Evaluation of risk-based surveillance strategies for Salmonella Dublin in Danish dairy herds by modelling temporal test performance and herd status classification errors
Alessandro Foddai , Jørgen Nielsen , Liza Rosenbaum Nielsen , Erik Rattenborg , Hans Ebbensgaard Murillo , Johanne Ellis-Iversen
{"title":"Evaluation of risk-based surveillance strategies for Salmonella Dublin in Danish dairy herds by modelling temporal test performance and herd status classification errors","authors":"Alessandro Foddai , Jørgen Nielsen , Liza Rosenbaum Nielsen , Erik Rattenborg , Hans Ebbensgaard Murillo , Johanne Ellis-Iversen","doi":"10.1016/j.mran.2021.100184","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The potential risk-based improvement of the <em>Salmonella</em> Dublin surveillance programme in Danish dairy herds was investigated, considering herd status misclassifications due to testing errors. The programme started in October 2002. Currently (early 2021) all dairy herds are classified based on quarterly bulk tank milk (BTM) testing with an indirect antibody ELISA (iELISA). Over the last two decades, the prevalence of herds classified as “likely infected” (levels 2,3) reduced remarkably. However, since 2015, the apparent prevalence has increased again, calling for improved surveillance and control to protect animal and human health. A deterministic simulation model based on data (2018–2019) from 2283 dairy herds in level 1 (“most likely free from infection”), was developed to estimate status misclassifications as false negative (FN) and false positive (FP) herds, under two testing strategies. These were: (A) the current system based on quarterly BTM testing only, and (B) an alternative strategy based on additional blood testing of up to eight calves, within herds at high risk of infection (HR). Both strategies were evaluated using three risk classification methods (I to III) and four sensitivity analysis scenarios (SA1-4), where different temporal performances were simulated for the iELISA in BTM. To apply strategy <em>B</em>, the best high-risk classification method (II), which combined managerial applicability and minimized errors, would require testing approximately 1000 calves across 127 HR herds. In that case, strategy A would cause 3 FNs and 67 FPs, by assuming annual BTM sensitivity (BTMSe) 95% conditional on a 1-year disease history and specificity (BTMSp) 97%. Whereas strategy <em>B</em> could cause a similar number of FNs, but 7 FPs more, assuming a sensitivity (Se) of 77% and specificity (Sp) of 99% in individual blood-samples (SA1). Assuming also quarterly BTMSe 53% and BTMSp 99.9% (SA4), strategy A derived 28 FNs and 2 FPs, while strategy B resulted in 6 FNs less and 8 FPs more. Therefore, strategy <em>B</em> could improve early detection of infected HR herds, while strategy A would avoid more unnecessary restrictions in false-positive herds. This improves knowledge on the potential use of additional blood testing in HR herds and illustrates how deterministic modelling can be used to improve disease surveillance and control.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48593,"journal":{"name":"Microbial Risk Analysis","volume":"19 ","pages":"Article 100184"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352352221000268/pdfft?md5=1816ced08adc826b12b708b15fe6709a&pid=1-s2.0-S2352352221000268-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Microbial Risk Analysis","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352352221000268","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The potential risk-based improvement of the Salmonella Dublin surveillance programme in Danish dairy herds was investigated, considering herd status misclassifications due to testing errors. The programme started in October 2002. Currently (early 2021) all dairy herds are classified based on quarterly bulk tank milk (BTM) testing with an indirect antibody ELISA (iELISA). Over the last two decades, the prevalence of herds classified as “likely infected” (levels 2,3) reduced remarkably. However, since 2015, the apparent prevalence has increased again, calling for improved surveillance and control to protect animal and human health. A deterministic simulation model based on data (2018–2019) from 2283 dairy herds in level 1 (“most likely free from infection”), was developed to estimate status misclassifications as false negative (FN) and false positive (FP) herds, under two testing strategies. These were: (A) the current system based on quarterly BTM testing only, and (B) an alternative strategy based on additional blood testing of up to eight calves, within herds at high risk of infection (HR). Both strategies were evaluated using three risk classification methods (I to III) and four sensitivity analysis scenarios (SA1-4), where different temporal performances were simulated for the iELISA in BTM. To apply strategy B, the best high-risk classification method (II), which combined managerial applicability and minimized errors, would require testing approximately 1000 calves across 127 HR herds. In that case, strategy A would cause 3 FNs and 67 FPs, by assuming annual BTM sensitivity (BTMSe) 95% conditional on a 1-year disease history and specificity (BTMSp) 97%. Whereas strategy B could cause a similar number of FNs, but 7 FPs more, assuming a sensitivity (Se) of 77% and specificity (Sp) of 99% in individual blood-samples (SA1). Assuming also quarterly BTMSe 53% and BTMSp 99.9% (SA4), strategy A derived 28 FNs and 2 FPs, while strategy B resulted in 6 FNs less and 8 FPs more. Therefore, strategy B could improve early detection of infected HR herds, while strategy A would avoid more unnecessary restrictions in false-positive herds. This improves knowledge on the potential use of additional blood testing in HR herds and illustrates how deterministic modelling can be used to improve disease surveillance and control.
期刊介绍:
The journal Microbial Risk Analysis accepts articles dealing with the study of risk analysis applied to microbial hazards. Manuscripts should at least cover any of the components of risk assessment (risk characterization, exposure assessment, etc.), risk management and/or risk communication in any microbiology field (clinical, environmental, food, veterinary, etc.). This journal also accepts article dealing with predictive microbiology, quantitative microbial ecology, mathematical modeling, risk studies applied to microbial ecology, quantitative microbiology for epidemiological studies, statistical methods applied to microbiology, and laws and regulatory policies aimed at lessening the risk of microbial hazards. Work focusing on risk studies of viruses, parasites, microbial toxins, antimicrobial resistant organisms, genetically modified organisms (GMOs), and recombinant DNA products are also acceptable.