| Literature DB >> 30569230 |
A Asambe1, A K B Sackey2, L B Tekdek2.
Abstract
The present study describes assessment of sanitary measures in piggeries of Benue State, Nigeria, to identify the risk factors of African swine fever. Questionnaires were distributed to 74 respondents consisting of piggery owners and attendants in different piggeries across 12 local government areas (LGAs) to collect data for this study. Sanitary measures in piggeries were observed to be generally very poor, though respondents admitted being aware of ASF. Piggeries located within 1-km radius of a slaughter slab (OR = 9.2, 95% CI 3.0-28.8; p < 0.0001) and piggeries near refuse dump sites (OR = 3.0, 95% CI 1.0-9.5; p < 0.05) showed higher chances of African swine fever virus (ASFV) infection, while piggeries where farm workers wear their work clothes outside of the piggery premises (OR = 0.2, 95% CI 0.1-0.7; p < 0.01) indicate less chances of infection but had a significantly associated p value thus were identified as potential risk factors. The study concluded that pigs in Benue State are still at risk of an ASF outbreak. Proper sanitary and hygienic practices are advocated and emphasized in piggeries, while routine surveillance for African swine fever virus antibodies in pigs in Benue State is strongly recommended to provide a reliable reference database to plan for the prevention of any devastating ASF outbreak.Entities:
Keywords: African swine fever; Awareness; Piggery; Risk factors; Sanitary measures
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30569230 PMCID: PMC6469624 DOI: 10.1007/s11250-018-1764-7
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Trop Anim Health Prod ISSN: 0049-4747 Impact factor: 1.559
Level of compliance with sanitary measures in piggeries
| Measures | Yes (%) |
|---|---|
| Quarantine section within 100 m of the main property | 74 (100) |
| Designated work clothes for the piggery | 17 (23.0) |
| Workers bath in the piggery after work | 27 (36.5) |
| Lend out service boars | 62 (83.8) |
| Clean (wash/sweep) pen floor daily | 12 (16.2) |
| Disinfect pen floor daily | 12 (16.2) |
| Clean (wash) work utensils daily | 74 (100) |
| Carcass burial within 1-km radius | 74 (100) |
| Piggery designated footwear | 12 (16.2) |
| Routine pests control | 12 (16.2) |
| Access by stray animals | 28 (37.8) |
| Presence of rodents on the piggery | 74 (100) |
Awareness of ASF admitted by respondents
| Category | Number of respondents | Yes (%) |
|---|---|---|
| Have you ever heard of ASF? | 74 | 74 (100) |
| Common Signs of ASF Aware of by Respondents | ||
| Abortion | 74 | 10 (13.5) |
| Hyperemia | 74 | 51 (68.9) |
| Weakness | 74 | 13 (17.6) |
Risk factors associated with African swine fever
| Category | OR (95% CI) | χ2/p values |
|---|---|---|
| Slaughter slab within 1-km radius of the pig farm | 9.2 (3.0–28.8) | (χ2 = 20.704, p = 0.000) |
| Refuse dump sites within 1 km radius of the pig farm | 3.1 (1.0–9.5) | (χ2 = 4.458, p = 0.035) |
| Wearing of work clothes outside of the piggery premises | 0.2 (0.1–0.7) | (χ2 = 7.179, p = 0.007) |
| Sharing of farm workers with other pig farms | Constant | Constant |
| Sharing of working utensils with other pig farms | Constant | Constant |
| Source of replacement stock | 1.3 (0.3–6.1) | (χ2 = 0.121, p = 0.728) |
| Feeding of swill to pigs | 0.5 (0.1–2.2) | (χ2 = 0.910, p = 0.340) |
| Nearby pig farm within 1 km radius of each other | 1.3 (0.3–6.1) | (χ2 = 0.135, p = 0.714) |
| Presence of functional foot dip on the pig farm | 1.0 (0.1–7.5) | (χ2 = 0.002, p = 0.962) |
| Presence of ticks on pigs | 0.7 (0.2–3.2) | (χ2 = 0.210, p = 0.647) |
| Pig farm perimeter fencing | 0.7 (0.1–5.6) | (χ2 = 0.108, p = 0.743) |