Why do farmers and veterinarians not report all bovine abortions, as requested by the clinical brucellosis surveillance system in France?

Abstract

BackgroundSince 2005, France has been officially free of brucellosis, an infectious disease that causes abortion in cattle and can be transmitted from cattle to humans. Recent animal and human cases have drawn attention to the need to prevent infection of humans and animals from any primary outbreaks. In order to detect any new outbreaks as soon as possible, a clinical surveillance system requires farmers and veterinarians to report each abortion and to test the aborting cow for brucellosis. However, under-reporting limits the sensitivity of this system. Our objective was to identify the barriers and motivations influencing field actors in their decision to report or not to report bovine abortions. We used a qualitative approach with semi-structured interviews of 12 cattle farmers and their eight veterinarians.ResultsOur analysis showed that four main themes influence the decision-making process of farmers and veterinarians: 1) the perceived risk of brucellosis and other abortive diseases; 2) the definition of a suspected case of brucellosis and other abortive diseases adopted by field actors, which is less sensitive than the mandatory definition; 3) the cost-benefit analysis conducted by actors, taking into account regulatory and health aspects, economic and financial losses, technical and practical factors; 4) the level of cooperation within the socio-technical network. We discussed how early detection may be improved by revising the definition of abortion, extending the time frame for notification and generalising the differential diagnosis of the causes of abortion.ConclusionsIn contrast to quantitative approaches, qualitative studies can identify the factors (including unknown factors) influencing the decision-making process of field actors and reveal why they take those factors into consideration. Our qualitative study sheds light on the factors underlying the poor sensitivity of clinical brucellosis surveillance system for cattle in France, and suggests that early detection may be improved by considering actors’ perceptions. We believe our findings may provide further insight into ways of improving other clinical surveillance systems and thus reduce the risk of disease.

Bovine Brucellosis in Organized Farms of India - An Assessment of Diagnostic Assays and Risk Factors

“…But brucellosis is a complicated disease in terms of diagnosis because of non-pathognomonic nature of infection and the clinical diagnosis cannot be generalized to all age groups, sex, breed and physiological status especially in non-pregnant animals, heifers and bulls. As a result, many cases remain under diagnosed and cause outbreaks in organized dairy farms, there by spreading the disease to other animals and humans (Bronner et al, 2014). This strikingly demands detailed study to assess the diagnostic tests and risk factors for brucellosis in organized farms with respect to species, age, sex, breed, herd size and associated risk factors.…”

Measuring general animal health status: Development of an animal health barometer

“…Third, Belgium has an important beef cattle production and abortion may stay undetected in pregnant beef cattle on pasture. Fourth, it has been described that various, often socio-economical reasons play a role in the underreporting of abortion by farmers (Bronner et al, 2014). Finally, cattle owners are traditionally of the opinion that they only have to notify abortion in case of observation of the expulsion of a dead or non-viable foetus during mid-and end-gestation.…”

Application of discrete choice experiment to assess farmers’ willingness to report swine diseases in the Red River Delta region, Vietnam

“…A distrust in veterinary authorities and control measures is, indeed, listed as an important barrier to disease reporting (Bronner et al, 2014;Elbers et al, 2010;. Here again, the timeliness and reliability of compensation delivery intervene as critical elements in building trust between farmers and officials (World Bank, 2006).…”

“…Various interventions have been suggested to improve the performance of passive surveillance systems based on the investigated farmer's attitude and behavior in animal disease reporting (Bronner et al, 2014;Dung et al, 2006;Elbers et al, 2010;. The most used methods are enhancing public awareness of priority animal diseases and of the importance of early reporting through mass media, the improvement of relationships between farmers and veterinary staff, provision of incentives for reporting, and provision of appropriate compensation for culling animals (Cameron, 2012).…”