Estimating the value of infectious or noninfectious foot disorder prevention strategies within dairy farms, as influenced by foot disorder incidence rates and prevention effectiveness.


Journal

Journal of dairy science
ISSN: 1525-3198
Titre abrégé: J Dairy Sci
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 2985126R

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
Jan 2019
Historique:
received: 01 05 2018
accepted: 20 09 2018
pubmed: 13 11 2018
medline: 8 2 2019
entrez: 13 11 2018
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

A farm-level stochastic simulation model was adapted to estimate the value of implementing foot disorder prevention on a dairy farm by calculating the return on investment associated with implementation of foot disorder prevention. Two potential strategies for foot disorder prevention were tested: strategy 1 was prevention focused on reducing infectious foot disorders (i.e., digital dermatitis) in the model, and strategy 2 was prevention focused on reducing noninfectious foot disorders (i.e., sole ulcer and white line disease) in the model. For each strategy, we evaluated the effect of foot disorder incidence on the value of prevention by setting the incidence of foot disorders at 3 levels. For strategy 1, the level of digital dermatitis incidence without prevention in all parities was 20, 40, or 60%, and the incidence level of the noninfectious foot disorders in the model were held constant. For strategy 2, levels of sole ulcer and white line disease incidence without prevention in parity ≥3 cows were 5, 15, or 25%, and the incidence level of the infectious foot disorders included in the model were held constant; the incidence levels of noninfectious foot disorders in younger cows were adjusted to be lower. Overall, 6 scenarios were run, 1 for each prevention strategy × foot disorder incidence rate combination. To evaluate how the effectiveness of each prevention strategy would influence the investment value, the effectiveness of prevention could vary from a prevention risk ratio (RR) of 0.0 (100% reduction in disorder incidence) to 1.0 (0% reduction in disorder incidence). When implementing strategy 1, the return on prevention investment per cow-year (mean ± standard deviation) when prevention effectiveness was low (prevention RR = 0.91 to 1.0) and the digital dermatitis incidence rate was originally 20, 40, or 60% was $0.6 ± 0.4, $1.2 ± 0.9, and $1.8 ± 1.3, respectively. In comparison, the return on prevention investment per cow-year when prevention effectiveness was high (prevention RR = 0.00 to 0.09) and the digital dermatitis incidence rate was originally 20, 40, or 60% was $12.2 ± 3.0, $24.4 ± 6.0, and $36.5 ± 9.0, respectively. When implementing strategy 2, the return on prevention investment per cow-year when prevention effectiveness was low and noninfectious foot disorder incidence rates were originally 5, 15, or 25% in parity ≥3 cows was $0.6 ± 0.4, $1.9 ± 1.1, and $3.2 ± 1.9, respectively. In comparison, the return on prevention investment per cow-year when prevention effectiveness was high and noninfectious foot disorder incidence rates were originally 5, 15, or 25% in parity ≥3 cows was $12.4 ± 1.5, $37.3 ± 4.6, and $62.2 ± 7.6, respectively. The return on investment for foot disorder prevention would depend on the cost of the prevention strategy and the other benefits associated with the selected prevention strategy. This model could be used as a decision support tool to help identify the amount that could be paid to implement a selected prevention strategy.

Identifiants

pubmed: 30415853
pii: S0022-0302(18)31045-2
doi: 10.3168/jds.2018-14996
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

731-741

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2019 American Dairy Science Association. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Auteurs

K A Dolecheck (KA)

Department of Animal and Food Sciences, University of Kentucky, Lexington 40546. Electronic address: karmella.dolecheck@uky.edu.

M W Overton (MW)

Elanco Animal Health, 2500 Innovation Way, Greenfield, IN 46140.

T B Mark (TB)

Department of Agricultural Economics, University of Kentucky, Lexington 40546.

J M Bewley (JM)

Alltech Inc., 3031 Catnip Hill Rd., Nicholasville, KY 40356.

Articles similaires

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male
Humans Meals Time Factors Female Adult

Classifications MeSH