Abstract
Simulation models can offer valuable insights into the effectiveness of different control strategies and act as important decision support tools when comparing and evaluating outbreak scenarios and control strategies. An international modelling study was performed to compare a range of vaccination strategies in the control of foot-and-mouth disease (FMD). Modelling groups from five countries (Australia, New Zealand, USA, UK, The Netherlands) participated in the study. Vaccination is increasingly being recognized as a potentially important tool in the control of FMD, although there is considerable uncertainty as to how and when it should be used. We sought to compare model outputs and assess the effectiveness of different vaccination strategies in the control of FMD. Using a standardized outbreak scenario based on data from an FMD exercise in the UK in 2010, the study showed general agreement between respective models in terms of the effectiveness of vaccination. Under the scenario assumptions, all models demonstrated that vaccination with ‘stamping-out’ of infected premises led to a significant reduction in predicted epidemic size and duration compared to the ‘stamping-out’ strategy alone. For all models there were advantages in vaccinating cattle-only rather than all species, using 3-km vaccination rings immediately around infected premises, and starting vaccination earlier in the control programme. This study has shown that certain vaccination strategies are robust even to substantial differences in model configurations. This result should increase end-user confidence in conclusions drawn from model outputs. These results can be used to support and develop effective policies for FMD control.