Economic aspects of food borne disease surveillance

The presence of food-borne disease in food systems creates direct and indirect economic impacts. These include the losses caused by the negative effects of disease itself when people are ill or die leading to reduced productivity, loss of income, and human suffering. In animal populations, similar losses occur when animals are ill or die leading to production losses and/or animal welfare issues. To avoid such losses, efforts to prevent, control or eradicate disease can be undertaken but in return also generate economic costs. Economic analyses in this context investigate how resources are allocated to activities and how to balance direct losses against expenditure to reduce the impact of disease

Economics of One Health: Costs and benefits of integrated West Nile virus surveillance in Emilia-Romagna

Since 2013 in Emilia-Romagna, Italy, surveillance information generated in the public health and in the animal health sectors has been shared and used to guide public health interventions to mitigate the risk of West Nile virus (WNV) transmission via blood transfusion. The objective of the current study was to identify and estimate the costs and benefits associated with this One Health surveillance approach, and to compare it to an approach that does not integrate animal health information in blood donations safety policy (uni-sectoral scenario). Costs of human, animal, and entomological surveillance, sharing of information, and triggered interventions were estimated. Benefits were quantified as the averted costs of potential human cases of WNV neuroinvasive disease associated to infected blood transfusion. In the 2009–2015 period, the One Health approach was estimated to represent a cost saving of €160,921 compared to the uni-sectoral scenario. Blood donation screening was the main cost for both scenarios. The One Health approach further allowed savings of €1.21 million in terms of avoided tests on blood units. Benefits of the One Health approach due to short-term costs of hospitalization and compensation for transfusion-associated disease potentially avoided, were estimated to range from €0 to €2.98 million according to the probability of developing WNV neuroinvasive disease after receiving an infected blood transfusion

Erratum to: 36th International Symposium on Intensive Care and Emergency Medicine

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1186/s13054-016-1208-6.]

Economic aspects of food borne disease surveillance

The presence of food-borne disease in food systems creates direct and indirect economic impacts. These include the losses caused by the negative effects of disease itself when people are ill or die leading to reduced productivity, loss of income, and human suffering. In animal populations, similar losses occur when animals are ill or die leading to production losses and/or animal welfare issues. To avoid such losses, efforts to prevent, control or eradicate disease can be undertaken but in return also generate economic costs. Economic analyses in this context investigate how resources are allocated to activities and how to balance direct losses against expenditure to reduce the impact of disease.</p

Summary

Cost-effectiveness analysis: adding value to assessment of animal health, welfare and production This paper (No. 22012014-00025-EN) has been peer-reviewed, accepted, edited, and corrected by authors. It has no yet been formatted for printing. It will be published i

Snakebite and its impact in rural communities: The need for a One Health approach

Snakebite envenoming is a neglected tropical disease (NTD) with a significant public health impact. It is estimated to cause up to 138,000 deaths worldwide every year and 400,000 victims of permanent disability, including blindness or restricted mobility (reviewed in [1]). The most vulnerable populations are those where the presence of venomous snakes overlaps with the lack of access to healthcare and effective treatment [2]. In 2017, the World Health Organization (WHO) formally listed snakebite envenoming (snakebite hereafter) as a NTD, adding it to the global health agenda and marking an important shift in both awareness and control efforts [1]. In 2018, the resolution on snakebite envenoming adopted by the 71st World Health Assembly urged Member States to assess and address the burden of snakebite. In a topic area in which large data gaps remain, there is currently also a call for a wider, transdisciplinary approach to the snakebite problem and overall enhanced systemic thinking in the field [3]. This viewpoint highlights the need to frame snakebite as an issue at the interface of humans, domestic animals, and snakes in agroecosystems, in such a systemic thinking context. We explore how human health, animal health, and reliance on agricultural activity and domestic animals for livelihood should be considered in a One Health approach. We further discuss how One Health can be used to enhance our understanding of this complex issue, namely of its eco-epidemiology and its broad socioeconomic impact, contributing to filling key research gaps