Engaging livestock keepers

as actors in animal health

Angus Cameron

AusVet Animal Health Services

Context

• Areas of interest

– Animal health surveillance

– Animal health information systems

• Principles applicable to other areas of

animal health

Starting assumptions

• Main purpose of surveillance

– report to OIE and FAO

• Focus on priority diseases

– Collecting data on routine diseases is a waste

of time and money

• Designing surveillance

– Senior veterinary officials or epidemiologists at

the central level

Starting assumptions…

• Early detection

– Difficult and expensive so focus resources on:

• priority diseases in priority areas

• use reliable (high Se and Sp) tests

• Passive surveillance (farmer reporting)

– Hard to make farmers report disease

• Farmers are stupid

Theory

• Reasons for surveillance

– Demonstration of freedom

– Describe level of disease

– Case finding

– Early detection

Sampling

possible

Theory…

• Requirements for early detection and case

finding:

– Complete coverage of the population

– Continuous surveillance

• Conclusion

– Farmer reporting is the only practical and

affordable approach

• Not just another component

• Must be the core of almost all surveillance systems

Early detection / Case finding

• Objective

– Every case (suspect of being a priority

disease)

– Reported immediately, and

– Investigated to provide definitive diagnosis (or

at least rule out priority disease)

• Reality

– Almost always fail

Why?

• Farmers fail to report

• Why?

– Farmers are not stupid

– Rational decision based on:

intuitive cost-benefit analysis

Example

• Notifiable disease

– (authorities not very interested in routine

diseases)

– Cost:

• Definite disruption

• Probable quarantine

• Possible culling of all animals

– Benefit for the farmer

• Almost none

• All benefits at higher level

Conclusion

• Farmers must get direct, personal benefit

from reporting

– Can’t target priority diseases

• Must work with all diseases of interest to the farmer

– Can’t aim to do surveillance

• Must provide animal health service (give) not do

surveillance (take)

Philosophical framework (part 1)

1. Farmer must get direct personal benefit

from participating in disease reporting

2. Passive reporting systems must work with

all diseases, not just priority diseases

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Jan-0

5

May-0

5

Sep-0

5

Jan-0

6

May-0

6

Sep-0

6

Jan-0

7

May-0

7

Sep-0

7

Jan-0

8

May-0

8

Sep-0

8

Jan-0

9

May-0

9

Sep-0

9

Jan-1

0

Staff Incentives

Philosophical framework (part 2)

3. All players must get direct personal

benefit from participating in disease

reporting

4. Information system must be designed by

field and local staff to meet their needs,

not central staff

Consequences

• Aim:

– Collect data on all diseases instantly

• Result:

– Too much paper, too much data

• Traditional solution

– Hierarchical compilation and filtering

• Slow

• Data of very little value

New approach: Big Surveillance

• Components

– Powerful central database

– Field staff capture data in electronic format

• SMS, mobile Apps, etc.

– Direct, immediate submission to central

database

– Automated checking, analysis and reporting

– Immediate feedback for case management

– Atomic data handling

Theory Practice

• Philosophy implemented in Indonesia

National integrated animal health information system

• Result

– 30 fold increase in reporting

– Sustainable

– No incentives

More information

• YouTube

– Search for

• iSIKHNAS - user testimonies

• iSIKHNAS - how the system works

• Web

– http://wiki.isikhnas.com

• Full system documentation

• Indonesian and English

Acknowledgements

• Indonesian funding

– DGLAHS

• Team members

– M Syibli

– Sigit Nurtanto

– S Yulianti

– CK Yohana

– Priyono

– RN Muhammad

– Soegiarto

– and many more…

• Australian funding

– AusAID

– Department of

Agriculture

• Team members

– Jonathan Happold

– Albertus Muljono

– Catriona Mackenzie

– and many more…

Thank you