Farmers' and veterinary surgeons' knowledge, perceptions and attitudes towards cattle abortion investigations in the UK.

BACKGROUND: Cattle abortion can significantly affect farm productivity and be an important cause of economic loss on beef and dairy farms. METHOD: A questionnaire-based survey, completed by 379 farmers and 134 veterinary surgeons from the UK and Ireland, investigated motivators and barriers towards abortion investigations and perceptions of cattle abortion. Participants were recruited using convenience sampling. RESULTS: Veterinary surgeons underestimated farmers' willingness to pay for an abortion investigation; 54 per cent of veterinary surgeons expected farmers to pay under 100£/€, compared with 46 per cent of farmers. Most farmers (27 per cent) were willing to pay 101-250£/€ and 12 per cent above 500£/€. The incidence threshold warranting abortion investigation was 4 per cent for veterinary surgeons and lower for farmers at 2 per cent, especially beef farmers, where 48 per cent indicated a 1 per cent incidence required attention. Seventy-five per cent of dairy farmers used more than 2 per cent as their threshold. Eighty-four per cent of veterinary surgeons and 95 per cent of farmers agreed on the same abortion definition. CONCLUSION: Veterinary surgeons and farmers agree on the definition of abortion; however, veterinary surgeons underestimate the willingness of farmers to engage with and pay for abortion investigations. A more proactive approach from veterinary surgeons, including improved communication and transparency around costs, expectations and clients' goals can improve abortion investigation outcomes.

Assessment of community awareness and risk perceptions of zoonotic causes of abortion in cattle at three selected livestock-wildlife interface areas of Zimbabwe.

A study was conducted to assess the awareness of cattle abortions due to brucellosis, Rift Valley fever (RVF) and leptospirosis, and to compare frequencies of reported abortions in communities living at the periphery of the Great Limpopo Transfrontier Conservation Area in southeastern Zimbabwe. Three study sites were selected based on the type of livestock-wildlife interface: porous livestock-wildlife interface (unrestricted); non-porous livestock-wildlife interface (restricted by fencing); and livestock-wildlife non-interface (totally absent or control). Respondents randomly selected from a list of potential cattle farmers (N = 379) distributed at porous (40·1%), non-interface (35·5%) and non-porous (26·4%), were interviewed using a combined close- and open-ended questionnaire. Focus group discussions were conducted with 10-12 members of each community. More abortions in the last 5 years were reported from the porous interface (52%) and a significantly higher per cent of respondents from the porous interface (P < 0·05) perceived wildlife as playing a role in livestock abortions compared with the other interface types. The odds of reporting abortions in cattle were higher in large herd sizes (odds ratio (OR) = 2·6; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1·5-4·3), porous (OR = 1·9; 95% CI 1·0-3·5) and non-porous interface (OR = 2·2; 95% CI 1·1-4·3) compared with livestock-wildlife non-interface areas. About 21·6% of the respondents knew brucellosis as a cause of abortion, compared with RVF (9·8%) and leptospirosis (3·7%). These results explain to some extent, the existence of human/wildlife conflict in the studied livestock-wildlife interface areas of Zimbabwe, which militates against biodiversity conservation efforts. The low awareness of zoonoses means the public is at risk of contracting some of these infections. Thus, further studies should focus on livestock-wildlife interface areas to assess if the increased rates of abortions reported in cattle may be due to exposure to wildlife or other factors. The government of Zimbabwe needs to launch educational programmes on public health awareness in these remote areas at the periphery of transfrontier conservation areas where livestock-wildlife interface exists to help mitigate the morbidity and mortality of people from some of the known zoonotic diseases.