A socio-psychological investigation into limitations and incentives concerning reporting a clinically suspect situation aimed at improving early detection of classical swine fever outbreaks

• Published in: Veterinary microbiology 2010-04, Vol.142 (1-2), p.108-118
• Main Authors: Elbers, A.R.W., Gorgievski-Duijvesteijn, M.J., van der Velden, P.G., Loeffen, W.L.A., Zarafshani, K.
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: agricultural law; Animal Husbandry - methods; Animal Husbandry - standards; Animals; Biological and medical sciences; Classical swine fever; Classical Swine Fever - prevention & control; Classical swine fever virus - physiology; decision support systems; diagnostic techniques; disease control; disease detection; disease diagnosis; Disease Notification; disease outbreaks; Disease Outbreaks - veterinary; disease reporting; disease surveillance; Early detection; economic analysis; economic impact; farmers; Focus Groups; Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology; hog cholera; information dissemination; Knowledge; livestock production; Microbiology; Motivation; pathogen identification; Prejudice; public opinion; questionnaires; Shame; signs and symptoms (animals and humans); Socio-psychological factors; Surveys and Questionnaires; Swine; veterinarians; Vigilance in reporting; world wide web
• ISSN: 0378-1135; 1873-2542
• DOI: 10.1016/j.vetmic.2009.09.051

The aim of this study was to identify limitations and incentives in reporting clinically suspect situations, possibly caused by classical swine fever (CSF), to veterinary authorities with the ultimate aim to facilitate early detection of CSF outbreaks. Focus group sessions were held with policy makers from the veterinary authorities, and representatives of veterinary practitioners and pig farmer unions. Personal interviews with a small group of pig farmers and practitioners were held to check limitations raised and solutions proposed during the focus group sessions. An electronic questionnaire was mailed to pig farmers and practitioners to investigate perceptions and attitudes with respect to clinically suspect situations possibly caused by CSF. After triangulating the responses of veterinary authorities, veterinary practitioners and farmers, six themes emerged across all groups: (1) lack of knowledge on the early signs of CSF; (2) guilt, shame and prejudice; (3) negative opinion on control measures; (4) dissatisfaction with post-reporting procedures; (5) lack of trust in government bodies; (6) uncertainty and lack of transparency of reporting procedures. The following solutions to facilitate early detection of CSF were put forward: (a) development of a clinical decision-support system for vets and farmers, in order to get faster diagnosis and detection of CSF; (b) possibility to submit blood samples directly to the reference laboratory to exclude CSF in a clinical situation with non-specific clinical signs, without isolation of the farm and free of charge for the individual farmer; (c) decrease social and economic consequences of reporting CSF, for example by improving the public opinion on first reports; (d) better schooling of veterinary officers to deal with emotions and insecurity of farmers in the process after reporting; (e) better communication of rules and regulations, where to report, what will happen next; (f) up-to-date website with information and visual material of the clinical signs of CSF.