Assessment of the cost effectiveness of compulsory testing of introduced animals and bulk tank milk testing for bovine viral diarrhea in Japan

ISODA, Norikazu; ASANO, Akihiro; ICHIJO, Michiru; OHNO, Hiroshi; SATO, Kazuhiko; OKAMOTO, Hirokazu; NAKAO, Shigeru; KATO, Hajime; SAITO, Kazuma; ITO, Naoki; USUI, Akira; TAKAYAMA, Hiroaki; SAKODA, Yoshihiro

A minor addition in this study was that the compulsory testing of introduced animals was applied as an optional control measure. The animals introduced from outside, which satisfied the criteria of a test animal, were assumed to be mandatorily diagnosed with the same test sensitivity as one of outbreak investigation that observed in the previous study, and test-positive animals were automatically culled prior to introduction in this simulation. To evaluate the cost effectiveness of each control measure, products of the unit cost and the number of test animals were calculated for BTM and compulsory testing, and these products were summed as the total cost of the scenario, which would be generally covered by farmers and agricultural parties. On the other hand, the cost of outbreak investigation was not included into the total cost because this is a response mandated by the Act on Domestic Animal Infectious Disease Control in Japan and is covered by the government. A BTM sample of between 100 and 200 cattle is said to be usually used for diagnosis by RT-PCR method. Given that it costs 2,000 JPY to run one RT-PCR reaction, the unit cost of BTM testing would be estimated as 10 to 20 JPY. The cost of compulsory testing should be assumed either as 2,000 JPY by RT-PCR or as 1,000 JPY by antigen-detection using ear-notch sample, which is instructed from the manufacturer. Finally, we adopted the cheaper price of each of two tests and set the unit cost of BTM and compulsory testing as 10 JPY and 1,000 JPY per animal, respectively.