Source: UNIV OF MINNESOTA submitted to
EVALUATING THE EFFECT OF DIFFERENT HOOF TRIMMING TECHNIQUES AND TIMING ON DAIRY COW WELL-BEING AND PERFORMANCE
Sponsoring Institution
State Agricultural Experiment Station
Project Status
TERMINATED
Funding Source
Reporting Frequency
Annual
Accession No.
1007229
Grant No.
(N/A)
Project No.
MIN-62-087
Proposal No.
(N/A)
Multistate No.
(N/A)
Program Code
(N/A)
Project Start Date
Jul 24, 2015
Project End Date
Jun 30, 2017
Grant Year
(N/A)
Project Director
Cramer, GE, .
Recipient Organization
UNIV OF MINNESOTA
(N/A)
ST PAUL,MN 55108
Performing Department
Veterinary Population Medicine
Non Technical Summary
Lameness is a painful, prevalent disease in the US dairy industry. Regular hoof trimming to remove overgrowth and rebalance the claws is viewed as an essential part of a lameness prevention program and is regularly practiced by the US dairy industry. Unfortunately, there is very little scientific evidence on which to base recommendations on the timing and technique of hoof trimming. The goal of this project is to provide sound scientific evidence for this. The overall hypothesis of this project is that by modifying the timing and hoof trimming technique the incidence of foot lesions and lameness will be reduced, thereby improving longevity, well-being and productivity. We will evaluate this hypothesis by recruiting four commercial dairy farms that will enroll a total of 1800 2nd lactation animals. These animals will be enrolled at time of dry-off in 2 different treatment groups. Each treatment group will contain 900 animals and followed until they are 100-150 DIM. The 2 trimming techniques evaluated will be the functional trimming method and an adaptation that removes more horn underneath the flexor tuberosity on the lateral claw. At 100-150 DIM cows will be reassigned into a trimmed and not trimmed group to evaluate the impact of trimming twice per lactation. Outcomes evaluated in this study will include: time to lameness, time to culling and lesion prevalence. Our objectives of evaluating the timing and technique of hoof trimming will provide evidence for preventive practices that will reduce animal stress and improve animal well-being through reduced lameness.
Animal Health Component
100%
Research Effort Categories
Basic
(N/A)
Applied
100%
Developmental
(N/A)
Classification

Knowledge Area (KA)Subject of Investigation (SOI)Field of Science (FOS)Percent
3153410117050%
3113410117040%
3113410301010%
Goals / Objectives
Based on the widespread use of hoof trimming in the US dairy industry (NAHMS, 2009) and the lack of evidence for the effectiveness of hoof trimming techniques and timing, the goal of this project is to evaluate 2 different methods and schedules of hoof trimming in Holstein dairy cows.The overall hypothesis of this project is that by modifying the timing and trimming technique of dairy cows the incidence of foot lesions and lameness will be reduced, thereby improving longevity, well-being and productivity.The specific objectives of this project are:Compare the effects of 2 different methods of functional hoof trimming on hoof lesion incidence, lameness, and culling risk.Compare the effects of an additional hoof trimming at 100 days in milk on hoof lesion incidence, lameness, and culling risk.
Project Methods
To meet our objectives we will enroll 1800, 2nd lactation animals at time of dry-off. These animals will initially be randomly assigned into 2 different treatment groups. Animals with hoof horn lesions such as sole ulcers and white line disease at the time of enrollment will not be enrolled in the study. Animals with the infectious disease, digital dermatitis will be treated according to standard farm protocol and enrolled in the study. All cows will be evaluated at 100-150 DIM for hoof lesions in the hoof trimming chute and then randomly be assigned to a TRIM or NOTRIM group. At the end of their 3rd lactation all cows will then be trimmed at time of drying off.The sample size of 900 animals in each initial treatment group was used to allow a total of 588 animals in each treatment group to finish their 3rd lactation. With this sample size we would be able to detect a 7-8% difference in lesions incidence between treatment groups in 3rd lactation (assuming an alpha of 0.05% and a power of 80% at a control lesion incidence of 30%). This lesion reduction was based on the preliminary data generated by a member of our group (Gomez et al., 2013). Since the data from Gomez et al. (2013) looked at first lactation only and lesion incidence is higher in 3rd lactation (Chapinal et al., 2013b) it is expected that the difference between lesion incidence between our treatment groups will be higher and our sample size is appropriate. To account for higher culling in early lactation it was assumed that 20% of the cows would be culled before the mid lactation hoof trimming and the remaining 15% of cows would be culled the later stages of lactation. Figure 1 below illustrates the study allocation.The project will use 4 different farms located within 1-4 hours drive of Saint Paul, MN. Participating farms will be recruited through the use of hoof trimmers who are have previously been trained in the modelling technique. Farms will be required to subscribe to dairy herd improvement services and use unique individual identification. Farm characteristics will be standardized to be mainly Holstein, have >1000 cows and using sand bedding.Sand bedding has been showing to influence lameness prevalence (Espejo and Endres, 2007; Cook, 2003). This potentially limits the external validity of this study but, if a significant effect of trimming method and timing can be found in an environment that fosters a lower lesion incidence this would be a bias towards the null. It is therefore highly probable that if we find an effect of our interventions in these herds, a greater effect would exist in non-sand bedding herds. We chose the herd size selection criteria to allow us to complete study in a short time frame and reduce procedural drift.Figure 1: Schematic of study allocation and sample sizes, initial n assumes a 35% cull rate across the 3rd lactation.Hoof trimmers will have been trained previously about the MODEL technique will receive training at the beginning of the study to standardize the trimming technique among the different farms. The NOMODEL trimming technique will be the standard functional trimming technique (Shearer and van Amstel, 2001; E. Toussaint Raven, 1985) The MODEL trimming technique used is an adaptation of this technique and will be the same as described by (Gomez et al., 2013). This method is an adaptation of the method described by (Ouweltjes et al., 2009). Hoof trimmers will be provided with an electronic recording device to facilitate data recording and extraction. Other than recording cow identification and date of trimming the hoof trimmers will records the lesions in a standardized manner.After the initial training session the farm will be visited monthly for locomotion scoring using a 4-point scoring system (Cook, 2003), to determine an objective measurement of lameness prevalence between the treatment groups. Productivity data like milk production and culling data will be retrieved from on farm records and dairy herd improvement data.Methods of analysis and interpretation:To evaluate the efficacy of trimming method on lesion incidence, lameness and productivity of each treatment group they will be compared to each other. The measures used as primary outcomes in this study include clinical lameness incidence as recorded by on farm personnel, and lesion incidence as recorded by the hoof trimmer at the time of trimming. Lesions of primary interest are digital dermatitis (DD), sole ulcers (SU) and white line disease, (WLD). The frequency of the remaining lesions such as thin soles or inter-digital hyperplasia will likely be too low for a separate analysis, but these lesions will be screened to ensure no difference exists between the treatment groups.To evaluate if a difference exists between the MODEL and NOMODEL treatment groups time to occurrence of lameness, first lesion and culling will be evaluated using survival analysis. This analysis will be done after all animals have been evaluated at 100-150 DIM for lesions in the hoof trimming chute. Animals without a lesion will be right censored at the time of evaluation. Time to occurrence of the first DD, SU or WLD lesion will be calculated from time of enrolment in the study. In addition, logistic regression will be used to evaluate the odds of lameness and lesions between treatment groups at the 100-150 DIM evaluation. Additional variables that will be considered for inclusion in all models will be age at enrolment, and milk production. Herd effects will be accounted for by using fixed effects and if the data includes repeated measures they will be accounted for by using an appropriate correlation matrix (Ian Robert Dohoo, 2009). A similar analysis will be done for the TRIM and NOTRIM group and for this analysis prior treatment group assignment will be included as a fixed effect.

Progress 07/24/15 to 06/30/17

Outputs
Target Audience:During this year we reached the following audiences through a variety of efforts: 1. Hoof trimmers both via 1-1 conversations during consultation visits and in larger group meetings at conferences. Hoof trimmers are professionals who are directly impacted by the effects of our research. 2. Dairy farmers and staff via 1-1 discussions via consultations and in both large and small group meetings at conferences. Dairy farmers and staff are the ultimate consumers of our research as they manage the cows and will experience and make decisions about how are research is implemented. 3. Veterinarians mainly via large and small group discussions at conferences. Veterinarians play a role in implementing and providing advice for a hoof health program. 4. Nutritionists and other farm advisory staff at conferences. Nutritionists typically are heavily involved in discussion with dairy farmers about lameness as they are typically blamed for lameness problems by other stakeholders. Changes/Problems:The main thing that occurred during the project that affected our ability to complete all of our objectives in a timely manner. We experienced some difficulties recruiting hoof trimmers to participate in the study and this resulted in a delay in the start of the project and a previous request for an NCE. Once a cow was enrolled in our study it would take at minimum 13 months for her to complete her full data collection period for our2nd objective. This long time period to measure our outcome means that there currently still are cows that have not completed their full data collection. Cows experiencing this delay will still have their data collected as there are no additional expenditures necessary to collect this data. In addition, there are additional funds availableto complete the data analysis and publication of results from our second objective. What opportunities for training and professional development has the project provided?This project support varies training and professional development activities. Through the project, we were able to train 2 hoof trimmers in the different modeling technique. We also served as a resource for them in various other hoof trimming related questions. The project also involved 1 Ph.D. student, 1 research associate, and 3 international J scholars. The PhD student and research associate were responsible for the initial set up of trial protocols and documents. The PhD student performed all of the scoring and data analysis for the project and is expected to complete his PhD in 2018. The research associate spent about 20% of her time on this project and has gone on to start a PhD program with our research group. The 3 J scholars assisted in data collection and data management for the project at various time points. One of the J scholars was a PhD student from Spain, while another will start a MS in January of 2018. All of the research personnel participated in discussions related to the project and general study and lameness related journal clubs. How have the results been disseminated to communities of interest?Results from the project have been presented at several different conferences and 3 publications are in progress and expected to be published in a leading peer-reviewed journal. Presentation at conferences have occurred internationally and domestically. Presentations have been a mix ofscientific presentations to veterinarians, hoof trimmers and researchers and more applied presentations toindustry partners. What do you plan to do during the next reporting period to accomplish the goals? Nothing Reported

Impacts
What was accomplished under these goals? Our first objective was to comparethe effects of the 2 different methods of functional hoof trimming on hoof lesion incidence, lameness and culling risk. For this objective, we accomplished this goal and will briefly describe our results. We enrolled 3 farms in this project and in total 1,562 cows were enrolled in this study. This resulted in 789 cows being trimmed with our controltreatment and 773 cows with our adaptation (BIG) model treatment. These cows were enrolled at their dry-off trim and evaluated again at around 120 days in milk for lesions. In addition, enrolled cows where locomotion scored every 2 weeks. At the time of the 120 DIM evaluation lesion incidence was lower than expected. Only 12% of cows had lesions and in our sample size calculation, we expected 30%. The results of our study are described below. When looking at overall lesion incidence outcomewe found the estimate for the risk difference between our control and our adaptation to range from -4.4 to 2.8. When we evaluated specific lesions types our most interesting finding was that in first lactation animals had a 70% lower odds have hoof horn lesions when trimmed with the BIG model. Therisk difference estimate for the BIG model was 1.1 to 8.1 indication that in this subgroup of animals there was a small advantage to using the BIG model. When we evaluated our treatments for impacts on lameness we found that the BIG model increased time to a lameness event as defined by a locomotion score. The impact on time to lameness was driven by the same subgroup of animals that were identifiedin the lesions analysis as results from the Cox proportional hazard model showed first lactation animals had an estimated hazard of becoming lame of 0.33-0.73 compared to our control treatment. Evaluation our treatments impact of productivity revealed no difference in performancewith respect to milk production and longevity. Overall the conclusion from this objective was that trimming with the BIG model has the potential to reduce lesion and lameness in first lactation animals. We hypothesize that the same is not true for older animals are there are likely other predisposing factors such that have already increased the risk of lameness in these cows and our treatment does not impact these animals. We suspect that our treatment is additive and that if animals were trimmed with the BIG model for their entire life the beneficial effects found in thefirst lactation would persist. Our second objective was to comparethe effect of an additional hoof trimming at approximately a 100 days on hoof lesion incidence, lameness an, culling risk. This objective built on our first objective and cows that did not have a lesion at the time of their mid-lactation trim where enrolled in this study. This study occurred on 1 farm and we have enrolled 793 animals in this study. 381 animals received no trim, 196 received our control hoof trimming and 216 received the BIG model. Data from these animals are still being collected as it takes at least 200 days from the mid-lactation trim for the cow to receive her follow hoof trimming to collect the final data. We expect to analyze this data in Spring 2018.

Publications

  • Type: Conference Papers and Presentations Status: Published Year Published: 2017 Citation: Stoddard, G., Cook N., Wagner S., Cramer, G. 2017 Evaluating the Effect of Two Hoof trimming Techniques on Lesion Incidence. 50th Annual Convention of the American Association of Bovine Practitioners, Omaha NE
  • Type: Conference Papers and Presentations Status: Published Year Published: 2017 Citation: Stoddard, G., Cook N., Wagner S., Cramer, G. 2017 Evaluating the Effect of Two Hoof trimming Techniques on Lesion Incidence. ADSA Annual Meeting. Pittsburgh, PA
  • Type: Conference Papers and Presentations Status: Published Year Published: 2017 Citation: Stoddard, G., Cook N., Wagner S., Cramer, G. 2017 Evaluating the Effect of Two Hoof trimming Techniques on Lesion Incidence. 19th International Symposium and 11th Conference of Lameness in Ruminants. Munich, Germany
  • Type: Journal Articles Status: Published Year Published: 2017 Citation: Stoddard G. C., Cramer G. 2017. A review of the relationship between hoof trimming and dairy cattle welfare. Vet Clin North Am Food Anim Pract. 33:365-375


Progress 10/01/15 to 09/30/16

Outputs
Target Audience:The target audiences for this project are hoof trimmers, veterinarians and dairy farm owners and personnel. As we are still in the data collectionperiod we have interactedmainly with our participating farms and hoof trimmers. Changes/Problems: Nothing Reported What opportunities for training and professional development has the project provided?We have provided some opportunities for training and development to the participating farm personnel and hoof trimmers. This has mainly consisted of providing support in hoof trimming and treatment techniques. This support allows them to treat lame cows in a more effective manner. How have the results been disseminated to communities of interest? Nothing Reported What do you plan to do during the next reporting period to accomplish the goals?During the next reporting period, we intend to wrap up enrollment and complete data collection. After this has completed we will analyze the data and disseminate results via publications and meetings.

Impacts
What was accomplished under these goals? Current progress towards achieving these goals has been made by having 3 farms enrolled. On these farms, hoof trimmers are enrolling cows weekly according to their treatment allocation. Data collection is ongoing and consists of bi-weekly locomotion scoring, lesion, and productivity capture. Cows enrolled at the start of the project have started to enter the mid-lactationtrim component of the study during the reporting period.

Publications


    Progress 07/24/15 to 09/30/15

    Outputs
    Target Audience: Nothing Reported Changes/Problems: Nothing Reported What opportunities for training and professional development has the project provided? Nothing Reported How have the results been disseminated to communities of interest? Nothing Reported What do you plan to do during the next reporting period to accomplish the goals?We plan to start data collection.

    Impacts
    What was accomplished under these goals? At this point we have identified farms for participation.

    Publications