Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36713879›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in veterinary science2022

An assessment of enhanced biosecurity interventions and their impact on porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus outbreaks within a managed group of farrow-to-wean farms, 2020-2021.

Karyn A Havas, Lisa Brands, Roger Cochrane, Gordon D Spronk, Joel Nerem, Scott A Dee

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in veterinary science, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
3.8field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Karyn A HavasPipestone Research, Pipestone Holdings, Pipestone, MN, United States.
Lisa BrandsPipestone Research, Pipestone Holdings, Pipestone, MN, United States.
Roger CochranePipestone Nutrition, Pipestone Holdings, Pipestone, MN, United States.
Gordon D SpronkPipestone Veterinary Services, Pipestone Holdings, Pipestone, MN, United States.
Joel NeremPipestone Veterinary Services, Pipestone Holdings, Pipestone, MN, United States.
Scott A DeePipestone Research, Pipestone Holdings, Pipestone, MN, United States.
Pipestone (United States) · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus (PRRSV) has been a challenge for the U.S. swine industry for over 30 years, costing producers more than $600 million annually through reproductive disease in sows and respiratory disease in growing pigs. In this study, the impact of enhanced biosecurity practices of site location, air filtration, and feed mitigation was assessed on farrow-to-wean sites managed by a large swine production management company in the Midwest United States. Those three factors varied in the system that otherwise had implemented a stringent biosecurity protocol on farrow-to-wean sites. The routine biosecurity followed commonplace activities for farrow-to-wean sites that included but were not limited to visitor registration, transport disinfection, shower-in/shower-out procedures, and decontamination and disinfection of delivered items and were audited. Methods: Logistic regression was used to evaluate PRRSV infection by site based on the state where the site is located and air filtration use while controlling for other variables such as vaccine status, herd size, and pen vs. stall. A descriptive analysis was used to evaluate the impact of feed mitigation stratified by air filtration use. Results: Sites that used feed mitigates as additives in the diets, air filtration of barns, and that were in less swine-dense areas appeared to experience fewer outbreaks associated with PRRSV infection. Specifically, 23.1% of farms that utilized a feed mitigation program experienced PRRSV outbreaks, in contrast to 100% of those that did not. Sites that did not use air filtration had 20 times greater odds of having a PRRSV outbreak. The strongest protective effect was found when both air filtration and feed mitigation were used. Locations outside of Minnesota and Iowa had 98.5-99% lesser odds of infection as well. Discussion: Enhanced biosecurity practices may yield significant protective effects and should be considered for producers in swine-dense areas or when the site contains valuable genetics or many pigs.

Indexed as

air filtrationbiosecurityfeed mitigationporcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus (PRRSV)swine

Identifiers

PMID36713879
PMCPMC9879578
OpenAlexW4315796870

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.