First approach validating a scoring system for foot-pad dermatitis in broiler chickens developed for application in practice

Abstract

Measuring the severity of foot-pad dermatitis is an accepted tool monitoring the quality of animal husbandry and welfare. Up to now, a variety of scoring schemes have been used, most of them based on visual evaluation. However, a standardisation and validation of scoring systems is beneficial, not only to compare different studies, but to provide objective indicators in poultry welfare. In this study, we validated one visual scoring system, widely used in Northern Germany, by using additional information of histological measurements. Therefore, feet of broiler chickens (ROSS 308) from one flock were visually scored at the slaughter plant (4-point score). Ten feet per score level (n = 40) were sampled and analysed macroscopically and microscopically. Data were analysed using cluster analysis, providing a classification based on these histopathological findings. Validity of the visual scoring system was analysed by (1) testing the interobserver reliability between different observers and (2) by comparing both, visual and cluster classification types using the McNemar’s test. In a last step Kendall tau correlations were calculated in order to find suitable parameters to judge the severity in a visual score more reliably. Results could show that most agreement was found for the score levels 1 and 2, whereas results for score levels 3 and 4 were more divergent. These results were found in both, interobserver reliability and comparison of classification types (visual vs. cluster). Results revealed interaction effects of classification type and scoring level for the width of ulcers (p = 0.0044) and the size of the lesion (p = 0.0081). In the cluster classification, higher values in both, width of ulcer and size of lesion could be found in score level 3. Furthermore, a positive correlation of the size of lesion with the depth of the ulcer was found (0.73). In conclusion, we found that histological findings coincided well with the less severe visual scores (1; 2), whereas the differentiation between the severe scores (3; 4) seemed to be less valid. For practical purposes we therefore recommend keeping visual scoring systems simple. Furthermore, as the correlation coefficient between both was quite high, the size of the lesion might serve as an indirect indicator of the depth.