Effectiveness and Cost Efficiency of Different Surveillance Components for Proving Freedom and Early Detection of Disease: Bluetongue Serotype 8 in Cattle as Case Study for Belgium, France and the Netherlands.

<p>Quick detection and recovery of country's freedom status remain a constant challenge in animal health surveillance. The efficacy and cost efficiency of different surveillance components in proving the absence of infection or (early) detection of bluetongue serotype 8 in cattle populations within different countries (the Netherlands, France, Belgium) using surveillance data from years 2006 and 2007 were investigated using an adapted scenario tree model approach. First, surveillance components (sentinel, yearly cross-sectional and passive clinical reporting) within each country were evaluated in terms of efficacy for substantiating freedom of infection. Yearly cross-sectional survey and passive clinical reporting performed well within each country with sensitivity of detection values ranging around 0.99. The sentinel component had a sensitivity of detection around 0.7. Secondly, how effective the components were for (early) detection of bluetongue serotype 8 and whether syndromic surveillance on reproductive performance, milk production and mortality data available from the Netherlands and Belgium could be of added value were evaluated. Epidemic curves were used to estimate the timeliness of detection. Sensitivity analysis revealed that expected within-herd prevalence and number of herds processed were the most influential parameters for proving freedom and early detection. Looking at the assumed direct costs, although total costs were low for sentinel and passive clinical surveillance components, passive clinical surveillance together with syndromic surveillance (based on reproductive performance data) turned out most cost-efficient for the detection of bluetongue serotype 8. To conclude, for emerging or re-emerging vectorborne disease that behaves such as bluetongue serotype 8, it is recommended to use passive clinical and syndromic surveillance as early detection systems for maximum cost efficiency and sensitivity. Once an infection is detected and eradicated, cross-sectional screening for substantiating freedom of infection and sentinel for monitoring the disease evolution are recommended.</p>