Prevalence and Risk Factors of Campylobacter Infection in Broilers in Spain21 April 2014
Factors that appeared to decrease the risk of Campylobacter infection in broilers in southern Spain were the existence of an entrance room to access the poultry house and drinking water treatment, according to a research from the University of Cordoba.
An extensive epidemiological study was performed at the University of Cordoba to determine the prevalence and risk factors of Campylobacter infection in broiler farms in Andalusia, report Alicia Torralbo and co-authors of a paper in Preventative Veterinary Medicine.
A total of 2,221 cloacal swabs and 747 environmental swabs from 291 broiler flocks were screened between April 2010 and May 2012.
The prevalence of Campylobacter in individual animals was 38.1 per cent, and the flock prevalence was 62.9 per cent.
Flocks were predominantly infected by C. jejuni and C. coli but were also infected by untyped Campylobacter spp., and mixed-species infection could be found.
Risk factors for Campylobacter infection were assessed from direct interview of the farmers. The number of positive samples by flock was modelled assuming a binomial distribution.
Analysis indicated five factors associated with increased intra-flock prevalence:
- presence of dogs or cats on the farm
- older age of the broiler flock
- the application of thinning of flocks
- the presence of windows with canvas blinds, and
- the presence of rodents in the poultry house.
Two factors were associated with decreased intra-flock prevalence:
- the treatment of drinking water and
- having an entrance room for access into the poultry house.
This is the first study performed on broilers farms from Spain reporting the risk factors of Campylobacter infection and is the largest study on the prevalence of Campylobacter infection.
Torralbo A., C. Borge, A. Allepuz, I. García-Bocanegra, S.K. Sheppard, A. Perea and A. Carbonero. 2014. Prevalence and risk factors of Campylobacter infection in broiler flocks from southern Spain. Preventive Veterinary Medicine. 114(2):106-113.
You can view the full report by clicking here.