| |
NAHMS
REPORT
Highlights from the past two NAHMS national swine studies
Eric Bush, DVM, MS; Nina Stanton, BS
Since 1990, the United States Department
of Agriculture's National Animal Health Monitoring System (NAHMS)
has conducted 12 national studies for eight different livestock
groups. National studies provide scientifically sound, statistically
valid national information used for education, research, policy
development, and the overall improvement of animal industries.
These studies provide a snapshot of industry health and management
practices and address information gaps identified by a needs assessment
process.1-3
NAHMS national studies include the states that have adequate
numbers of animals so that at least 70% of the producers and animals
within the continental United States are represented in the survey
sample. Each study is based on producers from a probability-selected
sample using National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS) sampling
frames. Respondent data are weighted to reflect selection probability
and adjusted to account for nonrespondents. National estimates,
therefore, reflect the population from which the sample was selected
and include variance estimates calculated to reflect the study
design.4,5
NAHMS staff are currently working with pork industry leaders
to prepare for the third national swine study, Swine 2000, which
will begin on-farm visits this summer. Practitioners serve as
key advisors to most producers and play an important role in helping
selected producers decide whether or not to participate in a NAHMS
study. This paper seeks to equip practitioners and other consultants
with knowledge and resources to help producers make an informed
decision regarding participation in the NAHMS Swine 2000 study.
Producer evaluations of past studies
In 1990 and 1995, NAHMS collected data from hundreds of pork
producers across the country. At the conclusion of each study,
participating producers completed evaluations to assist NAHMS
staff in developing future studies. Seventy-nine percent of producers
that participated in the NAHMS 1990 National Swine Survey and
88% from the Swine '95 study indicated they would participate
again. Over 85% and 94% of producers from the two studies, respectively,
indicated they would recommend other producers participate.6
Producers' chief reason for participating was the recognized
benefit to the entire United States pork industry, as indicated
by 89% of respondents to the 1990 survey, and 86% of respondents
to the 1995 study. Other reasons for participation mentioned less
frequently by producers were study incentives (free laboratory
testing of blood, feed, and feces for porcine reproductive and
respiratory syndrome virus [PRRSV], mycotoxins, and Salmonella)
and expectations of direct benefits from farm data collected during
the study.
Benefits to pork industry from past studies
Information derived from NAHMS studies fills a niche for health,
management, and biological data summarized at a national level.
A top priority is that data be collected in a professional and
confidential manner. Merged data from both laboratory testing
and questionnaires were beneficial to the pork industry for epidemiological
research by government and universities, policy development by
industry organizations and government, and education.
Laboratory testing of biological samples collected during NAHMS
studies provides objective prevalence data on swine pathogens,
foodborne pathogens, and emerging diseases. This information allows
stakeholders within the United States and from other countries
to make health assessments of the United States national swine
herd based on fact rather than perception. For instance:
- During the Swine '95 study, NAHMS provided timely data on
a baseline seroprevalence of Salmonella shedding in finisher
hogs.7 New meat inspection regulations and interest
in reducing Salmonella contamination through Hazard Analysis
and Critical Control Points (HACCP) had stimulated the need for
this information on farm.
- NAHMS found no evidence of the Escherichia coli 0157:H7
bacteria, typically associated with other food products, among
the 4229 swine fecal samples tested during the Swine '95 study.
When Japan was experiencing an E. coli 0157:H7 outbreak,
these results helped reassure the Japanese market that United
States pork was safe, thereby minimizing the impact of the outbreak
on demand for United States pork.
- Blood samples collected from sows in the 1990 National Swine
Survey were stored in a serum bank and later used to determine
the national prevalence and the initial geographic distribution
of the PRRSV soon after it was identified.8 PRRSV
research continued during the NAHMS Swine '95 study (just prior
to widespread adoption of the PRRSV vaccine), when blood samples
collected from breeding and market hogs were tested to provide
a broader estimate of how many animals and herds were affected
by this virus.
- Researchers from the University of Tennessee and Iowa State
University tested serum samples banked during the NAHMS 1990
and 1995 studies to confirm that Toxoplasma gondii
seroprevalence in United States pigs is on a decline.9
While fewer United States pigs are infected with Toxoplasma,
it is a growing public health concern.
- Swine '95 blood samples made it possible for ELANCO and NOBL
Laboratories to estimate Lawsonia intracellularis exposure
in finishing hogs and breeding animals. Many people in the industry
believed that the seroprevalence of ileitis had increased in
occurrence in the previous years, and this research showed that
considerably more United States pigs were exposed to the organism
than expected.10
Some of the most valuable benefits from the NAHMS studies are
from analysis of management data in connection with laboratory
test results. By knowing how tested animals were managed, NAHMS
can identify management practices that pork producers can avoid
or apply to reduce possible public health threats and improve
product quality. In addition, management information provides
facts that support development of national programs and policies
affecting the pork industry. Examples from the NAHMS swine studies
include:
- Data analysts compared Swine '95 management and Salmonella
test data to identify on-farm management practices that could
reduce both the spread of Salmonella within a herd and
transmissions through the food chain. They found pelleted feed
and feed mixed off the farm presented a greater risk for shedding
of Salmonella.11,12
- Researchers from the University of Tennessee and the Iowa
State University did similar risk factor analyses for Toxoplasma.
They identified the extent to which access of cats to the swine
facilities and hog access to the outdoors contribute to the spread
of the parasite.13
- The significance of findings from such risk factor analyses
are often interpreted and applied in conjunction with industry
working groups. The NPPC Salmonella and Toxoplasma
Working Groups have incorporated NAHMS findings as they seek
to identify herd-level good production practices (GPPs) to reduce
foodborne transmission. The Swine '95 study provided estimates
of seroprevalence and described the extent to which related management
practices were used to help define the challenges future certification
programs would face.
- The prevalence of Trichinae infection, another parasite
found in United States hogs, had not been evaluated since the
1970s. By the mid 1990s, the pork industry knew the prevalence
of Trichinae had declined, but was unsure by how much.
On behalf of the National Trichinae Research Project, NAHMS evaluated
the Trichinae seroprevalence in sows (during the 1990
study) and finisher pigs (through the Swine '95 study).14
The Trichinae Working Group used the information on risk factors
to evaluate the feasibility of establishing a Trichinae
certification program and to judge how effective such a program
was likely to be.
- The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is using NAHMS
Swine '95 information to revise their effluent guidelines for
swine production. To date, these guidelines have been "one
size fits all." With the NAHMS information, the EPA, in
cooperation with the NPPC, is designing the guidelines to fit
specific industry segments.
A third benefit of NAHMS data is the widespread use of national
information to support education throughout the pork industry.
Countless specific examples exist for the inclusion of NAHMS estimates
by various departments within many universities where NAHMS publications
are applied to research efforts and used in the classroom or for
producer education. Other educational uses of NAHMS data are for
company training and education booklets.
NAHMS Swine 2000 national study
What's next for NAHMS' swine projects? NAHMS is working with
input from industry members to ensure continual success in addressing
health issues affecting United States pork production. Their current
focus is to prioritize animal health issues to be incorporated
into a Swine 2000 study. Information on this upcoming study and
its planned benefits will be released in the coming months. Current
information is available under the swine section at the NAHMS
web site at http://www.aphis.usda.gov/vs/ceah/cahm/.
References - refereed
1. Bush EJ, Gardner IA. Animal Health Surveillance in the United
States via the National Animal Health Monitoring System (NAHMS).
Epidemiol Sante Anim. 1995;27:113-126.
3. Wineland NE, Dargatz DA. The national animal health monitoring
system. A source of on-farm information. Vet Clin North Am
Food Anim Pract. 1998;14(1):127-139.
4. Losinger WC, Bush EJ, Hill GW, Smith MA, Garber LP, Rodriguez
JM, Kane G. Design and implementation of the United States National
Animal Health Monitoring System 1995 National Swine Study. Prev
Vet Med. 1998 Feb 27;34(2-3):147-159.
5. Dargatz DA. Analysis of survey data. Prev Vet Med.
1996;28:225-237.
8. Bautista EM, Morrison RB, Goyal SM, Collins JE, Annelli
JF. Seroprevalence of PRRS virus in the United States. Swine
Health Prod. 1993;1(6):4-8.
9. Patton. S, Zimmerman JJ, Roberts T, Faulkner CT, Diderrich
VR, Assadi-Rad A, Davies PR, Kliebenstein JB. Seroprevalence of
Toxoplasma gondii in hogs in the NAHMS. J Eukaryotic
Microbiology. October 1996;121S.
14. Gamble HR, Bush EJ. Seroprevalence of Trichinella
infection in domestic swine based on the National Animal Health
Monitoring System's 1990 and 1995 swine surveys. Vet Parasitol.
1999;80(4):303-310.
References - nonrefereed
2. Gardner IA. Epidemiological research and surveillance in
swine production in the USA. 1st France-Japan Workshop on Epidemiology.
Tokyo, Japan. September, 1995.
6. USDA:APHIS:VS. Producer evaluations of on-farm VS monitoring
and surveillance activities. Fort Collins, Colorado: Centers for
Epidemiology and Animal Health. 1994. NAHMS publication. N145.0694.
7. Fedorka-Cray PJ, Bush EJ, Thomas L. Results of the NAHMS
Swine '95 Grower/Finisher Survey. Proc USAHA. Little Rock,
Arkansas, 1996.
10. Bane DP, Norby B, Gardner IA, Roof MB, Knittel JP, Bush
EJ. Prevalence and Management risk factors associated with Lawsonia
intracellularis seropositivity in the U.S. swine herd. University
of Minnesota. Supplement to Allen D. Leman Swine Conference
Proceedings. St Paul, Minnesota. September 1997;19.
11. Bush EJ, Fedorka-Cray PJ. Management factors associated
with shedding of Salmonella in the NAHMS Swine '95: Grower/Finisher
study. Pork Quality and Safety Summit. 1998;66-71.
12. Bush EJ, Wagner BA, Fedorka-Cray PJ. Risk factors associated
with shedding of Salmonella by US finishing hogs. Proc
of the 3rd International Symp on the Epidemiology and Control
of Salmonella in pork. Washington, DC. August 1999;106-8.
13. Kliebenstein JB, Patton S, Zimmerman JJ, Hu X, Hallam A,
Roberts T, Bush EJ. Toxoplasma gondii in United States
swine operations: An assessment of management factors. AEEMA
Epidemiologie et Sante Animale VIII. Paris, France. 1997;05.26.1
|
|