{"title":"缩短狗进口前的等待时间会对狂犬病风险产生什么影响?基于欧盟立法的模型研究。","authors":"Guillaume Crozet, Florence Cliquet, Emmanuelle Robardet","doi":"10.1111/zph.13113","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Aims</h3>\n \n <p><i>Lyssavirus rabies</i> (RABV) is responsible for a major zoonotic infection that is almost always lethal once clinical signs appear. Rabies can be (re)introduced into rabies-free areas through transboundary dog movements, thus compromising animal and human health. A number of measures have been implemented to prevent this happening, one of which is the waiting period (WP) after anti-rabies vaccination and serological testing. This WP ensures that antibodies assessed through the serological test are due to the vaccine, not to infection. Indeed, if antibodies are due to RABV infection, the dog should display clinical signs within this WP and would not therefore be imported.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods and Results</h3>\n \n <p>Within a framework of quantitative risk assessment, we used modelling approaches to evaluate the impact of this WP and its duration on the risk of introducing rabies via the importation of dogs into the European Union. Two types of models were used, a classical stochastic scenario tree model and an individual-based model, both parameterised using scientific literature or data specifically applicable to the EU. Results showed that, assuming perfect compliance, the current 3-month waiting period was associated with a median annual number of 0.04 infected dogs imported into the EU. When the WP was reduced, the risk increased. For example, for a 1-month WP, the median annual number of infected dogs imported was 0.17 or 0.15 depending on the model, which corresponds to a four-fold increase.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>This in silico study, particularly suitable for evaluating rare events such as rabies infections in rabies-free areas, provided results that can directly inform policymakers in order to adapt regulations linked to rabies and animal movements.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":24025,"journal":{"name":"Zoonoses and Public Health","volume":"71 4","pages":"402-415"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/zph.13113","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"What would be the impact on the rabies risk of reducing the waiting period before dogs are imported? A modelling study based on the European Union legislation\",\"authors\":\"Guillaume Crozet, Florence Cliquet, Emmanuelle Robardet\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/zph.13113\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Aims</h3>\\n \\n <p><i>Lyssavirus rabies</i> (RABV) is responsible for a major zoonotic infection that is almost always lethal once clinical signs appear. Rabies can be (re)introduced into rabies-free areas through transboundary dog movements, thus compromising animal and human health. A number of measures have been implemented to prevent this happening, one of which is the waiting period (WP) after anti-rabies vaccination and serological testing. This WP ensures that antibodies assessed through the serological test are due to the vaccine, not to infection. Indeed, if antibodies are due to RABV infection, the dog should display clinical signs within this WP and would not therefore be imported.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Methods and Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>Within a framework of quantitative risk assessment, we used modelling approaches to evaluate the impact of this WP and its duration on the risk of introducing rabies via the importation of dogs into the European Union. Two types of models were used, a classical stochastic scenario tree model and an individual-based model, both parameterised using scientific literature or data specifically applicable to the EU. Results showed that, assuming perfect compliance, the current 3-month waiting period was associated with a median annual number of 0.04 infected dogs imported into the EU. When the WP was reduced, the risk increased. For example, for a 1-month WP, the median annual number of infected dogs imported was 0.17 or 0.15 depending on the model, which corresponds to a four-fold increase.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\\n \\n <p>This in silico study, particularly suitable for evaluating rare events such as rabies infections in rabies-free areas, provided results that can directly inform policymakers in order to adapt regulations linked to rabies and animal movements.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":24025,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Zoonoses and Public Health\",\"volume\":\"71 4\",\"pages\":\"402-415\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/zph.13113\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Zoonoses and Public Health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"97\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/zph.13113\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"农林科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"INFECTIOUS DISEASES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Zoonoses and Public Health","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/zph.13113","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"INFECTIOUS DISEASES","Score":null,"Total":0}
What would be the impact on the rabies risk of reducing the waiting period before dogs are imported? A modelling study based on the European Union legislation
Aims
Lyssavirus rabies (RABV) is responsible for a major zoonotic infection that is almost always lethal once clinical signs appear. Rabies can be (re)introduced into rabies-free areas through transboundary dog movements, thus compromising animal and human health. A number of measures have been implemented to prevent this happening, one of which is the waiting period (WP) after anti-rabies vaccination and serological testing. This WP ensures that antibodies assessed through the serological test are due to the vaccine, not to infection. Indeed, if antibodies are due to RABV infection, the dog should display clinical signs within this WP and would not therefore be imported.
Methods and Results
Within a framework of quantitative risk assessment, we used modelling approaches to evaluate the impact of this WP and its duration on the risk of introducing rabies via the importation of dogs into the European Union. Two types of models were used, a classical stochastic scenario tree model and an individual-based model, both parameterised using scientific literature or data specifically applicable to the EU. Results showed that, assuming perfect compliance, the current 3-month waiting period was associated with a median annual number of 0.04 infected dogs imported into the EU. When the WP was reduced, the risk increased. For example, for a 1-month WP, the median annual number of infected dogs imported was 0.17 or 0.15 depending on the model, which corresponds to a four-fold increase.
Conclusion
This in silico study, particularly suitable for evaluating rare events such as rabies infections in rabies-free areas, provided results that can directly inform policymakers in order to adapt regulations linked to rabies and animal movements.
期刊介绍:
Zoonoses and Public Health brings together veterinary and human health researchers and policy-makers by providing a venue for publishing integrated and global approaches to zoonoses and public health. The Editors will consider papers that focus on timely collaborative and multi-disciplinary research in zoonoses and public health. This journal provides rapid publication of original papers, reviews, and potential discussion papers embracing this collaborative spirit. Papers should advance the scientific knowledge of the sources, transmission, prevention and control of zoonoses and be authored by scientists with expertise in areas such as microbiology, virology, parasitology and epidemiology. Articles that incorporate recent data into new methods, applications, or approaches (e.g. statistical modeling) which enhance public health are strongly encouraged.