Brucellosis 2003 proceedings - PHIDIAS

Short Oral Communications
Epidemiology, control and eradication programs
EO7- HUMAN HEALTH BENEFITS FROM LIVESTOCK VACCINATION FOR
BRUCELLOSIS: A CASE STUDY.
Felix Roth 1 , Jakob Zinsstag 1 , Dontor Orkhon 2 , G. Chimed-Ochir 3 , Guy Hutton 1 , Ottorino Cosivi 4 , Guy
Carrin 4 and Joachim Otte 5 . (1) Swiss Tropical Institute, Swiss Centre for International Health and
Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, PO Box, CH-4002 Basle, Switzerland. (2) Ministry of
Public Health, Olympic Street 2, Ulaanbaatar 11, Mongolia. (3) Infectious Disease Research Centre,
PO Box 48, Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia. (4) World Health Organisation, Avenue Appia 20, 1211 Geneva
27, Switzerland. (5) Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), Viale delle Terme
di Caracalla, I-00100 Rome/ Italy.
This study estimates the economic benefit, cost-effectiveness and distribution
of benefit of improving human health in Mongolia through the control of brucellosis by
mass vaccination of livestock. Cost-effectiveness and economic benefit of mass
vaccination against brucellosis, considering both human society and the agricultural
sector is modelled. The intervention consists of a planned 10-year livestock mass
vaccination campaign using Rev-1 livestock vaccine for small ruminants and S19
livestock vaccine for cattle. Cost-effectiveness, expressed as cost per DALY averted,
was the primary outcome of this study. In a scenario of 52% reduction of brucellosis
transmission between animals, conferred by mass vaccination, a total number of
49,027 DALYs could be averted. In the same scenario, estimated intervention costs
are USD 8.3 millions and the overall benefit is USD 26.6 millions. This results in a
Net Present Value of USD 18.3 millions and an average Benefit Cost Ratio for
society of 3.2 (min. 2.27; max. 4.37). If the costs of the intervention are shared
between the sectors proportionally to the benefit to each, the public health sector
should contribute 11% to the intervention cost, yielding a cost-effectiveness of USD
19.1 per DALY averted (95% confidence intervals: 5.3 – 486.8). If private economic
gain due to improved human health is included, the health sector should contribute
42% to the intervention costs and the cost effectiveness decreases to USD 71.4 per
DALY averted. If costs of livestock brucellosis vaccination are allocated proportionally
to all benefits, the intervention may become profitable and cost effective for both the
agricultural and the health sectors.
EO8- DIAGNOSTIC VALIDATION OF BOVINE BRUCELLOSIS SEROLOGICAL
TESTS FOR EPIDEMIOSURVEILLANCE PURPOSES.
F. Boelaert 1 , E. Venoo 1 , D. Verloo 1 , C. Saegerman 2 , G. Maquet 3 , M. Lomba 3 , L. De Meulemeester 4 , J.
Wullepit 4 , K. Walravens 1 , K. Mintiens 1 , J. Godfroid 1 . (1) Veterinary and Agrochemical Research
Center, Brussels, Belgium. (2) Ministry of Health, Consumer’s Protection and Environment, Brussels,
Belgium. (3) Association Régionale de Santé et d’Identification Animales, Ciney, Belgium. (4)
Diergezondheidszorg Vlaanderen, Leefdaal, Belgium.
The last bovine brucellosis case in Belgium was identified in March 2000. In
the context of the belgian epidemiosurveillance program, the objective of this study
was to compare the diagnostic characteristics of, on one hand, different brucellosis
serological tests performed on individual bovine sera (SAW-EDTA, RB, iELISA) or
pooled bovine sera (pooled iELISA) and, on the other hand, a serial testing strategy:
first testing the pooled sera followed by retesting the individual sera in case of
positivity.
In order to evaluate the diagnostic specificity (Sp), sera were collected from
animals over 2 years of age, between November 1st, 2001 and March 31, 2002. The
50
Brucellosis 2003 International Research Conference