Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

Evaluating vaccination strategies to control foot-and-mouth disease: a country comparison study

  • T.G. Rawdon (a1), M.G. Garner (a2), R.L. Sanson (a3), M.A. Stevenson (a4), C. Cook (a5), C. Birch (a5), S.E. Roche (a2), K.A. Patyk (a6), K.N. Forde-Folle (a6), C. Dubé (a7), T. Smylie (a8) and Z.D. Yu (a9)...

Abstract

Vaccination is increasingly being recognised as a potential tool to supplement ‘stamping out’ for controlling foot-and-mouth disease (FMD) outbreaks in non-endemic countries. Infectious disease simulation models provide the opportunity to determine how vaccination might be used in the face of an FMD outbreak. Previously, consistent relative benefits of specific vaccination strategies across different FMD simulation modelling platforms have been demonstrated, using a UK FMD outbreak scenario. We extended this work to assess the relative effectiveness of selected vaccination strategies in five countries: Australia, New Zealand, the USA, the UK and Canada. A comparable, but not identical, FMD outbreak scenario was developed for each country with initial seeding of Pan Asia type O FMD virus into an area with a relatively high density of livestock farms. A series of vaccination strategies (in addition to stamping out (SO)) were selected to evaluate key areas of interest from a disease response perspective, including timing of vaccination, species considerations (e.g. vaccination of only those farms with cattle), risk area vaccination and resources available for vaccination. The study found that vaccination used with SO was effective in reducing epidemic size and duration in a severe outbreak situation. Early vaccination and unconstrained resources for vaccination consistently outperformed other strategies. Vaccination of only those farms with cattle produced comparable results, with some countries demonstrating that this could be as effective as all species vaccination. Restriction of vaccination to higher risk areas was less effective than other strategies. This study demonstrates consistency in the relative effectiveness of selected vaccination strategies under different outbreak start up conditions conditional on the assumption that each of the simulation models provide a realistic estimation of FMD virus spread. Preferred outbreak management approaches must however balance the principles identified in this study, working to clearly defined outbreak management objectives, while having a good understanding of logistic requirements and the socio-economic implications of different control measures.

  • View HTML
    • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

      Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

      Evaluating vaccination strategies to control foot-and-mouth disease: a country comparison study
      Available formats
      ×

      Send article to Dropbox

      To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      Evaluating vaccination strategies to control foot-and-mouth disease: a country comparison study
      Available formats
      ×

      Send article to Google Drive

      To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      Evaluating vaccination strategies to control foot-and-mouth disease: a country comparison study
      Available formats
      ×

Copyright

Corresponding author

Author for correspondence: T.G. Rawdon, E-mail: Thomas.Rawdon@mpi.govt.nz

References

Hide All
1.Kitching, RP, Thrusfield, MV and Taylor, NM (2006) Use and abuse of mathematical models: an illustration from the 2001 foot and mouth disease epidemic in the United Kingdom. Revue Scientifique et Technique de l'Office International des Epizooties 25, 293311.
2.Mansley, LM et al. (2011) Destructive tension: mathematics versus experience – the progress and control of the 2001 foot and mouth disease epidemic in Great Britain. Revue Scientifique et Technique de l'Office International des Epizooties 30, 483498.
3.Dubé, C et al. (2007) A comparison of predictions made by three simulation models of foot-and-mouth disease. New Zealand Veterinary Journal 55, 280288.
4.Sanson, RL et al. (2011) Foot-and-mouth disease model verification and ‘relative validation’ through a formal model comparison. Revue Scientifique et Technique de l'Office International des Epizooties 30, 527540.
5.Roche, SE et al. (2015) Evaluating vaccination strategies to control foot-and-mouth disease: a model comparison study. Epidemiology and Infection 143, 12561275.
6.Backer, JA et al. (2012) Vaccination against foot-and-mouth disease II: regaining FMD-free status. Preventive Veterinary Medicine 107, 4150.
7.Garner, MG et al. (2014) Estimating resource requirements to staff a response to a medium to large outbreak of foot and mouth disease in Australia. Transboundary and Emerging Diseases 63, 109121.
8.Zingg, D et al. (2015) Evidence for emergency vaccination having played a crucial role to control the 1965/66 foot-and-mouth disease outbreak in Switzerland. Frontiers in Veterinary Science 2, 72.
9.Probert, WJ et al. (2016) Decision-making for foot-and-mouth disease control: objectives matter. Epidemics 15, 1019.
10.Sakamoto, K (2012) Mechanism of FMD outbreaks and its control in the Asian region. Journal of Disaster Research 7, 258263.
11.Akashi, H (2012) The 2011 foot and mouth disease outbreak in Miyazaki prefecture. Journal of Disaster Research 7, 252257.
12.Porphyre, T et al. (2013) Vaccination against foot-and-mouth disease: do initial conditions affect its benefit? PLoS ONE 8, e77616.
13.Garner, MG and Beckett, SD (2005) Modelling the spread of foot-and-mouth disease in Australia. Australian Veterinary Journal 83, 758766.
14.Roche, SE et al. (2014) How do resources influence control measures during a simulated outbreak of foot and mouth disease in Australia? Preventive Veterinary Medicine 113, 436446.
15.Beckett, SD and Garner, MG (2007) Simulating disease spread within a geographic information system environment. Veterinaria Italiana 43, 595604.
16.Stevenson, MA et al. (2013) Interspread plus: a spatial and stochastic simulation model of disease in animal populations. Preventive Veterinary Medicine 109, 1024.
17.Risk Solutions (2005) Cost benefit analysis of foot and mouth disease controls. A report for DEFRA. Available at http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20070806051350/http://www.defra.gov.uk/animalh/diseases/fmd/pdf/costben.pdf (Accessed 1 June 2017).
18.Harvey, N et al. (2007) The north American animal disease spread model: a simulation model to assist decision making in evaluating animal disease incursions. Preventive Veterinary Medicine 14, 176197.
19.Sanson, R and Pearson, A (1997) AgriBase – A national spatial farm database. Proceedings of 8th International Symposium on Veterinary Epidemiology and Economics, Paris, 7–11 July 1997. Epidémiologie et Santé Animale 31–32, 12.16.112.16.3.
20.Dominguez, B (2007) Characterization of livestock herds in extensive agricultural settings in southwest Texas (Unpublished Master of Science thesis). Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas, United States of America.
21.Animal Health Australia (2012) Disease strategy: Foot-and-mouth disease (Version 3.3). Australian Veterinary Emergency Plan (AUSVETPLAN), 3rd Edn. Canberra, ACT, Australia: Standing Council on Primary Industries. Available at http://www.animalhealthaustralia.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/FMD-19-FINAL29Oct12.pdf (Accessed 1 June 2017).
22.CFIA (2013) Foot-and-Mouth Disease Hazard Specific Plan. Canadian Food Inspection Agency. Available at http://www.inspection.gc.ca/animals/terrestrial-animals/diseases/reportable/foot-and-mouth-disease/plan/eng/1332174353793/1332174430101 (Accessed 1 June 2017).
23.Owen, K, Stevenson, MA and Sanson, RL (2011) A sensitivity analysis of the New Zealand standard model of foot-and-mouth disease. Revue Scientifique et Technique de l'Office International des Epizooties 30, 513526.
24.DEFRA (2011) Foot and Mouth Disease Control Strategy for Great Britain. Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs. Animal Health and Veterinary Laboratories Agency: London, United Kingdom. Available at https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/69456/fmd-controlstrategy111128.pdf (Accessed 1 June 2017).
25.USDA (2013) Parameters used to simulate the spread of FMD in Texas using the North American Animal Disease Spread Model (NAADSM) for use in FMD response workforce requirement estimates. Report by United States Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, Veterinary Services, Centre for Epidemiology and Animal Health, Fort Collins, Colorado.
26.Wilcoxon, F (1945) Individual comparisons by ranking methods. Biometrics 1, 8083.
27.Mann, HB and Whitney, DR (1947) On a test whether one of two random variables is stochastically larger than the other. Annals of Mathematical Statistics 18, 5060.
28.R Development Core Team (2013) R: a Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing.
29.Tomassen, FH et al. (2002) A decision-tree to optimise control measures during the early stage of a foot-and-mouth disease epidemic. Preventive Veterinary Medicine 54, 301324.
30.Durr, S et al. (2014) Evaluation of the benefit of emergency vaccination in a foot-and-mouth disease free country with low livestock density. Preventive Veterinary Medicine 113, 3446.
31.Traulsen, I et al. (2011) Consideration of different outbreak conditions in the evaluation of preventive culling and emergency vaccination to control foot and mouth disease epidemics. Research in Veterinary Science 91, 219224.
32.Sanson, RL et al. (2014) Simulation modelling of a hypothetical introduction of foot-and-mouth disease into Alberta. Preventive Veterinary Medicine 114, 151163.
33.Garner, MG et al. (2016) Early decision indicators for foot-and-mouth disease outbreaks in Non-endemic countries. Frontiers Veterinary Science 3, 109. doi: 10.3389/fvets.2016.00109.
34.Willeberg, PW et al. (2017) Semiquantitative decision tools for FMD emergency vaccination informed by field observations and simulated outbreak data. Frontiers in Veterinary Science 4, 43. doi: 10.3389/fvets.2017.00043.
35.Keeling, MJ et al. (2003) Modelling vaccination strategies against foot-and-mouth disease. Nature 421, 136142.
36.Jewell, CP, Keeling, MJ and Roberts, GO (2009) Predicting undetected infections during the 2007 foot-and-mouth disease outbreak. Journal of The Royal Society Interface 6, 11451151.
37.Morelli, MJ et al. (2012) A Bayesian inference framework to reconstruct transmission trees using epidemiological and genetic data. PLOS Computational Biology 8, e1002768.
38.Sanson, RL et al. (2017) Evaluating the benefits of vaccination when used in combination with stamping-out measures against hypothetical introductions of foot-and-mouth disease into New Zealand: a simulation study. New Zealand Veterinary Journal 65, 124133.
39.Shea, K et al. (2014) Adaptive management and the value of information: learning via intervention in epidemiology. PLoS Biology 12, e1001970.
40.OIE (2016) Terrestrial Animal Health Code, Edition 25. Paris: World Organisation for Animal Health. Available at http://www.oie.int/international-standard-setting/terrestrial-code/access-online/ (Accessed 1 June 2017).

Keywords

Evaluating vaccination strategies to control foot-and-mouth disease: a country comparison study

  • T.G. Rawdon (a1), M.G. Garner (a2), R.L. Sanson (a3), M.A. Stevenson (a4), C. Cook (a5), C. Birch (a5), S.E. Roche (a2), K.A. Patyk (a6), K.N. Forde-Folle (a6), C. Dubé (a7), T. Smylie (a8) and Z.D. Yu (a9)...

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed