Abstract
Zoonotic bacterial infections are a health hazard for people who are in regular contact with livestock at the farm level. Improved biosecurity can limit zoonotic pathogen transmission within farms. The aim of this review was to summarize the effectiveness of farm‐level biosecurity interventions in reducing bacterial transmission from animals to people who lived, worked in or visited farms. A systematic literature review was conducted using Embase, Ovid Medline and Agris databases, which were searched on 7th of July 2019, limited to English language papers but with no time exclusion criteria. A narrative synthesis was undertaken utilizing the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination approach, reported in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses guidelines. Risk of bias within and across the included studies was performed using established checklists. Out of 869 studies retrieved through database searches, 11 studies were selected. In addition, three studies were found through study reference lists. Fourteen studies were therefore included in this review. Biosecurity interventions were grouped into five categories: hand washing, sanitization and hygienic measures (six studies); personal protective equipment (five studies); vaccination (two studies); other interventions (e.g. air ventilation flap) (four studies); and routine farm activities (two studies). Across studies that investigated odds of human colonization or infection (three studies), odds were seen to both be increased and decreased through use of tested biosecurity measures. Large confidence intervals that often crossed the threshold of an odds ratio equal to 1 were found. Most of the studies' overall risk of bias was ‘medium risk’ (11 studies), with selection bias domains generally being scored ‘medium risk.’ Biosecurity interventions are potentially beneficial in reducing bacterial transmission from animals to humans. However, more high‐quality evidence is needed to increase certainty in which interventions, in which contexts, are most effective from the human health perspective.
Highlights
The aim of this review was to summarize the effectiveness of biosecurity interventions in reducing the transmission of bacterial infections from livestock to humans at the farm level
The study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of Brucella melitensis Rev-1 for small ruminants and Brucella abortus S19 for cattle as annual mass vaccination for 10 years and found that achieving a reduction of brucellosis transmission by 52% between animals result in a human impact of avoiding 51,856 human brucellosis cases, which results in 49,027 disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) averted, with a cost-effectiveness ratio of US$19.1 per DALY averted (Zinsstag et al, 2007)
This review summarizes the effectiveness of biosecurity interventions on farms in relation to the impact on bacterial infection and/or colonization in people
Summary
Zoonotic bacterial infections are a serious public health hazard, as well as an occupational risk for farm workers who are in regular contact with livestock. Improved biosecurity is an often-applied intervention to limit pathogen transmission within and between farms These interventions can affect transmission of zoonotic pathogens to humans, having a beneficial impact on public health. Types of biosecurity interventions and their effectiveness to reduce transmission of bacterial infections from animal to farmers are available (Schimmer et al, 2012). The effectiveness of these interventions in terms of the reduced transmission of bacteria to humans has not been systematically analysed or assessed in terms of risk of bias. 2. To assess the risk of bias within and across the current evidence on the effectiveness of biosecurity interventions on the transmission of bacteria from animals to people, within farms
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
