BACKGROUND: The 2005-06 avian influenza (AI) epidemic in Dogubayazit and nearby provinces in Eastern Turkey resulted in 12 confirmed human cases and four deaths and the culling of millions of poultry. The aim of this study was to determine the behaviour and perception about AI and the knowledge of breeders whose poultry were culled during the epidemic and to assess the outbreak control efforts with regard to the breeders' experiences. METHODS: Using a cross-sectional design, 510 households whose poultry were culled during the epidemic were selected to represent rural and urban areas of Dogubayazit. Data were collected via face-to-face questionnaire-based interviews in 2008. RESULTS: During the epidemic 17.1% of the households experienced mass death of poultry due to AI, 61.2% 'helped' the culling teams catch and contain the animals and 31.6% reported that their children also took part in this process. Among those that helped the culling teams, 53.8% used nylon bags or gloves to protect their hands and 31.7% covered their mouth and nose. The findings show that epidemic control activities, primarily those of the Turkish Ministry of Agriculture teams, did not include the provision of information to poultry breeders. The teams' field activity consisted of culling poultry and paying the owners for the culled animals. Safer breeding practices were not promoted sufficiently and about half of the breeders stopped breeding poultry after the epidemic. CONCLUSION: Preparedness plans of Turkish Ministry of Agriculture for controlling zoonotic diseases need to be improved through veterinary public health and health promotion approach.
BACKGROUND: The 2005-06 avian influenza (AI) epidemic in Dogubayazit and nearby provinces in Eastern Turkey resulted in 12 confirmed human cases and four deaths and the culling of millions of poultry. The aim of this study was to determine the behaviour and perception about AI and the knowledge of breeders whose poultry were culled during the epidemic and to assess the outbreak control efforts with regard to the breeders' experiences. METHODS: Using a cross-sectional design, 510 households whose poultry were culled during the epidemic were selected to represent rural and urban areas of Dogubayazit. Data were collected via face-to-face questionnaire-based interviews in 2008. RESULTS: During the epidemic 17.1% of the households experienced mass death of poultry due to AI, 61.2% 'helped' the culling teams catch and contain the animals and 31.6% reported that their children also took part in this process. Among those that helped the culling teams, 53.8% used nylon bags or gloves to protect their hands and 31.7% covered their mouth and nose. The findings show that epidemic control activities, primarily those of the Turkish Ministry of Agriculture teams, did not include the provision of information to poultry breeders. The teams' field activity consisted of culling poultry and paying the owners for the culled animals. Safer breeding practices were not promoted sufficiently and about half of the breeders stopped breeding poultry after the epidemic. CONCLUSION: Preparedness plans of Turkish Ministry of Agriculture for controlling zoonotic diseases need to be improved through veterinary public health and health promotion approach.