Literature DB >> 29785893

Evaluating vaccination strategies to control foot-and-mouth disease: a country comparison study.

T G Rawdon1, M G Garner2, R L Sanson3, M A Stevenson4, C Cook5, C Birch5, S E Roche2, K A Patyk6, K N Forde-Folle6, C Dubé7, T Smylie8, Z D Yu9.   

Abstract

Vaccination is increasingly being recognised as a potential tool to supplement 'stamping out' for controlling foot-and-mouth disease (FMD) outbreaks in non-endemic countries. Infectious disease simulation models provide the opportunity to determine how vaccination might be used in the face of an FMD outbreak. Previously, consistent relative benefits of specific vaccination strategies across different FMD simulation modelling platforms have been demonstrated, using a UK FMD outbreak scenario. We extended this work to assess the relative effectiveness of selected vaccination strategies in five countries: Australia, New Zealand, the USA, the UK and Canada. A comparable, but not identical, FMD outbreak scenario was developed for each country with initial seeding of Pan Asia type O FMD virus into an area with a relatively high density of livestock farms. A series of vaccination strategies (in addition to stamping out (SO)) were selected to evaluate key areas of interest from a disease response perspective, including timing of vaccination, species considerations (e.g. vaccination of only those farms with cattle), risk area vaccination and resources available for vaccination. The study found that vaccination used with SO was effective in reducing epidemic size and duration in a severe outbreak situation. Early vaccination and unconstrained resources for vaccination consistently outperformed other strategies. Vaccination of only those farms with cattle produced comparable results, with some countries demonstrating that this could be as effective as all species vaccination. Restriction of vaccination to higher risk areas was less effective than other strategies. This study demonstrates consistency in the relative effectiveness of selected vaccination strategies under different outbreak start up conditions conditional on the assumption that each of the simulation models provide a realistic estimation of FMD virus spread. Preferred outbreak management approaches must however balance the principles identified in this study, working to clearly defined outbreak management objectives, while having a good understanding of logistic requirements and the socio-economic implications of different control measures.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Disease spread; foot-and-mouth disease; model comparison; modelling; relative validation; vaccination

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29785893      PMCID: PMC9134278          DOI: 10.1017/S0950268818001243

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Epidemiol Infect        ISSN: 0950-2688            Impact factor:   4.434


  28 in total

1.  Predicting undetected infections during the 2007 foot-and-mouth disease outbreak.

Authors:  C P Jewell; M J Keeling; G O Roberts
Journal:  J R Soc Interface       Date:  2008-12-16       Impact factor: 4.118

2.  Probability tables for individual comparisons by ranking methods.

Authors:  F WILCOXIN
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  1947-09       Impact factor: 2.571

3.  Consideration of different outbreak conditions in the evaluation of preventive culling and emergency vaccination to control foot and mouth disease epidemics.

Authors:  Imke Traulsen; Gerhard Rave; Jürgen Teuffert; Joachim Krieter
Journal:  Res Vet Sci       Date:  2011-02-05       Impact factor: 2.534

4.  Evaluating the benefits of vaccination when used in combination with stamping-out measures against hypothetical introductions of foot-and-mouth disease into New Zealand: a simulation study.

Authors:  R L Sanson; T Rawdon; K Owen; K Hickey; M van Andel; Z D Yu
Journal:  N Z Vet J       Date:  2017-01-11       Impact factor: 1.628

5.  InterSpread Plus: a spatial and stochastic simulation model of disease in animal populations.

Authors:  M A Stevenson; R L Sanson; M W Stern; B D O'Leary; M Sujau; N Moles-Benfell; R S Morris
Journal:  Prev Vet Med       Date:  2012-09-17       Impact factor: 2.670

6.  Evaluation of the benefit of emergency vaccination in a foot-and-mouth disease free country with low livestock density.

Authors:  Salome Dürr; Céline Fasel-Clemenz; Barbara Thür; Heinzpeter Schwermer; Marcus G Doherr; Heinrich Zu Dohna; Tim E Carpenter; Lukas Perler; Daniela C Hadorn
Journal:  Prev Vet Med       Date:  2013-10-24       Impact factor: 2.670

7.  Modelling vaccination strategies against foot-and-mouth disease.

Authors:  M J Keeling; M E J Woolhouse; R M May; G Davies; B T Grenfell
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2002-12-22       Impact factor: 49.962

8.  Evaluating vaccination strategies to control foot-and-mouth disease: a model comparison study.

Authors:  S E Roche; M G Garner; R L Sanson; C Cook; C Birch; J A Backer; C Dube; K A Patyk; M A Stevenson; Z D Yu; T G Rawdon; F Gauntlett
Journal:  Epidemiol Infect       Date:  2014-07-31       Impact factor: 4.434

9.  Adaptive management and the value of information: learning via intervention in epidemiology.

Authors:  Katriona Shea; Michael J Tildesley; Michael C Runge; Christopher J Fonnesbeck; Matthew J Ferrari
Journal:  PLoS Biol       Date:  2014-10-21       Impact factor: 8.029

10.  Semiquantitative Decision Tools for FMD Emergency Vaccination Informed by Field Observations and Simulated Outbreak Data.

Authors:  Preben William Willeberg; Mohammad AlKhamis; Anette Boklund; Andres M Perez; Claes Enøe; Tariq Halasa
Journal:  Front Vet Sci       Date:  2017-03-27
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.