Search

Clinical ketosis (CK) and subclinical ketosis (SCK) are associated with lower milk production, lower reproductive performance, an increased culling of cows and an increased probability of other disorders. Quantifying the costs related to ketosis will enable veterinarians and farmers to make more informed decisions regarding the prevention and treatment of the disease. The overall aim of this study was to estimate the combined costs of CK and SCK using assumptions and input variables from a typical Dutch context. A herd level dynamic stochastic simulation model was developed, simulating 385 herds with 130 cows each. In the default scenario there was a CK probability of almost 1% and a SCK probability of 11%. The herds under the no risk scenario had no CK and SCK, while the herds under the high-risk scenario had a doubled probability of CK and SCK compared to the default scenario. The results from the simulation model were used to estimate the annual cash flows of the herds, including the costs related to milk production losses, treatment, displaced abomasum, mastitis, calf management, culling and feed, as well as the returns from sales of milk and calves. The difference between the annual net cash flows of farms in the no risk scenario and the default scenario provides the estimate of the herd level costs of ketosis. Average herd level costs of ketosis (CK and SCK combined) were €3,613 per year for a default farm and €7,371 per year for a high-risk farm. The costs for a single CK case were on average €709 (with 5 and 95 percentiles of €64 and €1,196, respectively), while the costs for a single SCK case were on average €150 (with 5 and 95 percentiles of €18 and €422, respectively) for the default farms. The differences in costs between cases occurred due to differences between cases (e.g., cow culled vs cow not culled, getting another disease vs not getting another disease)., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

On-farm decision support in animal health management requires a tailor-made failure costs (FCs) assessment of production disorders for the individual farm. In our study we defined a generic framework to estimate the FC of production disorders in dairy cows. We converted the framework to a practical tool in which the farm-specific FC of mastitis, ketosis, lameness and metritis were estimated for 162 organic dairy farms in four European countries. Along with the structure of the framework, the FC estimation required three distinct types of model input: performance input (related to herd performance parameters), consequential input (related to the consequences of the disorders) and economic input (related to price levels). Input was derived from official herd recordings (e.g. test-day records and animal health recordings) and farmers' responses (e.g. questionnaire replies). The average FC of mastitis, ketosis, lameness and metritis amounted to € 96, € 21, € 43 and € 10 per cow per year, respectively. The variation in FC outcomes was high among farmers and countries. Overall ranking of the disorders based on absolute values was the same for all countries, with mastitis being the costliest disorder followed in order by lameness, ketosis, and metritis. Farm specific estimates can be used to rank production related disorders in terms of their associated failure costs and thus provide valuable insights for herd health management. The practical calculation tool developed in this study should be considered by farmers or herd health advisors to support their animal health practices or advice., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Recently, it has been shown that the addition of meloxicam to standard antimicrobial therapy for clinical mastitis (CM) improves the conception rate of dairy cows contracting CM in the first 120 d in milk. The objective of our study was to assess whether this improved reproduction through additional treatment with meloxicam would result in a positive net economic benefit for the farmer. We developed a stochastic bio-economic simulation model, in which a dairy cow with CM in the first 120 d in milk was simulated. Two scenarios were simulated in which CM cases were treated with meloxicam in conjunction with antimicrobial therapy or with antimicrobial therapy alone. The scenarios differed for conception rates (31% with meloxicam or 21% without meloxicam) and for the cost of CM treatment. Sensitivity analyses were undertaken for the biological and economic components of the model to assess the effects of a wide range of inputs on inferences about the cost effectiveness of meloxicam treatment. Model results showed an average net economic benefit of €42 per CM case per year in favor of the meloxicam scenario. Cows in the no-meloxicam treatment scenario had higher returns on milk production, lower costs upon calving, and reduced costs of treatment. However, these did not outweigh the savings associated with lower feed intake, reduced number of inseminations, and the reduced culling rate. The net economic benefit favoring meloxicam therapy was a consequence of the better reproductive performance in the meloxicam scenario in which cows had a shorter calving to conception interval (132 vs. 143 d), a shorter intercalving interval (405 vs. 416 d), and fewer inseminations per conception (2.9 vs. 3.7) compared with cows in the no-meloxicam treatment scenario. This resulted in a shorter lactation, hence a lower lactational milk production (8,441 vs. 8,517 kg per lactation) with lower feeding costs in the meloxicam group. A lower culling rate (12 vs. 25%) resulted in lower replacement costs in the meloxicam treatment scenario. All of the scenarios evaluated in the sensitivity analyses favored meloxicam treatment over no meloxicam. This study demonstrated that improvements in conception rate achieved by the use of meloxicam, as additional therapy for mild to moderate CM in the first 120 d in milk, have positive economic benefits. This inference remained true over a wide range of technical and economic inputs, demonstrating that use of meloxicam is likely to be cost effective across many production systems., (The Authors. Published by FASS Inc. and Elsevier Inc. on behalf of the American Dairy Science Association®. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/).)

Bovine udder health in Switzerland is of a relatively high level. However, antimicrobial usage (AMU) seems high in comparison to other European countries also. A new udder health and AMU improvement program could improve this situation but it is uncertain whether there is support from the field. This study aimed to quantify preferences of dairy farmers and veterinarians for the start and design characteristics of a new national udder health and AMU improvement program in Switzerland. A total of 478 dairy farmers and 98 veterinarians completed an online questionnaire. Questions on their demographics and their mindset toward AMU were complemented with an adaptive choice-based conjoint interview, a novel conjoint analysis technique to quantify preferences of respondents for characteristics of a product for which multiple trade-off decisions must be made (here a bovine udder health and AMU improvement program). The conjoint analysis was followed by a multivariate multiple regression analysis to identify groups of respondents with different program design preferences. Logistic regression models were used to associate covariates with respondents' preference to start a new udder health and AMU improvement program. Most farmers (55%) and veterinarians (62%) were in favor of starting a new voluntary udder health and AMU improvement program, but the program design preferences agreed moderately between the two stakeholder groups. Farmers preferred an udder health and AMU improvement program that did not contain a penalty system for high AMU, was voluntary for all dairy herds, and aimed to simultaneously improve udder health and reduce AMU. Veterinarians preferred a program that had the veterinary organization and the government taking the lead in program design decision making, did not contain a penalty system for high AMU, and aimed to simultaneously improve udder health and reduce AMU. Differences between groups of farmers and veterinarians concerning their start preference were identified. Also, the magnitude of various program design preferences changed for farmers with different opinions toward AMU. The information obtained from this study may support the decision-making process and the communication to the field afterward, when discussing national strategies to improve udder health and AMU in Switzerland.

Mastitis is an important disease from an economic perspective, but most cost assessments of mastitis include only the direct costs associated with the disease (e.g., production losses, culling, and treatment), which we call failure costs (FC). However, farmers also invest time and money in controlling mastitis, and these preventive costs (PC) also need to be taken into account. To estimate the total costs of mastitis, we estimated both FC and PC. We combined multiple test-day milk records from 108 Dutch dairy farms with information on applied mastitis prevention measures and farmers' registration of clinical mastitis for individual dairy cows. The aim was to estimate the total costs of mastitis and to give insight into variations between farms. We estimated the average total costs of mastitis to be €240/lactating cow per year, in which FC contributed €120/lactating cow per year and PC contributed another €120/lactating cow per year. Milk production losses, discarded milk, and culling were the main contributors to FC, at €32, €20, and €20/lactating cow per year, respectively. Labor costs were the main contributor to PC, next to consumables and investments, at €82, €34, and €4/lactating cow per year, respectively. The variation between farmers was substantial, and some farmers faced both high FC and PC. This variation may have been due to structural differences between farms, different mastitis-causing pathogens, the time at which preventive action is initiated, stockmanship, or missing measures in PC estimates. We estimated the minimum FC to be €34 per lactating cow per yr. All farmers initiated some preventive action to control or reduce mastitis, indicating that farmers will always have mastitis-related costs, because mastitis will never be fully eradicated from a farm. Insights into both the PC and FC of a specific farm will allow veterinary advisors and farmers to assess whether current udder health strategies are appropriate or whether there is room for improvement from an economic perspective., (Copyright © 2016 American Dairy Science Association. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)