Authors: Marisabel Caballero, Global Technical Manager Poultry, and Fellipe Freitas Barbosa, Global Technical Manager Swine, EW Nutrition.
Biosecurity is the foundation for all disease
prevention programs (Dewulf, et al., 2018), and one of the most important
points in antibiotic reduction scenarios. It includes the combination of all
measures taken to reduce the risk of introduction and spread of diseases. It is
based on the prevention of and protection against infectious agents by
understating the disease transmission processes.
The application of consistently high standards of
biosecurity can substantially contribute to the reduction of antimicrobial
resistance, not only by preventing the introduction of resistance genes into
the farm but also by lowering the need to use antimicrobials (Davies
& Wales, 2019).
LOWER USE OF ANTIMICROBIALS
WITH HIGHER BIOSECURITY
Several studies and assessments relate that high
farm biosecurity status and/or improvements in biosecurity lead to reduced antimicrobial use (Laanen, et al.,
2013, Gelaude, et al., 2014, Postma, et al., 2016, Collineau, et al., 2017 and
Collineau, et al., 2017a). Laanen, Postma, and Collineau studied the profile of
swine farmers in different European countries, finding a relation between the
high level of internal biosecurity, efficient control of infectious diseases,
and reduced need for antimicrobials.
Reports on reduction on antibiotic use due to
farm interventions are also available. Gelaude, et al. (2014), evaluated data
from several Belgian broiler farms, finding a reduction of antimicrobial use by
almost 30% within a year when biosecurity and other farm issues were improved.
Collineau et al. (2017) studied pig farms in Belgium, France, Germany, and
Sweden, in which the use of antibiotics was reduced on average by 47% across
all farms. The researches observed that farms with the most strict biosecurity protocols,
higher compliance, and who also took a multidisciplinary approach (making other
changes, e.g. in management and nutrition), achieved a greater reduction of
antibiotic use.
BIOSECURITY INTERVENTIONS PAY
OFF
Of course, the interventions necessary to achieve
an increased level of biosecurity carry some costs. However, the interventions
have proven to also improve productivity. Especially if taken with other
measures such as improved management of newborn animals and nutritional
improvements. The same studies which report that biosecurity improvements
decrease antibiotics use also report an improvement in animal performance. In
the case of broilers, Laanen (2013) found a reduction of 0.5 percentual points
in mortality and one point in FCR; and Collineau (2017) reported a reduction in
mortality in pigs during both the pre-weaning and fattening period of 0.7 and
0.9 percentual points, respectively.
EXECUTION
Although biosecurity improvements and other
interventions necessary for antibiotic reduction programs are well known,
continuous compliance of these interventions is often low and difficult.
The implementation, application, and execution of any biosecurity program
involve adopting a set of attitudes and behaviors to reduce the risk of
entrance and spread of disease in all activities involving animal production or
animal care. Measures should not be constraints but part of a process aimed to
improve health of animals and people, and a piece of the multidisciplinary
approach to reduce antibiotics and improve performance.
DESIGNING EFFECTIVE
BIOSECURITY PROGRAMS: CONSIDER FIVE PRINCIPLES
When designing or evaluating biosecurity
programs, we can identify five principles that need to be applied (Dewulf, et
al., 2018). These principles set the ground for considering and evaluating
biosecurity interventions:
1. Separation: Know your enemy, but don’t keep it close
It is vital to have a good definition of the
perimeter of the farm, a separation between high and low-risk animals, and
dirty and clean internal areas on the farm. This avoids not only the entrance
but the spread of disease, as possible sources of infection (e.g. animals being
introduced in the herd and wild birds) cannot reach the sensitive population.
2. Reduction: Weaken your enemy, so it doesn’t spread
The goal of the biosecurity measures is to keep
infection pressure beneath the level which allows the natural immunity of the
animals to cope with the infections (Dewulf, et al., 2018). Lowering the
pressure of infection e.g. by an effective cleaning and disinfection program,
by the reduction of the stocking density, and by changing footwear when
entering a production house.
3. Focus: Hunt the elephant in the room, shoo the butterflies
In each production unit, some pathogens can be
identified as of high economic importance due to their harm and frequency. For
each of these, it is even more important, to understand the likely routes of
introduction into a farm and how it can spread within it. Taking into
consideration that not all disease transmission routes are equally significant,
the design of the biosecurity program should focus first on high-risk pathogens
and transmission routes, and only subsequently on the ones lower-risk (Dewulf,
et al., 2018).
4. Repetition:
When the danger is frequent, the probability of injury is increased
In addition to the probability of pathogen
transmission via the different transmission routes, the frequency of occurrence
of the transmission route is also highly significant when evaluating a risk
(Alarcon, et al., 2013). When designing biosecurity programs, risky actions
such as veterinary visits, if repeated regularly must be considered with a
higher risk.
5. Scaling: In the multitude, it is easy to disguise
The risks related to disease introduction and
spread are much more important in big farms (Dorea, et al., 2010); more animals
may be infected and maintain the infection cycle, also large flocks/herds
increase the infection pressure and increase the risk by contact with external
elements such as feed, visitors, etc.
CAN WE STILL IMPROVE OUR
BIOSECURITY?
Almost 100% of poultry and swine operations
already have a nominal biosecurity program, but not in all cases is it fully
effective. BioCheck UGent, a standardized biosecurity questionnaire applied in
swine and broiler farms worldwide, shows an average of 65% and 68% in
conformity, respectively, from more than 3000 farms between both species
(UGent, 2020). Therefore, opportunities to improve can be found in farms
globally, and they pay off.
To find these opportunities, consider
three situations you need to know:
- Know
your menace: Identify and prioritize the disease
agents of greatest concern for your production system by applying the
principles of focus and repetition. Consider the
size of the facility when evaluating risks applying the scaling
- Know
your place: Conduct an assessment of the facility. A
starting point is to define the status
quo. For that, operation-existing questionnaires or audits can
be used. However, the “new eyes principle” should be applied and an
external questionnaire such as BioCheck UGent (biocheck.ugent.be) is
recommended. The questionnaire will help you identify gaps in your biosecurity plan as
well as processes that
may be allowing pathogens to enter or move from one location to another,
and measures that can be implemented applying the principles of separation and reduction.
- Know
your processes: Implement processes and procedures
that apply the biosecurity principles and help to eliminate, prevent, or
minimize the potential of disease. A deep evaluation of the daily farm
processes will aid in risk mitigation, considering, among others, movement
of personnel, equipment, and visitors, the entrance of pets, pests and
vermin, dealing with deliveries and handling of mortality and used litter.
COMPLIANCE – THE WEAK LINK IN
BIOSECURITY PROGRAMS
Achieving systematic compliance of biosecurity
protocols on a farm is a complex, interactive, and continuous process
influenced by several factors (Delabbio, 2006) and an ongoing challenge for
animal production facilities (Dewulf, et al., 2018). Thus, it is clear that the
biosecurity plan can only be effective if everyone on the operation follows it
constantly, i.e. if everyone performs in compliance.
Compliance can be defined as the extent to which
a person’s behavior coincides with the established rules. Thus, compliance with
biosecurity practices should become part of the culture of the facility. Poor
compliance in relation with biosecurity can be connected to:
- Lack of knowledge or understanding of the biosecurity protocols
(Alarcon, et al., 2013; Cui & Liu, 2016; Delpont, et al., 2020)
- Lack of consequences for non-compliance (Racicot, et al.,
2012a)
- A company culture of inconsistent or low application of
biosecurity protocols (Dorea, et al., 2010)
In general terms, compliance with biosecurity
procedures has been found to be incomplete in different studies (Delpont, et
al., 2020; Dorea, et al., 2010; Gelaude, et al., 2014; Limbergen, et al.,
2017). In one study (Racicot, et al., 2011) used hidden cameras, to asses
biosecurity compliance in Quebec, Canada and found 44 different biosecurity fails
made by 114 individuals (farm workers and visitors) in the participating
poultry farms, over the course of 4 weeks; in average four mistakes were made
per visit. The most frequent mistakes were ignoring the delimitation between
dirty and clean areas, not changing boots, and not washing hands at the
entrance of the barns; these three mistakes were committed in more than 60% of
the occasions, regardless of being farm employees or visitors. These are
frequent breaches not only of those farms in Quebec but found frequently in
many animal production units around the world and have a high probability of
causing the entrance and spread of pathogens.
HOW TO CREATE A HIGH
BIOSECURITY CULTURE: START NOW!
Creating, applying, and maintaining a biosecurity
culture is the most effective way to make sure that compliance of the
biosecurity program and procedures is high on the farm. Decreasing, therefore,
the probability of entrance and spread of pathogens, reducing the use of
antimicrobials, and maintaining animal health. Some actions are recommended in
order to achieve a high biosecurity culture:
1. Name an
accountable person
Every operation should have a biosecurity
coordinator who is accountable for developing, implementing, and maintaining
the biosecurity program.
This important position should be appointed
having in mind that certain personality traits may facilitate performance and
execution of the labor (Delabbio, 2006; Racicot, et al., 2012; Laanen, et al.,
2014; Delpont, et al., 2020) such as responsibility, orientation to action, and
being able to handle complexity. Additionally, expertise – years working in the
industry y- and orientation to learn are strategic (Racicot, et al., 2012).
2. Set the
environment
When the farm layout is not facilitating biosecurity,
compliance is low (Delabbio, 2006), thus the workspace should facilitate
biosecurity workflows and at the same time make them hard to ignore (Racicot,
et al., 2011).
3. Allow
participation
It is important to mention that not only the
management and the biosecurity coordinator are responsible for designing and
improving biosecurity procedures. Biosecurity practices must be owned by all
the farm workers and should be the social norm.
The annual or biannual revision of biosecurity
measures should be done together with the farm staff. This not only serves the
purpose of assessing compliance but also allows the personnel to suggest
measures addressing existing -often overlooked– gaps, and to be frank about
procedures that are not followed and the reasons for it. At the same time,
participation increases accountability and responsibility for the biosecurity
program.
4. Train for
learning
Don’t take knowledge for granted. Even when a
person has experience in farm work and has been working in the industry for
several years, their understanding and comprehension around biosecurity may
have gaps.
People are more likely to do something when they
see evidence of the activity’s benefit. Therefore, if workers are told about
the effectiveness of the practices, showing the benefits of biosecurity and
analyzing the consequences of non-compliance, they are most likely to follow
the procedures (Dewulf, et al., 2018). Knowledge of disease threats and
symptoms also improves on-farm biosecurity (Dorea, et al., 2010), thus workers
should recognize the first symptoms of disease in animals and act upon them.
Discussion of ‘What if…?’ scenarios to gain an
understanding of the key aspects of farm biosecurity should be held on a
regular basis. Workers should see examples of the benefits of compliance – and
risks of noncompliance – as part of their training.
5. Lead by
example
A high biosecurity culture requires everyone to
comply regardless of status.
Personnel practice of biosecurity procedures is
not only affected by the availability of resources and training, but also by
the position that management takes on biosecurity and the feedback provided.
The management and owners must transmit a message of commitment to the farm
personnel, owning and following biosecurity practices, procedures and
protocols, giving positive and negative feedback on the personnel’s compliance,
supplying information on farm performance and relating it with biosecurity
compliance and ensuring adequate resources for the practice of biosecurity
(Delabbio, 2006).
When necessary, management also should enforce
personnel compliance by disciplinary measures, firings, and creating awareness
about the consequences of disease incidence. Nevertheless, the recognition of
workers’ contribution to animal health performance also has a positive impact
on biosecurity compliance (Dorea, et al., 2010).
THE BOTTOM LINE
Biosecurity is necessary for disease prevention
in any animal production system. Actions and interventions that prevent the
entrance and spread of disease in a production unit have a pay-off as they
often lead to performance improvements and lower antimicrobial use.
Maintaining a successful production unit requires a multidisciplinary approach
in which biosecurity compliance needs to be taken seriously and also actions to
improve in other areas such as management, health, and nutrition.
No comments:
Post a Comment