Veterinarians’ perceptions on African swine fever and the control measures in Estonia

• الحاوية / القاعدة: Acta Veterinaria Scandinavica
• المؤلفون الرئيسيون: Lidiia Moskalenko, Kerli Mõtus, Arvo Viltrop
• التنسيق: مقال
• اللغة: الإنجليزية
• منشور في: BMC 2025-08-01
• الموضوعات: Acceptability; ASF; Attitude; Awareness; Biosecurity; Domestic pig
• الوصول للمادة أونلاين: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13028-025-00822-9

Abstract Background Veterinarians are key stakeholders in fighting African Swine Fever (ASF), yet their awareness, perceptions and attitudes of ASF are often unknown. This is crucial, especially in Estonia where ASF has persisted for almost 10 years. We conducted five focus groups involving 11 farm veterinarians and 4 assistants working on Estonian commercial pig farms. Using participatory methods, we revealed their awareness of ASF signs, transmission routes, and preventive measures. Furthermore, we identified perceived obstacles to the implementation and maintenance of ASF biosecurity measures and their acceptance of control measures. Finally, we investigated veterinarians’ awareness of stakeholders in ASF control, their role and trust to fulfil these roles. Results Haemorrhages on skin, mucosa and organs, along with fever, loss of appetite, and increased mortality were frequently mentioned as first signs that would lead veterinary staff to suspect ASF infection in the herd. The highest risk of virus introduction into the herd was designated to humans, transport vehicles, and bedding. Training of people and disinfection with movement restrictions were considered the most effective measures for preventing ASF. The motivation and attitude of farm employees, and financial constraints were perceived as major obstacles impacting implementation and maintenance of ASF biosecurity measures. Herd-level ASF eradication measures were generally accepted, except for culling. The majority acknowledged its necessity, while others advocated for a case-by-case approach or suggested using the animals for food. Establishing restricted zones I, II, and III received the least acceptance, with concerns over market access, product prices, economic hardships for farmers, and inconsistencies in zoning practices across the EU. Pigkeepers and veterinary authorities were seen as the key stakeholders in ASF control, with veterinarians and pigkeepers being the most trusted to fulfil their roles. Conclusions Veterinary staff demonstrated good awareness of ASF signs, transmission routes, and preventive measures. Further training in ASF control measures remains relevant in areas related to the EU and national legislation, involved parties and their roles, to ensure effective implementation and collaboration with stakeholders. This study provides insights into refining ASF communication strategies and identifying potential blind spots in biosecurity practices in Estonia.