FREE SHIPPING over $40
OVER 10000 FIVE-STAR REVIEWS
5% OFF ALL SUBSCRIPTIONS
100% HAPPINESS GUARANTEE
Analyze Diet
0
Animals : an open access journal from MDPI2023; 13(22); 3550; doi: 10.3390/ani13223550

Cross-Sectional Survey of Horse Owners to Assess Their Knowledge and Use of Biosecurity Practices for Equine Infectious Diseases in the United States.

Abstract: Horses are transported in the United States more than any other livestock species and co-mingle at various events; therefore, they are considered to be at an increased risk for infectious disease transmission. The fragmented movement of horses combined with numerous sites of co-mingling makes tracing the potential spread of a disease outbreak a necessary part of an infection control plan, both locally and nationally. The cross-movement of personnel with horses and the persistence of endemic diseases make biosecurity implementation an ongoing challenge. Although many of the risks for infection are known, there is limited documentation about the usefulness of prospective control measures. The objective of this survey was to determine horse owners' understanding and knowledge of biosecurity practices for preventing infectious diseases in the United States. Questions covered owner demographic information, including horse use which was divided into 10 categories as follows: Pleasure/Trail Riding, Lessons/School, Western Show, English Show, Breeding, Farm/Ranch, Retired, Racing, Driving and Other. The survey was distributed by sending requests to a list of horse owner organizations, which then sent emails to their members. The email request described the survey and provided a website link to start the survey. A total of 2413 responses were collected. Analysis of the results included cross-tabulation to identify significant differences in biosecurity knowledge and awareness by horse use. Significant differences by horse use were identified for vaccination, biosecurity planning, use of isolation, disease risk, monitoring for diseases, co-mingling of horses, sanitation, medical decision making and health record requirements for horse events. In summary, the results suggest that most owners are not highly concerned about the risk of disease or the use of biosecurity. There are several biosecurity applications and techniques which can be increased and will benefit horse health and welfare. These include reliance on temperature monitoring, isolation of new horses at facilities, risks of horse mingling, entry requirements such as vaccination and health certificates at events, and an emphasis on having biosecurity plans for facilities and events where horses co-mingle. The information from this study will be used to create tools and information that horse owners and veterinarians can use to implement appropriate biosecurity practices for different types of horse uses and events.
Get Full Text
Publication Date: 2023-11-17 PubMed ID: 38003167PubMed Central: PMC10668770DOI: 10.3390/ani13223550Google Scholar: Lookup
The Equine Research Bank provides access to a large database of publicly available scientific literature. Inclusion in the Research Bank does not imply endorsement of study methods or findings by Mad Barn.
LinkedInCopy
  • Journal Article

Summary

This research summary has been generated with artificial intelligence and may contain errors and omissions. Refer to the original study to confirm details provided. Submit correction.

The article explores the knowledge and use of biosecurity procedures among horse owners in the United States due to the potential risk of infectious disease transmission through horse transportation and mingling. The research comes to the disturbing conclusion that the majority of horse owners lacks sufficient concern and awareness regarding biosecurity.

Methodology

  • The study conducted a cross-sectional survey with horse owners interrogating their biosecurity awareness and practices pertinent to equine infectious diseases.
  • The biosecurity topics covered through the survey included vaccination, use of isolation, disease risk, monitoring for diseases, horse co-mingling, sanitation, medical decision making, and health record requirements.
  • Demographic data about the owners were gathered and the uses of horses were divided into categories: Pleasure/Trail Riding, Lessons/School, Western Show, English Show, Breeding, Farm/Ranch, Retired, Racing, Driving, and Other.
  • Survey distribution was carried out via emails sent to members of horse owner organizations. The email included a description of the survey and a link to participate.
  • A total of 2413 responses were garnered and their subsequent analysis incorporated cross-tabulation to identify significant disparity in biosecurity knowledge and awareness according to horse use.

Findings

  • The study discovered that horse owners’ concern and awareness about disease risks and the execution of biosecurity are generally low.
  • The analysis unveiled significant variations in knowledge and awareness about biosecurity practices according to the different purposes for which horses are used, ranging from vaccination to health record maintenance.

Implications

  • The research indicates potential areas where biosecurity applications and techniques can be scaled up for the enhancement of equine health and welfare. These include isolation of new horses, risks of co-mingling, temperature monitoring, vaccination, health certificates, and biosecurity planning for events and facilities.
  • The data collected from the study could be instrumental in creating tools and information for horse owners and veterinarians to promote appropriate biosecurity practices tailored to diverse horse uses and events.

Cite This Article

APA
White N, Pelzel-McCluskey A. (2023). Cross-Sectional Survey of Horse Owners to Assess Their Knowledge and Use of Biosecurity Practices for Equine Infectious Diseases in the United States. Animals (Basel), 13(22), 3550. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani13223550

Publication

Animals : an open access journal from MDPI
ISSN: 2076-2615
NlmUniqueID: 101635614
Country: Switzerland
Language: English
Volume: 13
Issue: 22
PII: 3550

Researcher Affiliations

White, Nathaniel
  • Equine Disease Communication Center, 4033 Iron Works Pkwy, Lexington, KY 40511, USA.
Pelzel-McCluskey, Angela
  • United States Department of Agriculture Animal, Plant Health Inspection Service, Veterinary Services, 2150 Centre Ave., Bldg B, Fort Collins, CO 80526, USA.

Grant Funding

  • APP-17434 / United States Department of Agriculture

Conflict of Interest Statement

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

This article includes 19 references
  1. Schemann K, Taylor M.R, Toribio J.A.L.M.L, Dhand N.K. Horse owners’ biosecurity practices following the first equine influenza outbreak in Australia.. Prev. Vet. Med. 2011;102:304–314.
    doi: 10.1016/j.prevetmed.2011.08.002pubmed: 21893356google scholar: lookup
  2. Rosanowski S.M, Rogers C.W, Cogger N, Benschop J, Stevenson M.A. The implementation of biosecurity practices and visitor protocols on non-commercial horse properties in New Zealand.. Prev. Vet. Med. 2012;107:85–94.
    doi: 10.1016/j.prevetmed.2012.05.001pubmed: 22703981google scholar: lookup
  3. Germann J.A. A Mixed Methods Approach to Understanding Horse Owners’ Perceptions and Practices of Biosecurity.. Master’s Thesis. University of Guelph; Guelph, ON, Canada: 2023.
  4. Traub-Dargatz J.L, Pelzel-Mccluskey A.M, Creekmore L.H, Geiser-Novotny S, Kasari T.R, Wiedenheft A.M, Bush E.J, Bjork K.E. Case-control study of a multistate equine herpesvirus myeloencephalopathy outbreak.. J. Vet. Intern. Med. 2013;27:339–346.
    doi: 10.1111/jvim.12051pubmed: 23398291google scholar: lookup
  5. Weese J.S. Infection control and biosecurity in equine disease control.. Equine Vet. J. 2014;46:654–660.
    doi: 10.1111/evj.12295pmc: PMC7163522pubmed: 24802183google scholar: lookup
  6. Carvelli A, Nielsen S.S, Paillot R, Broglia A, Kohnle L. Clinical impact, diagnosis and control of Equine Herpesvirus-1 infection in Europe.. EFSA J. 2022;20:e07230.
    doi: 10.2903/j.efsa.2022.7230pmc: PMC8985062pubmed: 35414834google scholar: lookup
  7. Courouce A, Normand C, Tessier C, Pomares R, Thevenot J, Marcillaud-Pitel C, Legrand L, Pitel P.H, Pronost S, Lupo C. Equine Herpesvirus-1 Outbreak During a Show-Jumping Competition: A Clinical and Epidemiological Study.. J. Equine Vet. Sci. 2023;128:104869.
    doi: 10.1016/j.jevs.2023.104869pubmed: 37339699google scholar: lookup
  8. Pusterla N, Barnum S, Miller J.E, Varnell S, Dallap Schaer B.L.L, Aceto H, Simeone A. Investigation of an EHV-1 outbreak in the United State caused by a new H752 genotype.. Pathogens 2021;747:747.
    doi: 10.3390/pathogens10060747pmc: PMC8231618pubmed: 34199153google scholar: lookup
  9. Pusterla N, Kalscheur M, Peters D, Bidwell L, Holtz S, Barnum S, Lawton K, Morrissey M, Schumacher S. Investigation of the Frequency of Detection of Common Respiratory Pathogens in Nasal Secretions and Environment of Healthy Sport Horses Attending a Multi-Week Show Event during the Summer Months.. Viruses 2023;15:1225.
    doi: 10.3390/v15061225pmc: PMC10301589pubmed: 37376525google scholar: lookup
  10. Saklou N, Pleasant S, Lahmers K, Funk R. Prevalence of Latent Equid Herpesvirus Type 1 in Submandibular Lymph Nodes of Horses in Virginia.. Pathogens 2023;12:813.
    doi: 10.3390/pathogens12060813pmc: PMC10301069pubmed: 37375503google scholar: lookup
  11. Smith F.L, Watson J.L, Spier S.J, Kilcoyne I, Mapes S, Sonder C, Pusterla N. Frequency of shedding of respiratory pathogens in horses recently imported to the United States.. J. Vet. Intern. Med. 2018;32:1436–1441.
    doi: 10.1111/jvim.15145pmc: PMC6060314pubmed: 29761571google scholar: lookup
  12. Price D, Barnum S, Mize J, Pusterla N. Investigation of the Use of Non-Invasive Samples for the Molecular Detection of EHV-1 in Horses with and without Clinical Infection.. Pathogens 2022;11:574.
    doi: 10.3390/pathogens11050574pmc: PMC9144909pubmed: 35631095google scholar: lookup
  13. Pavulraj S, Eschke K, Theisen J, Westhoff S, Reimers G, Andreotti S, Osterrieder N, Azab W. Equine Herpesvirus Type 4 (EHV-4) Outbreak in Germany: Virological, Serological, and Molecular Investigations.. Pathogens 2021;10:810.
    doi: 10.3390/pathogens10070810pmc: PMC8308676pubmed: 34202127google scholar: lookup
  14. Pusterla N, Naranatt P, Swadia H, Winfield L, Hartwig A, Barnum S, Mendonsa E. Multi-Centered Field Evaluation of a Salmonella spp. Point-of-Care PCR Assay Using Equine Feces and Environmental Samples.. J. Equine Vet. Sci. 2023;126:104538.
    doi: 10.1016/j.jevs.2023.104538pubmed: 37150233google scholar: lookup
  15. Whitlock F, Grewar J, Newton R. An epidemiological overview of the equine influenza epidemic in Great Britain during 2019.. Equine Vet. J. 2023;55:153–164.
    doi: 10.1111/evj.13874pmc: PMC10087154pubmed: 36054725google scholar: lookup
  16. Bodin L.A, Parkin T.D, Yates J, Mellor D, Kao R.R. An online survey of horse-owners in Great Britain.. BMC Vet. Res. 2013;9:188.
    doi: 10.1186/1746-6148-9-188pmc: PMC3850011pubmed: 24074003google scholar: lookup
  17. Thompson K, Taylor J, Mendez D, Chicken C, Carrick J, Durrheim D.N. Willingness to adopt personal biosecurity strategies on thoroughbred breeding farms: Findings from a multi-site pilot study in Australia’s Hunter Valley.. Front. Vet. Sci. 2022;9:1017452.
    doi: 10.3389/fvets.2022.1017452pmc: PMC9797739pubmed: 36590817google scholar: lookup
  18. Webster W.R. Overview of the 2007 Australian outbreak of equine influenza.. Aust. Vet. J. 2011;89:3–4.
    doi: 10.1111/j.1751-0813.2011.00721.xpubmed: 21711267google scholar: lookup
  19. Fenner K, Hyde M, Crean A, McGreevy P. Identifying sources of potential bias when using online survey data to explore horse training, management, and behaviour: A systematic literature review.. Vet. Sci. 2020;7:140.
    doi: 10.3390/vetsci7030140pmc: PMC7558402pubmed: 32971754google scholar: lookup

Citations

This article has been cited 3 times.
  1. Turcotte GK, O'Sullivan TL, Spence KL, Winder CB, Greer AL. Biosecurity perspectives of equestrian competition organizers in Ontario, Canada. Front Vet Sci 2025;12:1713303.
    doi: 10.3389/fvets.2025.1713303pubmed: 41659966google scholar: lookup
  2. Rimayanti R, Khairullah AR, Mustofa I, Utomo B, Lestari TD, Utama S, Akintunde AO, Mulyati S, Hernawati T, Dawood AQ, Riady G, Khan IU, Rasad SD, Moses IB. Hidden menace: Understanding the devastating consequences of dourine disease in horses. Open Vet J 2025 Sep;15(9):3931-3942.
    doi: 10.5455/OVJ.2025.v15.i9.2pubmed: 41200335google scholar: lookup
  3. Yuan X, Yao X, Zeng Y, Wang J, Ren W, Wang T, Li X, Yang L, Yang X, Meng J. The Impact of the Competition on miRNA, Proteins, and Metabolites in the Blood Exosomes of the Yili Horse. Genes (Basel) 2025 Feb 15;16(2).
    doi: 10.3390/genes16020224pubmed: 40004554google scholar: lookup
Subscribe to our newsletter
Join 99,780 horse owners like you who receive our email updates on horse health and nutrition.