PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
May 17, 2026EFSA Journal5 citationsOpen Access

Knowledge mapping of risk mitigation measures against vector‐borne diseases

View Full Paper
E(European Food Safety Authority (EFSA)IBIeva BaltusyteFBFabio Bigoni

Key Points

  • This research aims to map the availability and effectiveness of risk mitigation measures for vector-borne diseases affecting animals in the EU.
  • Synthesis of evidence from systematic literature reviews, modelling studies, field investigations, and expert judgement.
  • Assessment of 25 vector-borne diseases categorized under the EU Animal Health Law based on control priorities.
  • Integration of various mitigation measures, including surveillance, vaccination, and vector control.
  • Surveillance is recognized as the most effective mitigation strategy for early detection and response.
  • Vaccination shows high efficacy, significantly reducing infection and mortality rates for key diseases, with specific evidence for African horse sickness and Rift Valley fever.
  • Movement restrictions have a moderate evidence base; however, their effectiveness in real-world outbreaks is hard to quantify.

Abstract

A comprehensive synthesis of current evidence on surveillance, prevention and control measures for 25 selected vector-borne diseases (VBDs) affecting animals in the EU is presented here. The assessment integrates evidence from systematic literature reviews, modelling studies, field investigations and expert judgement. The aim is mapping the availability and effectiveness of risk mitigation measures (RMMs), including surveillance, movement restrictions, vaccination, culling, medicinal treatments, on-farm biosecurity and vector control. Of the 25 VBDs considered, 13 are listed under the EU Animal Health Law (AHL) and categorised according to disease control priorities, while 12 additional non-listed diseases were included based on vector presence and epidemiological relevance. Surveillance emerges as the most comprehensively documented mitigation category and is recognised as the cornerstone of VBD risk management. Evidence supports its critical role in early detection, situational awareness and timely response through integrated monitoring of hosts, vectors, pathogens and environmental drivers. Movement restrictions are supported by a moderate evidence base, primarily derived from modelling studies, indicating that they can reduce transmission under specific epidemiological conditions; however, their stand-alone effectiveness is difficult to quantify in real-world outbreaks. Vaccination shows high efficacy and effectiveness for several key VBDs, including African horse sickness virus, bluetongue virus, lumpy skin disease virus and Rift Valley fever virus, with substantial reductions in infection, morbidity and mortality. Evidence for culling is limited and highly disease-specific, and its effectiveness is generally contingent on the combination with other control measures. Medicinal treatments are limited to some groups of pathogens and demonstrate variable effectiveness, with emerging concerns regarding drug resistance. Biosecurity and vector control measures are supported by heterogeneous evidence, with chemical vector control showing robust entomological efficacy, but limited empirical data linking vector reduction to disease incidence. The report identifies key knowledge gaps and uncertainties across RMM categories and provides targeted recommendations for research to strengthen future VBD mitigation capacity in the EU.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

(EFSA) et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a095a427880e6d24efe0508https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2026.10060
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper