{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2025,12,31]],"date-time":"2025-12-31T07:30:57Z","timestamp":1767166257159,"version":"build-2238731810"},"update-to":[{"DOI":"10.1111\/j.1751-0813.2006.00045.x","type":"erratum","label":"Erratum","source":"publisher","updated":{"date-parts":[[2006,10,10]],"date-time":"2006-10-10T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1160438400000}}],"reference-count":25,"publisher":"Wiley","issue":"10","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2006,10,10]],"date-time":"2006-10-10T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1160438400000},"content-version":"vor","delay-in-days":9,"URL":"http:\/\/onlinelibrary.wiley.com\/termsAndConditions#vor"}],"content-domain":{"domain":["onlinelibrary.wiley.com"],"crossmark-restriction":true},"short-container-title":["Aust Veterinary J"],"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2006,10]]},"abstract":"<jats:p>\n                    <jats:bold>Objective\u2003<\/jats:bold>\n                    A field trial was conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of on\u2010farm antemortem inspection performed by Australian pig producers in terms of proficiency in detecting unhealthy animals (suspects), the impact on food safety and animal welfare outcomes.\n                  <\/jats:p>\n                  <jats:p>\n                    <jats:bold>Animals\u2003<\/jats:bold>\n                    A total of 64 trial groups of market pigs (\n                    <jats:italic>n<\/jats:italic>\n                    = 10,703) were dispatched from 20 herds to three abattoirs in three states.\n                  <\/jats:p>\n                  <jats:p>\n                    <jats:bold>Procedure\u2003<\/jats:bold>\n                    All producers and abattoir antemortem inspectors were trained in antemortem inspection prior to the trial using a standardised set of antemortem criteria. Study 1 consisted of three comparisons: on\u2010farm versus abattoir antemortem inspections on the same pigs, transport effects in suspect and normal pigs, and meat rejection and carcase disposition in suspect and normal pigs. Study 2 compared\n                    <jats:italic>Salmonella<\/jats:italic>\n                    spp status of suspect and normal pigs. Studies 3 and 4 were conducted to assist the interpretation of the results of on\u2010farm versus abattoir inspection. Antemortem inspection results of three producers and one abattoir antemortem inspector were compared with those of a reference inspector (Gold Standard).\n                  <\/jats:p>\n                  <jats:p>\n                    <jats:bold>Results\u2003<\/jats:bold>\n                    Of the pigs examined, 2.12% (95% CI: 1.84%, 2.42%) were classified as suspect at on\u2010farm antemortem inspection compared to only 0.14% at abattoir antemortem inspection. Forty one percent of pigs classified as suspect on\u2010farm had locomotor problems (arthritis, lameness and foot abscess). Compared to normal pigs, suspect pigs had a relative risk of 67.7 (\n                    <jats:italic>P<\/jats:italic>\n                    &lt; 0.0001) of suffering transport injuries. Meat rejection amounted to the equivalent of 9.68% of suspect carcases, compared to the equivalent of 0.35% of normal carcases. The isolation of\n                    <jats:italic>Salmonella<\/jats:italic>\n                    species from caecal content from 20.9% of 67 suspect pigs and 18.8% of 133 control pigs (two matched healthy pigs from the same batch for each suspect pig) were not significantly different. When compared with the reference inspector on\u2010farm, three producers classified abnormalities in 2,495 pigs with high specificity (0.98), acceptable sensitivity (0.82) and kappa (0.57).\n                  <\/jats:p>\n                  <jats:p>\n                    <jats:bold>Conclusions\u2003<\/jats:bold>\n                    With training, producer sensitivity in antemortem inspection may be high and more proficient than abattoir antemortem inspection. Use of producer inspections may have benefits for animal welfare and chain efficiency, but not food safety.\n                  <\/jats:p>","DOI":"10.1111\/j.1751-0813.2006.00045.x","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2006,10,10]],"date-time":"2006-10-10T04:13:07Z","timestamp":1160453587000},"page":"351-357","update-policy":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1002\/crossmark_policy","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":4,"title":["Assessment of producer conducted antemortem inspection of market pigs in Australia"],"prefix":"10.1111","volume":"84","author":[{"given":"J","family":"Jackowiak","sequence":"first","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"A","family":"Kiermeier","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"V","family":"Kolega","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"G","family":"Missen","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"D","family":"Reiser","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"AM","family":"Pointon","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]}],"member":"311","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2006,10,10]]},"reference":[{"key":"e_1_2_6_2_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1111\/j.1751-0813.1986.tb02997.x"},{"key":"e_1_2_6_3_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/S1090-0233(97)80051-2"},{"key":"e_1_2_6_4_2","unstructured":"APL (Australian Pork Ltd). Australian Pig Annual 2003. Canberra:Australian Pork Limited;2004."},{"key":"e_1_2_6_5_2","unstructured":"Anon. Export Meat Orders (Export Control Act). Canberra:Australian Quarantine Inspection Service;1982."},{"key":"e_1_2_6_6_2","unstructured":"Anon. The Australian Standard for Hygienic Production of Meat for Human Consumption. Australian Standard 4461. Canberra;1997."},{"key":"e_1_2_6_7_2","unstructured":"PointonA.An Empirical Risk Assessment of Post Mortem Pig Meat Inspection in Australia: Pig Research and Development Corporation Jan1997. ISBN 1 876007 03 6."},{"key":"e_1_2_6_8_2","unstructured":"WillebergP WedamJM GardnerIA et al.A comparative study of visual and traditional post\u2010mortem inspection of slaughter pigs: estimation of sensitivity specificity and differences in non\u2010detection rates.Epidemiol. sante anim1997:31\u201332."},{"key":"e_1_2_6_9_2","first-page":"536","article-title":"Reconsidering of \u2018Bacterial Examination\u2019 of slaughtered animals","volume":"112","author":"Engel HWB","year":"1987","journal-title":"Tijdschrift voor diergeneeskunde"},{"key":"e_1_2_6_10_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1136\/vr.146.5.124"},{"key":"e_1_2_6_11_2","first-page":"960","article-title":"A model for risk assessment of organoleptic postmortem inspection procedures for meat and poultry","volume":"192","author":"Hathaway SC","year":"1988","journal-title":"JAVMA"},{"key":"e_1_2_6_12_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1136\/vr.133.17.411"},{"key":"e_1_2_6_13_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1136\/vr.140.18.472"},{"key":"e_1_2_6_14_2","unstructured":"JackowiakJ.Antemortem inspection pigs on\u2010farm \u2013 impact on food safety and animal welfare [Master of Agricultural Science]. Adelaide:The University of Adelaide;2000."},{"key":"e_1_2_6_15_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1017\/S0022029900020355"},{"key":"e_1_2_6_16_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1111\/j.1365-2672.1968.tb00353.x"},{"key":"e_1_2_6_17_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1080\/01652176.1992.9694327"},{"key":"e_1_2_6_18_2","first-page":"1111","volume-title":"Diseases of Swine","author":"Pointon AM","year":"1999"},{"key":"e_1_2_6_19_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1177\/104063870001200504"},{"key":"e_1_2_6_20_2","first-page":"1015","article-title":"Distribution of persistent Salmonella typhimurium infection in internal organs of swine","volume":"50","author":"Wood RL","year":"1989","journal-title":"Am J Vet Res"},{"key":"e_1_2_6_21_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1080\/01652176.1992.9694326"},{"key":"e_1_2_6_22_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.31274\/safepork-180809-169"},{"key":"e_1_2_6_23_2","unstructured":"CoatesKJ KolegaV BartonM et al.Level of food\u2010borne pathogens on Australian pig meat and carcasses. InManipulating Pig production VI. Australasian Pig Science Association. Conference1997. Canberra ACT. p.148"},{"key":"e_1_2_6_24_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.4315\/0362-028X-54.6.471"},{"key":"e_1_2_6_25_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1136\/vr.151.4.110"},{"key":"e_1_2_6_26_2","unstructured":"Codex Alimentarius Commission. Recommended international code of practice general principles of food hygiene. CAC\/RCP 1\u20101969 Rev. 3\u20101997 Amd. (1999): Codex Alimentarius Commission;1999."}],"updated-by":[{"DOI":"10.1111\/j.1751-0813.2006.00045.x","type":"erratum","label":"Erratum","source":"publisher","updated":{"date-parts":[[2006,10,10]],"date-time":"2006-10-10T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1160438400000}}],"container-title":["Australian Veterinary Journal"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/api.wiley.com\/onlinelibrary\/tdm\/v1\/articles\/10.1111%2Fj.1751-0813.2006.00045.x","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/onlinelibrary.wiley.com\/doi\/pdf\/10.1111\/j.1751-0813.2006.00045.x","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2023,10,16]],"date-time":"2023-10-16T03:59:09Z","timestamp":1697428749000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/onlinelibrary.wiley.com\/doi\/10.1111\/j.1751-0813.2006.00045.x"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2006,10]]},"references-count":25,"journal-issue":{"issue":"10","published-print":{"date-parts":[[2006,10]]}},"alternative-id":["10.1111\/j.1751-0813.2006.00045.x"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1111\/j.1751-0813.2006.00045.x","archive":["Portico"],"relation":{},"ISSN":["0005-0423","1751-0813"],"issn-type":[{"value":"0005-0423","type":"print"},{"value":"1751-0813","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2006,10]]},"assertion":[{"value":"2006-10-10","order":2,"name":"published","label":"Published","group":{"name":"publication_history","label":"Publication History"}}]}}