Implementation of the 5 Steps-Process platform for PRRS control in a farm in Spain

This is a summary of a large field trial designed to evaluate the impact of the 5 Step Process platform on control of heterologous PRRSV in a commercial farm, assessed by animal performance.

11-05-2018


Article by:

E. Sánchez1, T. Fernández1, S. Figueras2, I. Hernández-Caravaca2, V. Rodriguez-Vega2

1 Inga Food, Almendralejo, Spain; 2 Boehringer Ingelheim España, S.A. Spain

Introduction

Porcine Reproductive and Respiratory syndrome (PRRS) is one of the most damaging diseases in the swine industry, having negative effects typically affecting breeding herd reproductive parameters as well as pig productivity parameters1. Costs in Europe are estimated between 100 € and 200 € per sow per year and 5 € to10 € per pig per year2. Controlling the infection is key to keep the systems producing at target levels3 and involves sow herd stabilization as well as an active pig protection. This is a summary of a large field trial designed to evaluate the impact of the 5 Step Process platform4 on control of heterologous PRRSV in a commercial farm, assessed by animal performance.

Materials and methods

The study has been conducted in a PRRS positive 750 sow farrow- to-feeder farm located in the central region of Spain. The 5 step process considers defining goals, determining the status at the starting point, assessing system constraints, and developing, implementing and monitoring solutions. Two resident field virus clusters were found at the beginning of the program with a phylogenetic heterology of the strains between 13,6 % and 15.5 %. 200 gilts entered the farm before closing it (week -1) and then two mass vaccinations (week 0 and week 3) of sows and gilts were done 3 weeks apart injecting intramuscularly 2 ml of Reprocyc PRRS EU®. The rest of the pigs older than 14 days were administered 1 ml IM of PRRSFLEX EU®. Since then, every weekly piglet batch was vaccinated on a regular basis at weaning (21 days), the McRebel protocol was implemented, and a sow and gilts quarterly vaccination was set up. This study analyses the reproductive parameters before and after implementation of the 5 Steps Process platform. Therefore, to analyze the productive parameters we compare them before and after achieving stability. For the statistical process control (SPC chart) analyzing method, the Minitab.17.1.0 software (2013 Minitab Inc.) was used.

Results

Results of the means of the reproductive data in both periods are summarized in table 1.

Table 1. Results of reproductive parameters before and after the implementation of the 5 Steps-Process

 

Before

After

Difference

p value

Return to oestrus rate

5.28

5.14

-0.14

p=0,409

Abortion rate

2.79

2.19

-0.6

p=0,711

WOI

6.379

6.141

-0.238

p=0,331

Total born

12.05

12.929

0.879

p=<0,0001

Born alive

110.36

11.782

0.746

p=<0,0001

Still born

1.021

1.141

0.12

p=<0,005

Mummification rate

0.157

0.1706

0.0136

p=0,549

Preweaning mortality

10.24

10.82

0.58

p=0,407

Piglets weaned/litter

9.893

10.488

0.595

p=<0,0001

Piglets weaned/sow/year

23.371

25.131

1.76

p<0,001

Nursery mortality rate

4.82

3.65

-1.17

p=0,409

 

Figure 1. Piglets weaned / litter before and after the implementation of the 5 Steps-Process

Figure 1. Piglets weaned / litter before and after the implementation of the 5 Steps-Process

Figure 2. Nursery mortality rate (MR) before and after the implementation of the 5 Stp Process

Figure 2. Nursery mortality rate (MR) before and after the implementation of the 5 Stp Process

Figure 3. Mortality rate (MR) in fattening before and after PRRS control implementation

Figure 3. Mortality rate (MR) in fattening before and after PRRS control implementation

Discussion and conclusion

The implementation of the 5 Step Process platform as well as the whole herd vaccination program implemented in this farm, had a significant positive impact on the reproductive and productive parameters. Regarding the financial impact the calculated return on investment was 12.1:1 for the intervention in sows and 6.0:1 for the intervention in pigs.

References

1. Diaz, E. et al AASV 2011
2. De Paz, X. PRRS cost for the European swine industry. https://www.pig333.com/what_the_experts_say/prrs-cost-for-the-european-swine-industry_10069
3. Polson, D. et al. IPVS 2008
4. 5 step process details explanations at https://www.prrs.com

Share