Peer-reviewed veterinary case report
A review of approaches to quality assurance of veterinary systems for health-status certification.
- Journal:
- Preventive veterinary medicine
- Year:
- 2002
- Authors:
- Stärk, Katharina D C et al.
- Affiliation:
- Swiss Federal Veterinary Office
Plain-English summary
This study looks at how to ensure that health certificates for animals and animal products are reliable, especially for trade purposes. The trustworthiness of these certificates relies on the quality of the information collected and the systems used to gather that data. The researchers discuss various methods to evaluate these systems, including scoring systems and questionnaires, but note that many of these methods have limitations, such as being too subjective or focusing only on the inputs rather than the actual outcomes. They suggest that using risk assessments and standardized data could improve the process, as seen in successful efforts by the European Union. Overall, the study emphasizes the need for better documentation and transparency in veterinary health systems to enhance their credibility.
Abstract
Regarding national and international trade of animals and animal products, certificates are required to document specific health levels. The credibility of such certificates depends on the quality of the data used to establish the status. Credibility also depends on the quality of the design and protocols used in the data-gathering process (i.e. on the quality of the surveillance-and-monitoring systems (SMS) and on the quality of the veterinary administrative systems (VAdminS)). The major requirements for the assessment of the SMS and VAdminS are: objectivity, accuracy, transparency, practicality, quantitative in nature. To assess the quality of SMS and VAdminS, systems analysis might provide a suitable framework. Systems analysis requires the identification and description of all components of the system-how they interact with each other and with other systems. Graphical methods (e.g. fault trees) are available to support this procedure. To assess the quality of SMS, scoring systems have been suggested. Their main weakness is the inherent subjectiveness. Alternatively, performance indicators (PI) could be used. For the assessment of VAdminS, questionnaires have been developed and applied. Their main limitations are that they focus on the input rather than on the output and that they are purely descriptive in nature. Thus, comparisons between countries are almost impossible. Semi-quantitative questionnaires using scores now are being developed and tested, although their limitations will be similar to those mentioned above. Another approach is the use of risk assessment including standardised data files assembled by countries volunteering to be assessed. This was applied successfully by the European Union (EU) in the geographic risk assessment for bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE). In general, the publication and documentation of veterinary systems needs to be encouraged to make them accessible to peer review.
Find similar cases for your pet
PetCaseFinder finds other peer-reviewed reports of pets with the same symptoms, plus a plain-English summary of what was tried across them.
Search related cases →Original publication: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12450685/