TY - JOUR
T1 - Scientific Opinion on the assessment of the control measures of the category A diseases of Animal Health Law
T2 - African Swine Fever
AU - EFSA Panel on Animal Health and Welfare (AHAW)
AU - Nielsen, Soren Saxmose
AU - Alvarez, Julio
AU - Bicout, Dominique Joseph
AU - Calistri, Paolo
AU - Depner, Klaus
AU - Drewe, Julian Ashley
AU - Garin-Bastuji, Bruno
AU - Gonzales Rojas, Jose Luis
AU - Schmidt, Christian Gortazar
AU - Herskin, Mette
AU - Michel, Virginie
AU - Miranda Chueca, Miguel Angel
AU - Pasquali, Paolo
AU - Roberts, Helen Clare
AU - Sihvonen, Liisa Helena
AU - Spoolder, Hans
AU - Stahl, Karl
AU - Velarde, Antonio
AU - Viltrop, Arvo
AU - Winckler, Christoph
AU - De Clercq, Kris
AU - Klement, Eyal
AU - Stegeman, Jan Arend
AU - Gubbins, Simon
AU - Antoniou, Sotiria-Eleni
AU - Broglia, Alessandro
AU - Van der Stede, Yves
AU - Zancanaro, Gabriele
AU - Aznar, Inma
PY - 2021/1
Y1 - 2021/1
N2 - EFSA received a mandate from the European Commission to assess the effectiveness of some of the control measures against diseases included in the Category A list according to Regulation (EU) 2016/429 on transmissible animal diseases (Animal Health Law'). This opinion belongs to a series of opinions where these control measures will be assessed, with this opinion covering the assessment of control measures for African Swine Fever (ASF). In this opinion, EFSA and the AHAW Panel of experts reviewed the effectiveness of: (i) clinical and laboratory sampling procedures, (ii) monitoring period and (iii) the minimum radius of the protection and surveillance zone, and the minimum length of time the measures should be applied in these zones. The general methodology used for this series of opinions has been published elsewhere; nonetheless, specific details of the model used for the assessment of the laboratory sampling procedures for ASF are presented here. Here, also, the transmission kernels used for the assessment of the minimum radius of the protection and surveillance zones are shown. Several scenarios for which these control measures had to be assessed were designed and agreed prior to the start of the assessment. In summary, several sampling procedures as described in the diagnostic manual for ASF were considered ineffective and a suggestion to exclude, or to substitute with more effective procedures was made. The monitoring period was assessed as noneffective for several scenarios and a longer monitoring period was suggested to ensure detection of potentially infected herds. It was demonstrated that the surveillance zone comprises 95% of the infections from an affected establishment, and therefore is considered effective. Recommendations provided for each of the scenarios assessed aim to support the European Commission in the drafting of further pieces of legislation, as well as for plausible ad hoc requests in relation to ASF. (C) 2021 European Food Safety Authority. EFSA Journal published by John Wiley and Sons Ltd on behalf of European Food Safety Authority.
AB - EFSA received a mandate from the European Commission to assess the effectiveness of some of the control measures against diseases included in the Category A list according to Regulation (EU) 2016/429 on transmissible animal diseases (Animal Health Law'). This opinion belongs to a series of opinions where these control measures will be assessed, with this opinion covering the assessment of control measures for African Swine Fever (ASF). In this opinion, EFSA and the AHAW Panel of experts reviewed the effectiveness of: (i) clinical and laboratory sampling procedures, (ii) monitoring period and (iii) the minimum radius of the protection and surveillance zone, and the minimum length of time the measures should be applied in these zones. The general methodology used for this series of opinions has been published elsewhere; nonetheless, specific details of the model used for the assessment of the laboratory sampling procedures for ASF are presented here. Here, also, the transmission kernels used for the assessment of the minimum radius of the protection and surveillance zones are shown. Several scenarios for which these control measures had to be assessed were designed and agreed prior to the start of the assessment. In summary, several sampling procedures as described in the diagnostic manual for ASF were considered ineffective and a suggestion to exclude, or to substitute with more effective procedures was made. The monitoring period was assessed as noneffective for several scenarios and a longer monitoring period was suggested to ensure detection of potentially infected herds. It was demonstrated that the surveillance zone comprises 95% of the infections from an affected establishment, and therefore is considered effective. Recommendations provided for each of the scenarios assessed aim to support the European Commission in the drafting of further pieces of legislation, as well as for plausible ad hoc requests in relation to ASF. (C) 2021 European Food Safety Authority. EFSA Journal published by John Wiley and Sons Ltd on behalf of European Food Safety Authority.
KW - African Swine Fever
KW - Suids
KW - disease control measures
KW - vector borne disease
U2 - 10.2903/j.efsa.2021.6402
DO - 10.2903/j.efsa.2021.6402
M3 - Journal article
C2 - 33552298
SN - 1831-4732
VL - 19
JO - EFSA Journal
JF - EFSA Journal
IS - 1
M1 - e06402
ER -