Major risk factors for PRRS in Colombian farms

1. Major risk factors for PRRS in Colombian farms Dr. Derald Holtkamp Cartagena, July 16, 2014

2. Outline • Importance of biosecurity and need for tools to assess risk • Production Animal Disease Risk Assessment Program (PADRAP) • Assessment of risks in Colombian sow farms

3. In the U.S. PRRSV had been the primary disease that motivated producers to improve biosecurity • Introduction of porcine circovirius type 2 (PCV2) and porcine epidemic diarrhea virus (PEDV) has been a real “wake up call” Biosecurity! Biosecurity! Biosecurity! Photo: Courtesy of Dr. Matt Ackerman

4. PEDV spread rapidly between and within regions of the U.S. Biosecurity as currently practiced in the U.S. was NOT effective at slowing the spread of the virus Source: Swine Enteric Coronavirus Disease Testing Summary Report, USDA Animal Plant & Health Inspection Service, May 15, 2014.

5. And now porcine deltacoronavirus (PDCoV) Source: Swine Enteric Coronavirus Disease Testing Summary Report, USDA Animal Plant & Health Inspection Service, May 15, 2014.

6. ~50% of sow herds infected with PEDV ~50% Source: Swine Health Monitoring Report, University of Minnesota, College of Veterinary Medicine. March 7, 2014.

7. But… PRRSV was relatively quiet this year Source: PRRS incidence study update, University of Minnestota, March 19, 2014

8. The slow down in PRRS dates back to July 2013 July 2013 Source: PRRS incidence study update, University of Minnestota, March 19, 2014

9. Biosecurity is the primary tool to slow herd-to-herd transmission and prevent outbreaks Biosecurity! Biosecurity! Biosecurity!

10. But – making continuous improvements in biosecurity is hard

11. Giving producers published lists of biosecurity recommendations or “page-after-page” of protocols doesn’t work! Need tools to assess risks and implement biosecurity that is tailored for farms or production systems

12. Outline • Importance of Biosecurity and need for tools to assess risk • Production Animal Disease Risk Assessment Program (PADRAP) • Assessment of risks in Colombian sow farms

13. Production Animal Disease Risk Assessment Program (PADRAP) is a program through which a set of disease risk assessment surveys are delivered PADRAP is owned by The American Association of Swine Veterinarians (AASV) and is used by veterinarians who are members www.padrap.org

14. Surveys can be delivered through PADRAP

15. Enables benchmarking of disease risks Examples of reports “Risk Quadrant” report

16. Enables benchmarking of disease risksExamples of reports “Individual Risk Factor” report

17. PADRAP is provided as a benefit to members of AASV • No fees for using PADRAP • Must be an AASV member to access it • International (Associate) members are eligible to use the program

18. History of Development • Fall-2002: Design and development of the PRRS Risk Assessment for the Breeding Herd was done at BoehringerIngelheimVetmedica Inc. (BIVI) • March 2005: BIVI offered to gift the tool to the American Association of Swine Veterinarians (AASV) • March 2006: AASV, with support from National Pork Board (NPB) and USDA accepted the gift • September 2006: Iowa State University College of Veterinary Medicine, Food Supply Veterinary Medicine entered into an agreement with AASV to establish the Production Animal Disease Risk Assessment Program (PADRAP)

19. History of Development • November 2007: Launch of web version – “PADRAP-Online” • February 2008: PADRAP Advisory Committee created • March 2009: Growing Pig Assessment introduced • December 2011: Boehringer Ingelheim, Harrisvaccines, NPPC and Newport Laboratories become sponsors of PADRAP

20. Collaborative effort • American Association of Swine Veterinarians (AASV) • Iowa State University (ISU) providing program coordination and web hosting • Director: Derald Holtkamp • Associate Director: Chris Mowrer • Financial support • National Pork Board (NPB) • BoehringerIngelheimVetmedica Inc. (BIVI) • Harrisvaccines • National Pork Producers Council (NPPC) • Newport Laboratories

21. Training sessions conducted 363: Number of veterinarians that have been trained 67 training sessions (33 online; 34 face-to-face) have been conducted in the U.S., Canada, Mexico, Colombia, Serbia and online Used primarily by veterinarians and researchers in the U.S, Mexico and Canada Veterinarians from Australia, Bermuda, Chile, Colombia, Germany, Italy, Japan, Netherlands, Philippines, Serbia, South Korea and UK have also been trained Veterinarians are provided a username and password for the web version that is activated upon completion of training

22. PRRS Risk Assessment for the Breeding Herd • Database of PRRS Risk Assessment for the Breeding Herd (version 2) continues to grow • 3,678: Number of assessments completed (as of February 2014) • 1,878: Number of breeding herd sites assessed (as of February 2014)

23. PRRS Risk Assessment for the Growing Pig Herd • Database of PRRS Risk Assessment for the Growing Pig Herd (version 1) • 1,120: Number of assessments completed (as of February 2014) • 982: Number of growing pig sites assessed (as of February 2014)

24. Ways veterinarians have applied the PRRS Risk Assessment for the Breeding Herd Evaluate current biosecurity protocols and/or to develop new biosecurity protocols Demonstrate improvement in biosecurity over time to help justify expenditure of resources on biosecurity An aid in the decision to initiate a project to eliminate PRRSV from a breeding herd site Regional PRRS Elimination / control projects utilizing PADRAP

25. Steps to get access to and use PADRAP

26. Outline • Importance of Biosecurity and need for tools to assess risk • Production Animal Disease Risk Assessment Program (PADRAP) • Assessment of risks in Colombian sow farms

27. PRRS Control and Monitoring Program in Colombia • Coordinated by the Technical Area of the Colombian Association of Pork Producers (Asociación Colombiana de Porcicultores) • Jose Fernando Naranjo • Diego Rodriguez • Mayra Aguirre • Natalia Toro • A PADRAP training session was conducted in Colombia • Lilly Urizar with Centre de développement du porc du Québec (CDPQ)

28. 72 sow herds in Colombia were assessed between July of 2013 and June of 2014

29. Average risk scores for Colombian farms assessed vs. average of all sites in the database (Benchmarked Against) “Biosecurity” terminology External Risks => Bioexclusion – keeping pathogens out of a population Internal Risks => Biomanagement– managing pathogens already in a population to minimize the negative consequences Dr. Butch Baker, National Hog Farmer, 10/15/2009

30. Average risk scores for Colombian farms assessed vs. average of all sites in the database (Benchmarked Against) Opportunity is to improve bioexclusion “Big bar bad --- little bar good”

31. Smaller and mid-size sow herds tended to have more frequent outbreaks

32. Farrow-to-finish farms had more frequent outbreaks

33. Most of the sow herds that were assessed were PRRSV “naïve” or “negative” • Holtkamp et. al. 2011. Terminology for classifying swine herds by PRRS virus status. J. Swine Health Prod. 19:1 44-56.

34. Closed herds (produce their own gilts) and farms with more sources of replacement gilts had more frequent outbreaks

35. Sow herds that obtained gilts from herds that were positive unstable or unknown status had more frequent outbreaks

36. Sow herds that enter gilts without routinely testing for PRRSV by PCR or ELISA had more frequent outbreaks

37. Just over ½ of the sow herds assessed are bringing semen in from outside the farm

38. Sow herds that received semen from boar studs with unknown PRRSV status had more frequent outbreaks

39. Sow herds that did not know when the most recent outbreak had occurred at the boar stud(s) had more frequent outbreaks

40. Of the assessed sow farms that are bringing in semen from outside the farm, very few are testing boars for PRRSV by PCR

41. When sow herds did not wash vehicles that hauled pigs between every load they had more frequent outbreaks

42. When sow herds did not allow vehicles that hauled genetic replacements to dry after washing they had more frequent outbreaks

43. Nearly all of the sow farms assessed disposed of dead animals on-site

44. Sow farms that only required a boot wash / disinfection or with unrestricted entry had more frequent outbreaks

45. Sow farms with high employee turnover had more frequent outbreaks

46. Sow farms located in areas with more swine farms had more frequent outbreaks

47. Sow farms located on flat land or gentle rolling hills had more frequent outbreaks

48. American Association of Swine Veterinarians National Pork Board Acknowledgements • Asociación Colombiana de Porcicultores • Jose Fernando Naranjo • Diego Rodriguez • All the veterinarians and producers that completed the PADRAP questionnaires • PADRAP Sponsors • Boehringer Ingelheim Vetmedica, Inc. • Harrisvaccines • NPPC • Newport Laboratories