Key result
Diagnostic screening for BVDV persistently infected cattle is economically justified in herds with a history of BVDV-compatible syndromes ($4.60 available per cow annually), but not in low-prevalence herds.
Why the study?
Is diagnostic screening for BVDV persistently infected cattle economically justified in beef cowherds?
Is diagnostic screening for BVDV persistently infected cattle economically justified in beef cowherds?
Diagnostic screening for BVDV persistently infected cattle is economically justified only in herds with a history raising suspicion of infection, rather than as a blanket protocol for all herds.
May justify targeted screening in suspect herds only; leaves open prospective validation across prevalence strata.
Bovine viral diarrhoea virus (BVDV) infection is responsible for a variety of economically important syndromes in cattle. In order to quantify the economic benefit for removing BVDV persistently infected (PI) animals, a 10-year farm profitability simulation model was used to compare production scenarios with and without PI calves present. Differences in profitability between the scenarios, estimates the value of diagnostic testing given the expected prevalence in the herd. If the true prevalence of herds with at least one PI animal is 1% (low end of the 95% confidence interval for randomly selected herds), the average annual dollars available for screening is only $0.15. Using a 10-year period, if the whole herd is tested the initial year and the cost of the initial screening is pro-rated over 10 years, and only replacements are screened in subsequent years, $0.60 is available for costs associated with each animal tested. If, however, the true prevalence of herds with at least one PI animal is 30% (high end of the 95% confidence interval for pre-screened herds), the average annual dollars available for screening is $4.60. In this scenario, $18.40 is available for each animal tested. These figures show that practitioners may not be economically justified to initiate diagnostic screening protocols for PI BVDV cattle for all clients. However, if ranch history raises a suspicion of BVDV PI cattle being present, a screening protocol can be defended based on its likelihood to improve economic return.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Larson et al. (2002) studied Bovine viral diarrhea virus (BVDV) persistent infection. Diagnostic screening for BVDV persistently infected animals vs. No screening was evaluated on Average annual dollars available for screening per cow exposed for breeding. Diagnostic screening for BVDV persistently infected cattle is economically justified in herds with a history of BVDV-compatible syndromes ($4.60 available per cow annually), but not in low-prevalence herds.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: