Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38178228›Full record

ArticlePorcine health management2024

Foot lesions and forelimb skin abrasions in suckling piglets: development and risk factors.

Marcus Heimann, Maria Hartmann, Fritjof Freise, Lothar Kreienbrock, Elisabeth Grosse Beilage

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Porcine health management, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 24% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Marcus HeimannField Station for Epidemiology, University of Veterinary Medicine Hannover, Buescheler Str. 9, 49456, Bakum, Germany.
Maria HartmannDepartment of Biometry, Epidemiology and Information Processing, WHO Collaborating Centre for Research and Training for Health at the Human-Animal-Environment Interface, University of Veterinary Medicine Hannover, Buenteweg 2, 30559, Hannover, Germany.
Fritjof FreiseDepartment of Biometry, Epidemiology and Information Processing, WHO Collaborating Centre for Research and Training for Health at the Human-Animal-Environment Interface, University of Veterinary Medicine Hannover, Buenteweg 2, 30559, Hannover, Germany.
Lothar KreienbrockDepartment of Biometry, Epidemiology and Information Processing, WHO Collaborating Centre for Research and Training for Health at the Human-Animal-Environment Interface, University of Veterinary Medicine Hannover, Buenteweg 2, 30559, Hannover, Germany.
Elisabeth Grosse BeilageField Station for Epidemiology, University of Veterinary Medicine Hannover, Buescheler Str. 9, 49456, Bakum, Germany. elisabeth.grosse.beilage@tiho-hannover.de.
University of Veterinary Medicine Hannover, Foundation · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFoot lesions in suckling piglets have been associated with poor flooring in several studies and were recently proposed to be indicative of swine inflammatory and necrosis syndrome. However, identical findings are also the typical outcome of various non-infectious causes; thus, further risk analysis is needed. The objective of this study was to describe the development of heel bruising, coronary band lesions and forelimb skin abrasion in suckling pigs up to 5 days of age. Furthermore, the effects of various intrinsic and extrinsic factors were examined. On each of four commercial piglet-producing farms, piglets from two or three batches of eight sows were studied. The piglets were included within 18 h after birth. Each piglet was individually scored four times. The score for the heels differentiated six (0-5) and for the coronary band and forelimb skin abrasion three stages (0-2). The body weight was measured two times. The effect of the floor was estimated by allocating the sows randomly to farrowing pens equipped with either soft rubber mats covered with litter or fully slatted plastic floors.

resultsThe final analysis comprised data from 1045 piglets. Foot lesions were not found at birth but started to develop on day 1. On day 5, heel bruising was found in 94%, main claw coronary band lesions in 49% and forelimb skin abrasion in 73% of the piglets. In a multifactorial logistic regression analysis, it was shown that a slatted plastic floor significantly increased the odds of heel bruising and coronary band lesions, while a rubber floor with litter increased the odds of forelimb skin abrasions.

conclusionFoot and forelimb lesions in new-born piglets are mainly induced by the floor. The effect of slatted plastic floors on heel bruising showed an overwhelming OR of 52.89 (CI 26.29-106.43). Notably, coronary band lesions in young suckling piglets occur on slatted as well as non-slatted floors, indicating that the piglets incur these injuries not only from the wedging of their feet into the gaps between slats but also from contact with the floor while suckling. Based on these findings, preventive measures should be redirected to the improvement of the floor in the farrowing pen, particularly in the area under the sow's udder.

Indexed as

Animal welfareErosionFloorHeel bruisingSINSSole bruising

Identifiers

PMID38178228
PMCPMC10768078
OpenAlexW4390588961

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.