced by epidemiological factors such as BVDV introduction risk, initial prevalence, viral circulation intensity and circulation duration (trial 1). Additionally, changes in mean annual BVDV production losses per animal due to specific mitigation measures (i.e., biosecurity, vaccination, testing and culling, cattle introduction or contact with neighbouring cattle herds) were analysed (trial 2). In total, 19 studies were included in the meta‐analysis to assess mean annual BVDV production losses. The mean annual direct losses were determined to be €42.14 per animal (trial 1). The multivariate meta‐regression showed that four of the previously mentioned epidemiological factors significantly influenced the mean annual BVDV production losses per animal. Indeed, the per animal costs increased to €67.19 when these four factors (trial 1) were considered as “high or moderate” compared to “low”. The meta‐regression analysis revealed that implementation of vaccination and biosecurity measures were associated with an 8%–12% and 28%–29% decrease in BVDV production losses on average, respectively, when simulated herds were compared with or without such mitigation measures (trial 2). This reduction of mean annual BVDV production losses per animal due to mitigation measures was partially counteracted when farmers brought new cattle on to farm or allowed contact with neighbouring cattle herds. The influencing mitigation factors presented here could help to guide farmers in their decision to implement mitigation strategies for the control of BVDV at farm level.

Prevalence and risk factors of bovine viral diarrhea in Colombian cattle

“…In the present study, some of these were initially identified as risk factors with independent Chi-square tests (e.g., the existence of corrals in the farm, and use of mechanical milking), although none of them were significant under the multivariate logistic regression analysis. The large heterogeneity of epidemiological and mitigation factors among BVDV studies might be attributed to different modeling approaches and to the omission of covariates such as herd immunity, management practices, age of animals, stocking rate, and community pasturing activities [ 30 ], which are of remarkable importance in pasture-based systems, the predominant cattle farming strategy in the South American region.…”

A survey of biosecurity measures and serological status for bovine viral diarrhoea virus and bovine herpesvirus 1 on dairy cattle farms in north‐west and north‐east Spain

“…32 Therefore, farmers need to be motivated both to change existing behaviours and to implement effective biosecurity practices to reduce the risk of disease introduction. [33][34][35] MCA and TSCA show that there are three main farm typologies in relation to the implementation of biosecurity measures differentiated mainly by region (which implies different implementation of BVDV and BoHV-1 control programmes) and herd size. Although some biosecurity limitations were common, others were more specific to each cluster, similar to the observation made by Sarrazin and others.…”

Bovine Pestivirus Heterogeneity and Its Potential Impact on Vaccination and Diagnosis

“…Bovine pestiviruses are an important group of pathogens that cause significant economic losses to the cattle industry worldwide [ 19 ]. BVD is well recognised as an economic factor of cattle production in the western world but less so in the developing world including emerging economies, such as Brazil, where it is not yet considered in disease control programmes.…”