Establishing the spread of bluetongue virus at the end of the 2006 epidemic in Belgium.

Bluetongue (BT) was notified for the first time in several Northern European countries in August 2006. The first reported outbreaks of BT were confirmed in herds located near the place where Belgium, The Netherlands and Germany share borders. The disease was rapidly and widely disseminated throughout Belgium in both sheep and cattle herds. During the epidemic, case reporting by the Veterinary Authorities relied almost exclusively on the identification of herds with confirmed clinical infected ruminants. A cross-sectional serological survey targeting all Belgian ruminants was then undertaken during the vector-free season. The first objective of this study was to provide unbiased estimates of BT-seroprevalence for different regions of Belgium. Since under-reporting was suspected during the epidemic, a second goal was to compare the final dispersion of the virus based on the seroprevalence estimates to the dispersion of the confirmed clinical cases which were notified in Belgium, in order to estimate the accuracy of the case detection based on clinical suspicion. True within-herd seroprevalence was estimated based on a logistic-normal regression model with prior specification on the diagnostic test's sensitivity and specificity. The model was fitted in a Bayesian framework. Herd seroprevalence was estimated using a logistic regression model. To study the linear correlation between the BT winter screening data and the case-herds data, the linear predicted values for the herd prevalence were compared and the Pearson correlation coefficient was estimated. The overall herd and true within-herd seroprevalences were estimated at 83.3 (79.2-87.0) and 23.8 (20.1-28.1)%, respectively. BT seropositivity was shown to be widely but unevenly distributed throughout Belgium, with a gradient decreasing towards the south and the west of the country. The analysis has shown there was a strong correlation between the outbreak data and the data from the survey (r=0.73, p<0.0001). The case detection system based on clinical suspicion underestimated the real impact of the epidemic, but indicated an accurate spatial distribution of the virus at the end of the epidemic.