| |
What's your interpretation?
|
Non refereed
|
The graph represents preweaning deaths caused by neonatal diarrhea in 22 sow
herds during a calendar year. Herds were categorized as those that either washed
sows (nine herds, total 25,050 sows) or did not wash sows (13 herds, 27,525
sows) before they were loaded into the farrowing crates. What impact might
this management practice have on preweaning mortality? What other data might
be collected in these herds to support or discourage the practice of washing
sows before loading?
To wash or not to wash?
Tara Donovan, DVM
E 4614 Highway 14-60, Spring Green, WI 53588; Tel: 608-588-9170.
Cite as: Donovan T. To wash or not to wash? J Swine Health
Prod. 2003;11(5):266-267.
Outbreaks of neonatal diarrhea in farrowing houses are common among swine production units. After a recent outbreak in one
production unit, there was a challenge to
understand what differences among management practices at the farms may
predispose piglets to diarrhea. Table 1 lists some potential risk factors that may influence
the prevalence of neonatal diarrhea in the farrowing house. Programs and
processes were compared among 22 sow herds in this production system. Two important
factors that predispose piglets to neonatal
diarrhea are inadequate piglet immunity and poor sanitation. With this in mind, the
practice of washing sows prior to loading them
into the farrowing crates was identified as a difference among the herds,
considering the overall inconsistency of the practice.
As sow washing was not universally accepted, supporting information was sought to
help determine the value of the time and effort required to wash sows.

The 22 sow herds were divided into two groups: those that washed sows
(nine herds, total 25,050 sows) and those that did not wash sows (13 herds, total
27,525 sows). The preweaning mortality data for each group of sows for a full calendar
year are presented in Figure 1. Although neonatal diarrhea is not a primary cause of
death, there was a tendency towards more deaths reported due to neonatal diarrhea from
the "do not wash" category. In the
"wash" herds, 0.34% of deaths were recorded
as due to neonatal diarrhea, and in the "do not wash" herds, 1.36% of deaths were
due to neonatal diarrhea, for a difference of 1% more deaths (814 pigs that were lost) in
the herds that did not wash sows.
In this production system, morbidity is usually high and mortality low during
outbreaks of diarrhea. Common diagnoses are Escherichia
coli, Clostridium perfringens, Clostridium difficile,
and rotavirus. Since the incidence of neonatal diarrhea was
not recorded, it was impossible to determine overall piglet morbidity. However,
supporting information was available to estimate morbidity. Whenever a new outbreak
of neonatal diarrhea occurred in these herds, the established protocol was to submit
affected pigs for an antibiotic sensitivity pattern. Even if the clinical signs were
similar to any previous outbreak, tissues of
affected pigs were submitted.
The diagnostic submissions from these herds are depicted in Figure 2. It is
evident that fewer diagnostic laboratory submissions for diarrhea work-ups came
from herds that washed sows (35 submissions) compared to herds that did not wash
sows (156 submissions). Figure 3 depicts submissions from these herds individually.
Another data set that would have been useful for determining the incidence of
neonatal diarrhea is the number of piglets treated
for neonatal diarrhea. Unfortunately, this information was impossible to combine
and analyze for all herds, since each farm has a different treatment record system.

Thus, on the basis of the general differences among nonspecific data collected
in this group of herds, it appears that washing sows is beneficial. A controlled
study would be ideal to evaluate the effect of washing sows prior to loading into
farrowing crates.
|
|