Comparison between dairy cow disease incidence in data registered by farmers and in data from a disease-recording system based on veterinary reporting

Sweden has a national disease-recording system based on veterinary reporting. From this system, all cattle-disease records are transferred to the dairy industry cattle database (DDD) where they are used for several purposes including research and dairy-health statistics. Our objective was to evaluate the completeness of this data source by comparing it with disease data registered by dairy farmers. The proportion of veterinary-treated disease events was estimated, by diagnosis. Disease incidence in the DDD was compared, by diagnosis and age, with disease data registered by the farmers. Comparison was made, by diagnosis, for (i) all disease events and (ii) those reported as veterinary-treated. Disease events, defined as “observed deviations in health, from the normal” were recorded by the farmers during January, April, July and October 2004. For the diagnoses calving problems, peripartum disorders, puerperal paresis and retained placenta, incidence proportions (IP) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated. For all other disease problems, incidence rates (IR) were used. In total, 177 farmers reported at least 1 month and 148 reported all 4 months. Fifty-four percent of all disease events in the farmers’ data were reported as veterinary-treated. For several of the most common diagnoses, the IRs and IPs for all events were significantly higher in farmers’ data than in the DDD. Examples are, in cows: clinical mastitis, cough, gastro-intestinal disorders and lameness in hoof and limb; and in young stock: cough and gastro-intestinal disorders. For veterinary-treated events only, significant differences with higher IR in the farmers’ data were found in young stock for sporadic cough and sporadic gastro-intestinal disorders. The diagnosis “other disorders” had significantly more events in the DDD than in farmers’ data, i.e. veterinarians tended to choose more unspecific diagnoses than the farmers. This result indicates that the true completeness is likely to be higher than our estimate. We conclude that for the time period studied there was differential under-reporting associated with the diagnosis, the age of the animal and whether the herd was served by a state-employed or private veterinarian.