Analysis of epidemiological indicators: Bovine brucellosis on the Atlantic coast and Antioquia - Colombia, 2005-2013

Análisis de indicadores epidemiológicos: Brucelosis bovina en la Costa Atlántica y Antioquia - Colombia, 2005-2013

Objective. Describe the situation of the bovine brucellosis in the Atlantic Coast and Antioquia (CAA) by analysis of epidemiological indicators during 2005-2013. Materials and methods. The data was obtained from epidemiological reports of the Colombian Agricultural Institute and the National Agricultural Census 2014. The annual departmental average of the variables studied was compared and it was performed a temporal analysis through graphical representation. Results. 44% of the positive farms were focused on the CAA; the positivity rate of farms in the CAA (27.9%) was higher and statistically significant when related to the average rate in the country (24.8%) being promoted by the least producing departments. Regarding to the cattle population, the CAA concentrated 47.0% of positive cattle in the country; however, the bovine positivity rate (5.8%) was statistically equal to the national average (5.3%); yet, the departments with lower cattle population had the highest rates. The best surveillance for bovine brucellosis was observed between 2005 and 2009, in contrast, during 2010, 2011 and 2013 there was a considerable reduction in the number of diagnoses, in both farms and cattle. In the least producing departments the temporary distribution of epidemiological indicators favored more the presence of the disease. Conclusions. The National Prevention Control and Eradication Program of Bovine Brucellosis in the CAA presented promising results, however, the lack of continuity in the diagnostic surveillance during some years and mainly in the least producing departments affected negatively their development.

1. Tan SY, Davis C. David Bruce (1855-1931): discoverer of brucellosis. Singapore Med J 2011; 52(3):138-9.
3. OIE. Código Sanitario para los Animales Terrestres, 2016. [en línea] Organización Mundial de Sanidad Animal, 2016. [Accesada en 07 de julio de 2016]. URL Disponible en: http://www.oie.int/es/normas-internacionales/codigo-terrestre.
5. ICA. Resolución 550 de 2006. Instituto Colombiano Agropecuario 2006. [fecha de acceso 23 de agosto de 2016] URL Disponible en http://www.ica.gov.co/getattachment/4ff425ff-bae8-432c-9266-5981652761fd/R0550.aspx.
7. ICA. Resolución 1332 de 2013a. Instituto Colombiano Agropecuario; 2013. [fecha de acceso 07 de julio de 2016]; URL disponible en http://www.ica.gov.co/getattachment/13d9a178-994e-4b0c-94b9 7ba385bbbd 50/2013R1332.aspx.
9. ICA. Resolución 1385 de 2013. Instituto Colombiano Agropecuario; 2013. [fecha de acceso 07 de julio de 2016]; URL Disponible en: http://www.ica.gov.co/getattachment/f857b023-9ccf-4173-aa2b-df5403543b6b/2013R1385.aspx.
11. ICA. Colombia Sanidad Animal. Instituto Colombiano Agropecuario; 2013. [fecha de acceso 07 de julio de 2016]; URL Disponible en:http://www.ica.gov.co/getattachment/0b099ac3-d670-4c11-be1b-02e50db63047 /2013.aspx.
13. DANE. Censo nacional agropecuario. Departamento Administrativo Nacional de Estadística; 2014. URL disponible en https://www.dane.gov.co/index.php/estadisticas-por-tema/agropecuario/censo-nacional-agropecuario-2014#12.
15. Orjuela J, Navarrete M, Betancourt A, Roqueme L, Cortez E, Morrison RB. Salud y productividad en bovinos de la costa norte de Colombia. World Animal Review 1991; 69:7-14.
17. Tique V, González M, Mattar S. Seroprevalencia de Brucella abortus en bovinos del departamento de Córdoba. Rev UDCA Act & Div Cient 2009; 12(2):51-59.
19. ICA. Boletines epidemiológicos. Instituto Colombiano Agropecuario; 2016. [fecha de acceso 06 de julio de 2016]; URL Disponible en: http://www.ica.gov.co/Boletines.aspx.
21. Schwabe CW, Riemann HP, Franti CE. Epidemiology in veterinary practice. Philadelphia, U.S.A.: Lea & Febiger; 1977.
23. Dimech W, Lim MSC, Gemert CV, Guy R, Boyle D, Donovan B, Hellard M. Analysis of laboratory testing results collected in an enhanced chlamydia surveillance system in Australia, 2008–2010. BMC Infectious Diseases 2014; 14:325. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2334-14-325
25. MAPA. Análise de Indicadores Epidemiológicos da Raiva dos Herbívoros no Brasil, período 2006/2012. Ministério da Agricultura, Pecuária e Abastecimento; 2013. URL Disponible en: http://www.idaf.es.gov.br/Download/Raiva%20herb%20indicadores%202006%20a%202012-1.pdf Accesado en 01 febrero de 2016.
27. Oviedo-Pastrana ME, Oliveira CSF, Capanema RO, Nicolino RR, Oviedo-Socarras, TJ, Haddad JPA. Trends in Animal Rabies Surveillance in the Endemic State of Minas Gerais, Brazil. PLoS Negl Trop Dis 2015; 9(3):e0003591. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pntd.0003591
29. Boyce RM, Reyes R, Matte M, Ntaro M, Mulogo E, Lin FC, Siedner MJ. Practical Implications of the Non-Linear Relationship between the Test Positivity Rate and Malaria Incidence. PLoS One 2016; 11(3):e0152410. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0152410
31. Zambrano JL. Salud de hato definición y estrategias para el establecimiento de programas de medicina veterinaria preventiva. Rev Med Vet Zoot 2009; 56:147-162.
33. ICA. Resolución 840 de 2011. Diario Oficial No. 47.987 de 18 de febrero de 2011. Instituto Colombiano Agropecuario; 2011. [fecha de acceso 07 de julio de 2016]; URL Disponible en http://www.icbf.gov.co/cargues/avance/docs/resolucion_ica_0840_2011.htm.
35. ICA. Avance Erradicación Brucelosis. Instituto Colombiano Agropecuario; 2016. [fecha de acceso 18 de septiembre de 2016]; URL Disponible en http://www.ica.gov.co/Areas/Pecuaria/Servicios/Enfermedades-Animales/Brucelosis-Bovina-(1)/Avance-Erradicacion-de-Brucelosis.aspx.