EFSA Journal (Jul 2021)

Assessment of the control measures of the category A diseases of Animal Health Law: Classical Swine Fever

  • EFSA Panel on Animal Health and Welfare (AHAW),
  • Søren Saxmose Nielsen,
  • Julio Alvarez,
  • Dominique Joseph Bicout,
  • Paolo Calistri,
  • Elisabetta Canali,
  • Julian Ashley Drewe,
  • Bruno Garin‐Bastuji,
  • José Luis Gonzales Rojas,
  • Christian Gortázar Schmidt,
  • Mette Herskin,
  • Virginie Michel,
  • Miguel Ángel Miranda Chueca,
  • Barbara Padalino,
  • Paolo Pasquali,
  • Liisa Helena Sihvonen,
  • Hans Spoolder,
  • Karl Ståhl,
  • Antonio Velarde,
  • Arvo Viltrop,
  • Christoph Winckler,
  • Simon Gubbins,
  • Jan Arend Stegeman,
  • Sotiria‐Eleni Antoniou,
  • Inma Aznar,
  • Alessandro Broglia,
  • Eliana Lima,
  • Yves Van der Stede,
  • Gabriele Zancanaro,
  • Helen Clare Roberts

DOI
https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2021.6707
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 19, no. 7
pp. n/a – n/a

Abstract

Read online

Abstract EFSA received a mandate from the European Commission to assess the effectiveness of some of the control measures against diseases included in the Category A list according to Regulation (EU) 2016/429 on transmissible animal diseases (‘Animal Health Law’). This opinion belongs to a series of opinions where these control measures will be assessed, with this opinion covering the assessment of control measures for Classical swine fever (CSF). In this opinion, EFSA and the AHAW Panel of experts review the effectiveness of: (i) clinical and laboratory sampling procedures, (ii) monitoring period and (iii) the minimum radii of the protection and surveillance zones, and the minimum length of time the measures should be applied in these zones. The general methodology used for this series of opinions has been published elsewhere; nonetheless, details of the model used for answering these questions are presented in this opinion as well as the transmission kernels used for the assessment of the minimum radius of the protection and surveillance zones. Several scenarios for which these control measures had to be assessed were designed and agreed prior to the start of the assessment. Here, several recommendations are given on how to increase the effectiveness of some of the sampling procedures. Based on the average length of the period between virus introduction and the reporting of a CSF suspicion, the monitoring period was assessed as non‐effective. In a similar way, it was recommended that the length of the measures in the protection and surveillance zones were increased from 15 to 25 days in the protection zone and from 30 to 40 days in the surveillance zone. Finally, the analysis of existing Kernels for CSF suggested that the radius of the protection and the surveillance zones comprise 99% of the infections from an affected establishment if transmission occurred. Recommendations provided for each of the scenarios assessed aim to support the European Commission in the drafting of further pieces of legislation, as well as for plausible ad hoc requests in relation to CSF.

Keywords