Subclinical foot and mouth infections in horses contributed to disease control problems in uruguay.

Shifting to foot-and-mouth disease-free status without vaccination: Application of the PROMETHEE method to assist in the development of a foot-and-mouth national program in Uruguay

Luis Gustavo Corbellini et al. Prev Vet Med. 2020 Aug.

Abstract

Foot-and-mouth disease (FMD) is highly contagious, and the introduction of FMD virus in countries free of the disease can result in large epidemics, similar to those observed in the United Kingdom, Japan, and Uruguay. Many countries or regions of South America are recognized as "FMD-free with vaccination" or "FMD-free without vaccination." Uruguay has been certified as FMD-free with vaccination, and the transition to the status of FMD-free without vaccination has been discussed among the stakeholders of the Ministry of Livestock Agriculture and Fisheries (MGAP in Spanish). This study illustrates how the Preference Ranking Organization Method for Enrichment Evaluation (PROMETHEE) can identify and rank alternative actions to be used in the national FMD program in Uruguay. It uses multiple-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) to structure the problem comprehensively. This helps to identify critical issues and potential solutions when planning a national FMD program for a country with a disease-free without vaccination status. The analysis highlighted the following perspectives: i) the importance of communication strategies as the country changes to "FMD-free without vaccination" status, as well as potential challenges such as a lack of trust in government; ii) the importance of enhancing epidemiological capacity and data management to allocate resources better and provide feedback from the surveillance system; iii) the need to re-evaluate the animal health compensation strategy to stimulate biosecurity and disease reporting; and iv) the importance of assisting the backyard pig sector given the risks it carries and the complexity of dealing with because of its informality, the educational status of its owners, and the lack of formal assistance by veterinary services. The results suggests that the MCDA approach could be a useful tool for animal health agencies when planning a program to eliminate FMD (as well as other diseases) in a structured way because it helps to identify which alternatives would yield more effective results and it helps to address future challenges.

Keywords: Animal health planning; Decision-making; Epidemiology; Foot-and-mouth disease eradication; Multiple-criteria decision analysis.

Copyright © 2020 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Conflict of interest statement

Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Similar articles

  • Stakeholder perceptions of foot-and-mouth disease control in South Africa.

    Roberts LC, Fosgate GT. Roberts LC, et al. Prev Vet Med. 2018 Aug 1;156:38-48. doi: 10.1016/j.prevetmed.2018.05.001. Epub 2018 May 4. Prev Vet Med. 2018. PMID: 29891144

  • Spatiotemporal analysis of foot-and-mouth disease outbreaks in the Republic of Kazakhstan, 1955 - 2013.

    Abdrakhmanov SK, Tyulegenov SB, Korennoy FI, Sultanov AA, Sytnik II, Beisembaev KK, Bainiyazov AA, Munsey AE, Perez AM, VanderWaal K. Abdrakhmanov SK, et al. Transbound Emerg Dis. 2018 Oct;65(5):1235-1245. doi: 10.1111/tbed.12864. Epub 2018 Mar 15. Transbound Emerg Dis. 2018. PMID: 29542873

  • A Review of OIE Country Status Recovery Using Vaccinate-to-Live Versus Vaccinate-to-Die Foot-and-Mouth Disease Response Policies II: Waiting Periods After Emergency Vaccination in FMD Free Countries.

    Geale DW, Barnett PV, Clarke GW, Davis J, Kasari TR. Geale DW, et al. Transbound Emerg Dis. 2015 Aug;62(4):388-406. doi: 10.1111/tbed.12165. Epub 2013 Oct 17. Transbound Emerg Dis. 2015. PMID: 24131661 Review.

  • Unapparent foot and mouth disease infection (sub-clinical infections and carriers): implications for control.

    Sutmoller P, Casas OR. Sutmoller P, et al. Rev Sci Tech. 2002 Dec;21(3):519-29. doi: 10.20506/rst.21.3.1366. Rev Sci Tech. 2002. PMID: 12523693 Review.

  • Epidemiological simulation modeling and spatial analysis for foot-and-mouth disease control strategies: a comprehensive review.

    Premashthira S, Salman MD, Hill AE, Reich RM, Wagner BA. Premashthira S, et al. Anim Health Res Rev. 2011 Dec;12(2):225-34. doi: 10.1017/S146625231100017X. Anim Health Res Rev. 2011. PMID: 22152294 Review.

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources

  • Full Text Sources

    • Elsevier Science
  • Medical

    • MedlinePlus Health Information

What countries have foot and mouth disease?

FMD outbreaks are common in Asia, the Middle East, South America and parts of Africa. In May 2022, an outbreak of FMD was reported in cattle in Indonesia and in July 2022 in Bali. International outbreaks are a reminder that animal diseases can spread quickly and do not respect international borders.

Why is foot and mouth disease a problem?

FMD can be transmitted in air particles between animals housed closely together. And it's easily spread through contaminated feed and water, animal transport vehicles, and equipment, clothing and footwear. It's important that livestock industries and animal owners are alert to the symptoms of FMD.

Where did foot and mouth disease come from?

Introduction. The earliest description of probable foot-and-mouth disease (FMD) in cattle was made by an Italian monk, Hieronymus Fracastorius, in Venice in 1514. The affected animals refused their feed, the oral mucosa showed redness and the animals had vesicles in the oral cavity and on their feet.

How does foot and mouth disease affect animals?

Fever, lameness, and sores and blisters on the feet are also common symptoms. While FMD is not normally fatal to adult animals, it seriously impairs the affected animals' ability to eat and ambulate, resulting in loss in meat and milk production. In young animals it can be fatal.