PetCaseFinder

Peer-reviewed veterinary case report

Development of methodology to prioritise wildlife pathogens for surveillance.

Journal:
Preventive veterinary medicine
Year:
2007
Authors:
McKenzie, Joanna et al.
Affiliation:
Massey University

Plain-English summary

Researchers in New Zealand created a new method to help prioritize which wildlife diseases should be monitored. This method, called "rapid risk analysis," quickly assesses the risk of 48 foreign and 34 local wildlife pathogens (germs that can cause disease) by looking at how likely they are to enter the country, spread, and affect wildlife, humans, and farm animals. By scoring these pathogens, they were able to rank them based on their risk levels, which can help decide where to focus resources for monitoring. This approach allows for tailored surveillance strategies for different groups of wildlife, making it easier to manage potential health threats. Overall, the new method proved effective in distinguishing between the risks of various pathogens.

Abstract

We developed and evaluated a methodology to prioritise pathogens for a wildlife disease surveillance strategy in New Zealand. The methodology, termed 'rapid risk analysis' was based on the import risk analysis framework recommended by the Office Internationale des Epizooties (OIE), and involved: hazard identification, risk estimation, and ranking of 48 exotic and 34 endemic wildlife pathogens. The risk assessment was more rapid than a full quantitative assessment through the use of a semi-quantitative approach to score pathogens for probability of entry to NZ (release assessment), likelihood of spread (exposure assessment) and consequences in free-living wildlife, captive wildlife, humans, livestock and companion animals. Risk was estimated by multiplying the scores for the probability of entry to New Zealand by the likelihood of spread by the consequences for free-living wildlife, humans and livestock. The rapid risk analysis methodology produced scores that were sufficiently differentiated between pathogens to be useful for ranking them on the basis of risk. Ranking pathogens on the basis of the risk estimate for each population sector provided an opportunity to identify the priorities within each sector alone thus avoiding value-laden comparisons between sectors. Ranking pathogens across all three population sectors by summing the risk estimate for each sector provided a comparison of total risk which may be useful for resource allocation decisions at national level. Ranking pathogens within each wildlife taxonomic group using the total risk estimate was most useful for developing specific surveillance strategies for each group.

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/17482697/