Assessment of the control measures of the category A diseases of Animal Health Law: Classical Swine Fever

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearch

Standard

Assessment of the control measures of the category A diseases of Animal Health Law: Classical Swine Fever. / EFSA Panel on Animal Health and Welfare, ; Nielsen, Søren Saxmose; Alvarez, Julio; Bicout, Dominique Joseph; Calistri, Paolo; Canali, Elisabetta; Drewe, Julian Ashley; Garin-Bastuji, Bruno; Gonzales Rojas, José Luis; Gortázar Schmidt, Christian; Herskin, Mette; Michel, Virginie; Miranda Chueca, Miguel Ángel; Padalino, Barbara; Pasquali, Paolo; Sihvonen, Liisa Helena; Spoolder, Hans; Ståhl, Karl; Velarde, Antonio; Viltrop, Arvo; Winckler, Christoph; Gubbins, Simon; Stegeman, Jan Arend; Antoniou, Sotiria-Eleni; Aznar, Inma; Broglia, Alessandro; Lima, Eliana; Van der Stede, Yves; Zancanaro, Gabriele; Roberts, Helen Clare.

In: EFSA Journal, Vol. 19, No. 7, e06707, 2021, p. 1-83.

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearch

Harvard

EFSA Panel on Animal Health and Welfare, , Nielsen, SS, Alvarez, J, Bicout, DJ, Calistri, P, Canali, E, Drewe, JA, Garin-Bastuji, B, Gonzales Rojas, JL, Gortázar Schmidt, C, Herskin, M, Michel, V, Miranda Chueca, MÁ, Padalino, B, Pasquali, P, Sihvonen, LH, Spoolder, H, Ståhl, K, Velarde, A, Viltrop, A, Winckler, C, Gubbins, S, Stegeman, JA, Antoniou, S-E, Aznar, I, Broglia, A, Lima, E, Van der Stede, Y, Zancanaro, G & Roberts, HC 2021, 'Assessment of the control measures of the category A diseases of Animal Health Law: Classical Swine Fever', EFSA Journal, vol. 19, no. 7, e06707, pp. 1-83. https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2021.6707

APA

EFSA Panel on Animal Health and Welfare, Nielsen, S. S., Alvarez, J., Bicout, D. J., Calistri, P., Canali, E., Drewe, J. A., Garin-Bastuji, B., Gonzales Rojas, J. L., Gortázar Schmidt, C., Herskin, M., Michel, V., Miranda Chueca, M. Á., Padalino, B., Pasquali, P., Sihvonen, L. H., Spoolder, H., Ståhl, K., Velarde, A., ... Roberts, H. C. (2021). Assessment of the control measures of the category A diseases of Animal Health Law: Classical Swine Fever. EFSA Journal, 19(7), 1-83. [e06707]. https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2021.6707

Vancouver

EFSA Panel on Animal Health and Welfare , Nielsen SS, Alvarez J, Bicout DJ, Calistri P, Canali E et al. Assessment of the control measures of the category A diseases of Animal Health Law: Classical Swine Fever. EFSA Journal. 2021;19(7):1-83. e06707. https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2021.6707

Author

EFSA Panel on Animal Health and Welfare, ; Nielsen, Søren Saxmose ; Alvarez, Julio ; Bicout, Dominique Joseph ; Calistri, Paolo ; Canali, Elisabetta ; Drewe, Julian Ashley ; Garin-Bastuji, Bruno ; Gonzales Rojas, José Luis ; Gortázar Schmidt, Christian ; Herskin, Mette ; Michel, Virginie ; Miranda Chueca, Miguel Ángel ; Padalino, Barbara ; Pasquali, Paolo ; Sihvonen, Liisa Helena ; Spoolder, Hans ; Ståhl, Karl ; Velarde, Antonio ; Viltrop, Arvo ; Winckler, Christoph ; Gubbins, Simon ; Stegeman, Jan Arend ; Antoniou, Sotiria-Eleni ; Aznar, Inma ; Broglia, Alessandro ; Lima, Eliana ; Van der Stede, Yves ; Zancanaro, Gabriele ; Roberts, Helen Clare. / Assessment of the control measures of the category A diseases of Animal Health Law: Classical Swine Fever. In: EFSA Journal. 2021 ; Vol. 19, No. 7. pp. 1-83.

Bibtex

@article{cc4f1aad8fbb4621a3bcadb3cdd4bead,
title = "Assessment of the control measures of the category A diseases of Animal Health Law: Classical Swine Fever",
abstract = "Abstract EFSA received a mandate from the European Commission to assess the effectiveness of some of the control measures against diseases included in the Category A list according to Regulation (EU) 2016/429 on transmissible animal diseases ({\textquoteleft}Animal Health Law{\textquoteright}). This opinion belongs to a series of opinions where these control measures will be assessed, with this opinion covering the assessment of control measures for Classical swine fever (CSF). In this opinion, EFSA and the AHAW Panel of experts review the effectiveness of: (i) clinical and laboratory sampling procedures, (ii) monitoring period and (iii) the minimum radii of the protection and surveillance zones, and the minimum length of time the measures should be applied in these zones. The general methodology used for this series of opinions has been published elsewhere; nonetheless, details of the model used for answering these questions are presented in this opinion as well as the transmission kernels used for the assessment of the minimum radius of the protection and surveillance zones. Several scenarios for which these control measures had to be assessed were designed and agreed prior to the start of the assessment. Here, several recommendations are given on how to increase the effectiveness of some of the sampling procedures. Based on the average length of the period between virus introduction and the reporting of a CSF suspicion, the monitoring period was assessed as non-effective. In a similar way, it was recommended that the length of the measures in the protection and surveillance zones were increased from 15 to 25 days in the protection zone and from 30 to 40 days in the surveillance zone. Finally, the analysis of existing Kernels for CSF suggested that the radius of the protection and the surveillance zones comprise 99 as well as for plausible ad hoc requests in relation to CSF.",
keywords = "disease control, CSF, sampling procedures, monitoring period, protection zone, surveillance zone, intervention",
author = "{EFSA Panel on Animal Health and Welfare} and Nielsen, {S{\o}ren Saxmose} and Julio Alvarez and Bicout, {Dominique Joseph} and Paolo Calistri and Elisabetta Canali and Drewe, {Julian Ashley} and Bruno Garin-Bastuji and {Gonzales Rojas}, {Jos{\'e} Luis} and {Gort{\'a}zar Schmidt}, Christian and Mette Herskin and Virginie Michel and {Miranda Chueca}, {Miguel {\'A}ngel} and Barbara Padalino and Paolo Pasquali and Sihvonen, {Liisa Helena} and Hans Spoolder and Karl St{\aa}hl and Antonio Velarde and Arvo Viltrop and Christoph Winckler and Simon Gubbins and Stegeman, {Jan Arend} and Sotiria-Eleni Antoniou and Inma Aznar and Alessandro Broglia and Eliana Lima and {Van der Stede}, Yves and Gabriele Zancanaro and Roberts, {Helen Clare}",
year = "2021",
doi = "10.2903/j.efsa.2021.6707",
language = "English",
volume = "19",
pages = "1--83",
journal = "E F S A Journal",
issn = "1831-4732",
publisher = "European Food Safety Authority (E F S A)",
number = "7",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Assessment of the control measures of the category A diseases of Animal Health Law: Classical Swine Fever

AU - EFSA Panel on Animal Health and Welfare, null

AU - Nielsen, Søren Saxmose

AU - Alvarez, Julio

AU - Bicout, Dominique Joseph

AU - Calistri, Paolo

AU - Canali, Elisabetta

AU - Drewe, Julian Ashley

AU - Garin-Bastuji, Bruno

AU - Gonzales Rojas, José Luis

AU - Gortázar Schmidt, Christian

AU - Herskin, Mette

AU - Michel, Virginie

AU - Miranda Chueca, Miguel Ángel

AU - Padalino, Barbara

AU - Pasquali, Paolo

AU - Sihvonen, Liisa Helena

AU - Spoolder, Hans

AU - Ståhl, Karl

AU - Velarde, Antonio

AU - Viltrop, Arvo

AU - Winckler, Christoph

AU - Gubbins, Simon

AU - Stegeman, Jan Arend

AU - Antoniou, Sotiria-Eleni

AU - Aznar, Inma

AU - Broglia, Alessandro

AU - Lima, Eliana

AU - Van der Stede, Yves

AU - Zancanaro, Gabriele

AU - Roberts, Helen Clare

PY - 2021

Y1 - 2021

N2 - Abstract EFSA received a mandate from the European Commission to assess the effectiveness of some of the control measures against diseases included in the Category A list according to Regulation (EU) 2016/429 on transmissible animal diseases (‘Animal Health Law’). This opinion belongs to a series of opinions where these control measures will be assessed, with this opinion covering the assessment of control measures for Classical swine fever (CSF). In this opinion, EFSA and the AHAW Panel of experts review the effectiveness of: (i) clinical and laboratory sampling procedures, (ii) monitoring period and (iii) the minimum radii of the protection and surveillance zones, and the minimum length of time the measures should be applied in these zones. The general methodology used for this series of opinions has been published elsewhere; nonetheless, details of the model used for answering these questions are presented in this opinion as well as the transmission kernels used for the assessment of the minimum radius of the protection and surveillance zones. Several scenarios for which these control measures had to be assessed were designed and agreed prior to the start of the assessment. Here, several recommendations are given on how to increase the effectiveness of some of the sampling procedures. Based on the average length of the period between virus introduction and the reporting of a CSF suspicion, the monitoring period was assessed as non-effective. In a similar way, it was recommended that the length of the measures in the protection and surveillance zones were increased from 15 to 25 days in the protection zone and from 30 to 40 days in the surveillance zone. Finally, the analysis of existing Kernels for CSF suggested that the radius of the protection and the surveillance zones comprise 99 as well as for plausible ad hoc requests in relation to CSF.

AB - Abstract EFSA received a mandate from the European Commission to assess the effectiveness of some of the control measures against diseases included in the Category A list according to Regulation (EU) 2016/429 on transmissible animal diseases (‘Animal Health Law’). This opinion belongs to a series of opinions where these control measures will be assessed, with this opinion covering the assessment of control measures for Classical swine fever (CSF). In this opinion, EFSA and the AHAW Panel of experts review the effectiveness of: (i) clinical and laboratory sampling procedures, (ii) monitoring period and (iii) the minimum radii of the protection and surveillance zones, and the minimum length of time the measures should be applied in these zones. The general methodology used for this series of opinions has been published elsewhere; nonetheless, details of the model used for answering these questions are presented in this opinion as well as the transmission kernels used for the assessment of the minimum radius of the protection and surveillance zones. Several scenarios for which these control measures had to be assessed were designed and agreed prior to the start of the assessment. Here, several recommendations are given on how to increase the effectiveness of some of the sampling procedures. Based on the average length of the period between virus introduction and the reporting of a CSF suspicion, the monitoring period was assessed as non-effective. In a similar way, it was recommended that the length of the measures in the protection and surveillance zones were increased from 15 to 25 days in the protection zone and from 30 to 40 days in the surveillance zone. Finally, the analysis of existing Kernels for CSF suggested that the radius of the protection and the surveillance zones comprise 99 as well as for plausible ad hoc requests in relation to CSF.

KW - disease control

KW - CSF

KW - sampling procedures

KW - monitoring period

KW - protection zone

KW - surveillance zone

KW - intervention

U2 - 10.2903/j.efsa.2021.6707

DO - 10.2903/j.efsa.2021.6707

M3 - Journal article

C2 - 34306220

VL - 19

SP - 1

EP - 83

JO - E F S A Journal

JF - E F S A Journal

SN - 1831-4732

IS - 7

M1 - e06707

ER -

ID: 274915542