Lewis Isabel, Wishart Harriet, Breeze Ellie, Setter Poppy, Amory Jonathan
Anglia Ruskin University, Chelmsford Campus, Lordship Road, Chelmsford, Essex CM1 3RR, UK.
Hartpury University, Hartpury, Gloucester GL19 3BE, UK.
Anim Welf. 2024 Nov 4;33:e48. doi: 10.1017/awf.2024.53. eCollection 2024.
In-farm livestock production vaccinations are commonly delivered intramuscularly using needles. While there are alternative strategies these have been subject to little attention and limited commercialisation. One such alternative is needle-free vaccines and studies have focused on the immune response few have addressed the welfare implications. This study aims to compare the impact of intradermal needle-free vaccination and intramuscular injection in terms of the welfare of the piglets. A total of 179 piglets were divided into two treatments: intradermal needle-free delivery and intramuscular delivery of a vaccine. Measures of health and welfare included, vocalisations, behavioural observations, papule formation, and weight. Piglets vaccinated via the needle-free intradermal route vocalised less and displayed no significant behavioural differences but showed increased weight compared to piglets vaccinated intramuscularly. The use of a needle-free device to deliver a vaccine through an intradermal route revealed no adverse effects on piglet welfare and supports the use of alternative strategies to vaccinate livestock.
农场内的家畜生产疫苗接种通常通过肌肉注射使用针头进行。虽然有其他替代策略，但这些策略很少受到关注且商业化程度有限。一种这样的替代方法是无针疫苗，研究主要集中在免疫反应上，很少涉及对动物福利的影响。本研究旨在比较皮内无针接种疫苗和肌肉注射对仔猪福利的影响。总共179头仔猪被分为两种处理方式：皮内无针接种疫苗和肌肉注射疫苗。健康和福利指标包括发声、行为观察、丘疹形成和体重。与肌肉注射疫苗的仔猪相比，通过皮内无针途径接种疫苗的仔猪发声较少，行为上没有显著差异，但体重增加。使用无针装置通过皮内途径接种疫苗对仔猪福利没有不良影响，并支持使用替代策略为家畜接种疫苗。
