Assessing lameness in cows kept in tie-stalls

Identifying lame cows and quantifying the prevalence of lameness are important elements of cattle welfare assessment that are generally achieved by methods involving observations of each animal walking. There is no published method for assessing lameness in cows confined in tie-stalls. The objective of this study (carried out within the European Commission's Welfare Quality^® project) was to develop a suitable method and validate it for lameness detection against a published locomotion score. A series of indicators of lameness visible in tied cows was formalized into a stall assessment protocol. This was validated against a traditional locomotion score and tested for repeatability between 2 observers. A total of 98 cows on 4 farms were assessed. Overall interobserver agreement was 91%. Sensitivity compared with locomotion scoring was 0.54 to 0.77, dependent on observer and threshold definition. Assessment in the stall underestimated the herd prevalence of lameness revealed by locomotion scoring by 11 to 37% (mean 27%). The discrepancy between herd lameness prevalence assessed in the stall and by locomotion scoring was not affected significantly by farm or observer. The cases of lameness that were not detected in the stall tended to be the least severe. The proposed method for lameness detection in tie-stalls could be used for herd-level assessment of lameness and detection of individual lame animals by farmers and their advisors, but it is important to remember that it is less sensitive than locomotion scoring.     

Technical note: A comparison of 2 methods of assessing lameness prevalence in tiestall herds

We compared 2 methods for identifying lame cows and estimating the prevalence of lameness in tiestalls. Cows (n = 320) in 9 tiestall herds were scored as lame both by the presence of limping while walking and by stall lameness scores (SLS). The SLS was based on the number of the following behaviors that the cow showed while standing in the tiestall: weight shifting, standing on the edge of the stall, uneven weight bearing while standing, and uneven weight bearing while moving from side to side. Two observers watched video-recordings of the cows. Intraobserver agreements for the 4 SLS behaviors ranged from 92 to 100%, and interobserver agreement ranged from 81 to 100%. The overall prevalence of lameness based on an SLS of ≥2 was similar to that of limping (39 vs. 40%). The sensitivity of the classification based on the SLS was 0.63 and the specificity was 0.77 in identifying cows with a limp; accuracy varied across farms from 62.2 to 80.4%, with a mean of 71.7%. A cow with an SLS of ≥2 had 4.88 times the odds of limping than a cow with an SLS of <2. The prevalence of lameness on farms based on SLS was highly correlated with the prevalence of limping (Pearson correlation = 0.88; n = 9), and prevalence estimates from the 2 methods diverged most when the mean herd prevalence was lower. The SLS method provides an estimate of the prevalence of lameness in tiestall herds comparable with traditional gait scoring, but does not require that the cows be untied. The SLS method could be used to improve lameness detection on tiestall farms and obtain estimates of lameness prevalence without the need to walk the cows.     

Prevalence of lameness in high-producing holstein cows housed in freestall barns in Minnesota

A cross-sectional study was conducted to estimate the prevalence of clinical lameness in high-producing Holstein cows housed in 50 freestall barns in Minnesota during summer. Locomotion and body condition scoring were performed on a total of 5,626 cows in 53 high-production groups. Cow records were collected from the nearest Dairy Herd Improvement Association test date, and herd characteristics were collected at the time of the visit. The mean prevalence of clinical lameness (proportion of cows with locomotion score ≥3 on a 1-to-5 scale, where 1 = normal and 5 = severely lame), and its association with lactation number, month of lactation, body condition score, and type of stall surface were evaluated. The mean prevalence of clinical lameness was 24.6%, which was 3.1 times greater, on average, than the prevalence estimated by the herd managers on each farm. The prevalence of lameness in first-lactation cows was 12.8% and prevalence increased on average at a rate of 8 percentage units per lactation. There was no association between the mean prevalence of clinical lameness and month of lactation (for months 1 to 10). Underconditioned cows had a higher prevalence of clinical lameness than normal or overconditioned cows. The prevalence of lameness was lower in freestall herds with sand stalls (17.1%) than in freestall herds with mattress stall surfaces (27.9%). Data indicate that the best 10th percentile of dairy farms had a mean prevalence of lameness of 5.4% with only 1.47% of cows with locomotion score = 4 and no cows with locomotion score = 5.     

Effect of free stall surface on daily activity patterns in dairy cows with relevance to lameness prevalence

Differences in behavior of nonlame cows, slightly lame cows, and moderately lame cows in 6 free stall barns with sand bedding (SAND) vs. 6 free stall barns with rubber-crumb geotextile mattress surfaces (MAT) were documented in Wisconsin dairy herds. All lactating cows in the 12 herds were observed and given a locomotion score based on a 4-point scale: 1 = nonlame, 2 = slightly lame, 3 = moderately lame, and 4 = severely lame. Herd least square means +/-SE for prevalence of clinical lameness (locomotion scores = 3 and 4) were 11.1 vs. 24.0 +/- 1.7% for herds using SAND vs. MAT surfaces, respectively. Subsets of 10 cows per herd with locomotion scores of 1 to 3 were observed via video cameras for 24-h periods. Cows in MAT herds spent more time standing in free stalls per day than cows in SAND herds. Differences in standing times were 0.73 h/d for cows that were not lame, 2.32 h/d for cows that were slightly lame, and 4.31 h/d for cows that were moderately lame in MAT herds compared with equivalent cows in SAND herds. In MAT herds, the increase in time spent standing in the stall in moderately lame cows was associated with a significant reduction in stall use sessions per day, which impacted daily lying time. Although cause and effect are not clear, these findings have implications for housing, comfort, and care of cows in dairy herds with different types of free stall surfaces.     

Prevalence of lameness and associated risk factors on dairy farms in the Maritime Provinces of Canada

Lameness in dairy cattle is a major issue for the industry due to the effects on the welfare of the animal, the economic impact, and consumer perception. The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence of lameness and explore potential risk factors in the Maritime Provinces of Canada. Cows were scored for lameness and potential risk factors and were assessed in 46 freestall herds and 33 tiestall herds in Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, and Prince Edward Island. In freestall herds, lameness was assessed using the most common method, locomotion scoring. A cow with a gait score of ≥3 out of 5 was considered to be lame. In tiestall herds, lameness was assessed using an alternative method known as stall lameness scoring. This assessment consisted of observation of the cow for 4 behavioral changes: standing on the edge of the stall, shifting weight, resting a limb, and uneven weight bearing when moved side to side. A cow displaying 2 or more of these behaviors was considered to be lame. At the time of the assessment, other animal-, environmental-, and management-based measurements were collected. These measurements were used in multivariable logistic regression analysis to determine risk factors that were associated with lameness for both freestalls and tiestalls independently. The prevalence of lameness was 21% for freestall-housed cattle and 15% for tiestall-housed cattle. Of the 1,488 tiestall-housed cows that were assessed, 68% showed no behavioral changes, whereas 15, 15, 2, and <1% showed 1, 2, 3, or 4 changes, respectively. In freestalls, higher odds of lameness were seen when cows spent ≥3 h/d in the holding area for milking compared with those that spent <3 h/d. In tiestall herds, higher odds of lameness were seen when bedding material was wet compared with when it was dry. For both lactating cow facility types, housing the dry cows and heifers on a deep bedded pack compared with tiestalls or freestalls was associated with a decreased odds of lameness. There were also many cow-level variables associated with lameness, including parity, daily milk production, stage of production, body condition, and width at the tuber coxae (hook bones). If producers become aware of the risk factors associated with lameness, they can make informed decisions on where to implement changes to help reduce the level of lameness in their herd.     

Lame cows on Australian dairy farms: A comparison of farmer-identified lameness and formal lameness scoring,and the position of lame cows within the milking order

On Australian pasture-based farms, where cows may often walk several kilometers and stand for several hours per day in a crowded concrete yard while they wait to be milked, the potential for lameness to negatively affect animal welfare is of ongoing concern. Several studies have shown that farmers tend to underestimate the incidence of lameness. Further, improving farmer diagnosis/identification of lameness is likely to result in more prompt treatment, which in turn will improve clinical and animal welfare outcomes. We scored 19,154 cows over 50 farms for lameness, in herd groups ranging from approximately 100 to 1,000 cows, as they left the milking parlor. We compared these results with farmer-diagnosed lameness records on the same day. We used a scoring system of 0, walks normally; 1, walks unevenly; 2, lame; and 3, very lame. All very lame cows had been detected by the farmer, but overall, farmers detected only 24% of cows identified by lameness scoring. An analysis of the position of lame cows within the milking order showed that lameness scoring of the entire herd was necessary to detect all the lame cows as only 60% of lame cows appeared in the last 30% of cows to be milked. However, lameness scoring only the last 200 cows to be milked could be used as a screening test to identify herds with a lameness prevalence below a given threshold.     

Comparison of modeled sampling strategies for estimation of dairy herd lameness prevalence and cow-level variables associated with lameness

Monitoring herd lameness prevalence has utility for dairy producers and veterinarians in their efforts to reduce lameness, for animal welfare assessment programs, and for researchers. Locomotion scoring is a method used to quantify lameness and calculate prevalence. Because of the time necessary to locomotion score each cow in large dairy herds, a sampling strategy to determine herd lameness prevalence that allows scoring of fewer cows would be useful. Such a sampling strategy must be validated for accuracy compared with the lameness prevalence when all cows in a herd are locomotion scored. The purpose of this study was to assess 3 previously suggested methods of estimating lameness prevalence by strategic sampling of dairy herds. Sampling strategies tested included (1) sampling a calculated number of cows in the middle third of the milking parlor exit order for each pen, (2) sampling a calculated number of cows weighted across pens and distributed evenly within each pen, and (3) sampling all cows in the high production, low production, and hospital pens. Lactating cows on 5 dairy farms in Washington and Oregon (n = 4,422) were locomotion scored using a 5-point scale to determine herd-level lameness prevalence (percentage with locomotion score ≥3). Milking parlor exit order, order in headlocks at the feed bunk within each pen, and breed were recorded for each cow. The number of days in lactation, milk production, and parity were collected from farm computer records. Pen grouping strategy for each farm was obtained by interview with farm management. Sampling strategies were modeled using the locomotion score data set for each herd. Estimates of lameness prevalence obtained from the milking parlor exit order sample and the sample distributed across pens were within 5 percentage points of the whole herd prevalence. The third strategy estimated the lameness prevalence within 5 percentage points on 4 farms, but overestimated prevalence on 1 farm. Pen-level prevalence obtained by locomotion score of all cows in the pen was variable and not reliably predictive of herd-level prevalence. Cows of Holstein breed, parity >1, and exiting the milking parlor in the last 20% of the pen had greater odds of lameness compared with other breeds, parities, and milking parlor exit order groups in a multivariate analysis. This study indicates that the sampling strategies using the middle of milking parlor exit order and a calculated sample distributed across the herd may be used to obtain an estimate of herd lameness prevalence.     

Better recovery from lameness among dairy cows housed in hospital pens

Housing in hospital pens may be beneficial for lame cows due to soft flooring and less competition for resources. We compared recovery from lameness among dairy cows housed in designated hospital pens, with deep-litter straw, with recovery among cows housed together with the rest of the lactating cows in their home pens, with cubicles and slatted or solid concrete floors. Additionally, we compared lying behavior in the 2 groups of cows. A total of 168 lame dairy cows from 5 herds were included in the study. Each herd was visited once weekly, and lame cows (locomotion score 3 or 4 on a 5-point scale) were examined in a hoof-trimming chute, trimmed, and randomly assigned to 1 of 2 treatments: housing in a hospital pen (termed “treatment”; 72 cows) or housing under the herds' standard conditions together with the rest of the lactating cows in the herd (termed “control”; 96 cows). Cows were locomotion scored weekly until they were no longer lame or until they had been part of the trial for 3 weeks (i.e., 2, 3, or 4 locomotion scorings per cow). We categorized cows to describe the progression of lameness over time: recovery (divided into fast, medium, or slow), improvement without recovery, constant lameness, or worsening of lameness. Lying behavior was recorded in a sample of 60 of the 168 cows for a period of 5 d. Overall, recovery from lameness was significantly different between treatment and control cows. The proportion of cows included in the study with locomotion score 4 and a subsequent improvement was significantly higher among treatment cows than among control cows. Among cows included with locomotion score 4, 40% of treatment cows also had a locomotion score 4 at the fourth locomotion scoring, 46% had improved to a score 3, and 14% were no longer lame. In comparison, 73% of control cows had a locomotion score 4 at the fourth locomotion scoring, 16% had improved to a score 3, and 11% were no longer lame. We found no differences between treatment and control cows for mean daily lying time, number of steps per day, number of daily lying bouts, or mean duration of lying bouts. Housing of lame dairy cows in a hospital pen with a soft surface, easier access to feed and water, a smaller group size, and reduced waiting time for milking may have positive effects on recovery from lameness. Typically, farmers have housed only severely lame cows in hospital pens. However, our results indicate that less severely lame cows may also benefit from a stay in a hospital pen.     

Perceptions and risk factors for lameness on organic and small conventional dairy farms

Lameness is an important multifactorial disease that affects dairy cattle on both organic (ORG) and conventional (CON) farms. The objective of this study was to characterize perception of lameness and identify risk factors for lameness prevalence on ORG and similarly-sized CON farms. Dairy herds (n = 292) were enrolled across 3 states (NY, OR, WI), with CON herds enrolled based on similar herd size and location of ORG herds. During a single herd visit, information was collected about management practices and lameness events occurring in the previous 60 d, and paperwork was left to record lameness events during the 60 d after the visit. During the herd visit, study personnel scored cows for body condition, lameness, and hock condition. For analysis, CON herds were further divided into CON grazing and CON nongrazing. A Poisson regression model was used to assess risk factors for prevalence of cows scored lame. On these relatively small, lower producing farms, the prevalence of lameness in cows scored by study personnel was less than previously reported for larger, higher producing dairy herds located in the United States. Prevalence of lameness was weakly and positively correlated with the rate of lameness calculated using farmer records. Researchers observed lame cows on some farms where farmers perceived that lameness never occurred. An increased prevalence of cows scored lame by study personnel was associated with an increased prevalence of hock lesions, use of CON nongrazing management, and routine use of a footbath. Multiple strategies may be used to manage lameness on farms, including increasing farmer perception of lameness and reduction in exposure of cows to risk factors that contribute to development of lameness.     

Assessment of lameness prevalence and associated risk factors in dairy herds in England and Wales

Visits were made to 205 dairy farms in England and Wales between October 2006 and May 2007 by 1 or more of 4 researchers. At each visit, all milking cows were locomotion scored (lameness scored) using a 4-point scale (0 = sound locomotion, 1 = imperfect locomotion, 2 = lame, 3 = severely lame). The mean prevalence of lameness (scores 2 and 3) across the study farms was 36.8% (range = 0-79.2%). On each farm, the presence within the housing and grazing environments of commonly reported risks for increased lameness was recorded. Each farmer was interviewed to gauge the ability of the farm staff to detect and treat lameness. A multivariable linear regression model was fitted. Risk factors for increased lameness were the presence of damaged concrete in yards, cows pushing each other or turning sharply near the parlor entrance or exit, cattle grazing pasture also grazed by sheep, the use of automatic scrapers, not treating lame cows within 48 h of detection, and cows being housed for 61 d or longer at the time they were locomotion scored by the visiting researcher. Having a herd consisting entirely of a breed or breeds other than Holstein-Friesian was associated with a reduction in lameness prevalence compared with having a herd consisting entirely of Holstein-Friesians.     

Cow-level associations of lameness,behavior, and milk yield of cows milked in automated systems

This study evaluated differences in behavior and productivity between lame and nonlame cows in herds with automated milking systems (AMS). We monitored 30 cows per herd on 41 farms with AMS in Canada (26 herds in Ontario and 15 herds in Alberta). During a 6-d period, milking data (n = 1,184) and lying behavior data (n = 1,209) were collected from cows on 41 farms. Rumination behavior (n = 569) and activity (n = 615) data were available for cows at 22 farms. Locomotion was scored using a numerical rating system (NRS; 1 = sound; 5 = extremely lame). Cows were defined as clinically lame with NRS ≥ 3 (n = 353, 29%) and nonlame with NRS < 3 (n = 865, 71%). Greater parity, lower body condition, and lower environmental temperature were factors associated with lameness. When accounting for other factors, lame cows produced 1.6 kg/d less milk in 0.3 fewer milkings/d. Lame cows were 2.2 times more likely to be fetched more than 1 time during the 6-d period and spent 38 min/d more time lying down in bouts that were 3.5 min longer in comparison with nonlame cows. As the number of cows per AMS unit increased, the frequency of milkings and refusals per cow per day decreased and cow activity increased. For each 13.3-percentage-point increase in freestall stocking density (cows per stall), daily lying time decreased by 13 min/d and cows were 1.6 times more likely to be fetched more than 1 time during the 6-d period. There was no difference in daily rumination or activity between lame and nonlame cows or in night:day rumination time, but lame cows had greater night:day activity ratios. This study supports the growing knowledge that lameness has negative effects on milk production, voluntary milking behavior, and lying behavior of cows in herds with AMS. These results may help dairy producers gain a better appreciation of the negative effects of even moderate cases of lameness and may help motivate them to improve their lameness monitoring and treatment protocols.     

Sampling strategies for monitoring lameness in dairy cattle

Evaluating the prevalence of lameness within herds of dairy cattle is important for management and certification purposes; however, sampling strategies that could reduce the time taken for an assessment would be valuable. The prevalence of lame and severely lame cows on 224 United Kingdom dairy farms was available for analysis. Presence of more than 1 severely lame cow on a farm was a useful indication of a lameness problem. The vast majority (80%) of the 182 farms that had ≥1 severely lame cow present had an overall lameness prevalence >25%, whereas only 24% of the 42 farms that had no severely lame cows had an overall prevalence >25%. Information was available on individual milking order through the parlor on the day of the lameness assessment. On 37 farms where cows were housed in a group, lameness prevalence was 11.9% greater in the last third compared with the first third of the milking order. For 36 herds that were larger than 100 cows, sampling a maximum of 100 cows from the middle of the milking order produced an estimate of prevalence within 5% of the true prevalence on 83% of farms. A reasonable sampling strategy may, therefore, be to observe up to 100 cows from the middle of the milking order. Also, presence of severely lame cows at the end of milking may be useful for identifying those farms likely to benefit from further support.     

Relationships between type of hoof lesion and behavioral signs of lameness in Holstein cows housed in Canadian tiestall facilities

Although foot pain can affect gait, the presence of a hoof lesion may or may not cause the cow to show visible changes in their gait. This can be dependent on the type and severity of the lesion; for example, the presence of a sole ulcer (SU) has been associated with increased gait scores, whereas digital dermatitis (DD) and sole hemorrhage (SH) have not. In tiestall facilities, gait scoring can be difficult to perform. An alternative method, known as stall lameness scoring (SLS), allows observers to assess cattle for lameness while they remain in their stall. Lameness is determined based on behavioral changes in weight bearing and foot positioning, which include: shifting weight, resting a foot, standing on the edge of the stall, and uneven weight bearing when stepping side to side. The aim of this study was to examine relationships between hoof lesions and these behavioral indicators. A total of 557 observations of SLS and corresponding hoof trimming records, collected during routine trimming events on 7 tiestall herds, were obtained. Trimming was performed by 2 trained hoof trimmers with good agreement on lesion identification, based on quizzes taken at the beginning and mid-way through the study. To ensure trimming had no effect on the behavioral indicators observed, SLS was always performed by a trained observer before trimming. Behavioral indicators focused on the hind limbs only; therefore, the analysis was confined to hind limb lesions using logistic regression to detect the presence of hoof lesion based on observations made during SLS. Seventy-five percent of observed cows had no SLS behavioral indicators, whereas, 11, 12, and 1% had 1, 2, and 3 behavioral indicators, respectively. At least one hind limb lesion was noted during trimming in 19% of cows, with the most common lesions being DD (7%), SU (6%), and SH (4%). A cow that was observed resting one foot and bearing weight unevenly when moving side to side had higher odds of having a hind limb hoof lesion than a cow not displaying these behaviors. When looking at specific hoof lesions, a cow observed resting one limb and bearing weight unevenly had higher odds of having a SU compared with those not displaying these behaviors. A cow observed shifting their weight from one foot to another had higher odds of having SH, and a cow observed bearing weight unevenly had higher odds of DD. Behavioral indicators in weight bearing and foot positioning can help identify cows in tiestalls with hind limb hoof lesions. Producers could routinely observe their cattle for these indicators to assist in the identification of cows that may require treatment. This could help reduce the duration of clinical lameness through earlier intervention.     

Farm-level factors associated with lameness prevalence,productivity, and milk quality in farms with automated milking systems

Impaired locomotion (lameness) may negatively affect the ability and desire of cows to milk voluntarily, which is a key factor in success of automated milking systems (AMS). The objective of this study was to identify factors associated with herd-level lameness prevalence and associations of lameness and other farm-level factors with milking activity, milk yield, and milk quality in herds with AMS. From April to September 2019, 75 herds with AMS in Ontario, Canada, were visited, and data on barn design and farm management practices were collected. Data from AMS were collected, along with milk recording data, for the 6-mo period before farm visits. Farms averaged 98 ± 71 lactating cows, 2.3 ± 1.5 robot units/farm, 43.6 ± 9.4 cows/robot, 36.4 ± 4.9 kg/d of milk, a milking frequency of 3.01 ± 0.33 milkings/d, and a herd average geometric mean SCC of 179.3 ± 74.6 (× 1,000) cells/mL. Thirty percent of cows/farm (minimum of 30 cows/farm) were scored for body condition (1 = underconditioned to 5 = over conditioned) and locomotion (1 = sound to 5 = lame; clinically lame ≥3 out of 5 = 28.3 ± 11.7%, and severely lame ≥4 out of 5 = 3.0 ± 3.2%). Clinical lameness (locomotion score ≥3) was less prevalent on farms with sand bedding, with increased feed bunk space per cow, and on farms with non-Holstein breeds versus Holsteins, and tended to be less prevalent with lesser proportion of underconditioned cows (with body condition score ≤2.5). Severe lameness occurrence (farms with any cows with locomotion score ≥4) was associated with a greater proportion of underconditioned cows and in farms with stalls with greater curb heights. Herd average milk yield/cow per day increased with lesser prevalence of clinical lameness (each 10-percentage-point decrease in clinical lameness prevalence was associated with 2.0 kg/cow per day greater milk yield) and greater milking visit frequency per day, and tended to be greater with increased feed push-up frequency. Lesser herd average somatic cell count was associated with lesser clinical lameness prevalence, herd average days in milk, and proportion of overconditioned cows, and somatic cell count tended to be lesser for farms with sand bedding versus those with organic bedding substrates. The results highlight the importance of minimizing lameness prevalence, using of sand bedding, ensuring adequate feed access and feed bunk space, and maintaining proper cow body condition to optimize herd-level productivity and milk quality in AMS herds.     

Effect of hoof trimmer intervention in moderately lame cows on lameness progression and milk yield

The objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of hoof trimmer intervention (HTI) in moderately lame cows on lameness progression and milk yield. Two freestall Holstein herds were enrolled. Cows were milked 2 (herd A: 2,374 cows) or 3 (herd B: 2,800 cows) times a day. Within each dairy, moderately lame cows [locomotion score (LS) = 3 on a 5-point scale] were randomly assigned to control group (CON; herd A = 66, herd B = 84) or treatment group (HTI; evaluated and treated by the hoof trimmer under researchers' supervision; herd A = 73; herd B = 75). Enrollment criteria were <350 d in milk, <180 d pregnant, >10 kg/d of milk yield, not selected for therapeutic trimming 2 mo before enrollment, and >14 observations of daily milk yield during the study period. Biweekly lameness scoring (LS ≤2, LS = 3, LS ≥4) was conducted up to 6 wk post-intervention. Lesion type and severity records were collected at intervention from HTI cows and up to 6 wk post-intervention from all enrolled cows identified as lame by farm employees. Daily milk yield data were collected from ?1 to 6 wk relative to intervention using Afifarm (Afimilk Ltd., Kibbutz Afikim, Israel) records. No treatment effect was detected on the predicted probability of locomotion score, but the predicted probability of LS ≥3 decreased over time in herd B, whereas in herd A, it initially decreased but later increased. A tendency for a treatment by time interaction was observed in herd A; at 2 wk post-intervention, the predicted probability for LS ≥3 was higher for HTI (0.69) than for CON (0.43), but similar at 4 wk (0.41 HTI, 0.49 CON) and 6 wk (0.77 HTI, 0.73 CON). At intervention, most study cows had no lesions (41.2%), sole hemorrhages (28.4%), thin soles (8.8%), or vertical fissure (6.8%). During the 6 wk following intervention, a similar proportion of cows were identified as lame in CON (8.7%) and HTI (6.7%) groups. In herd A, milk yield (least squares means ± standard error) was similar for CON (42.0 ± 0.77 kg/d) and HTI (42.3 ± 0.75 kg/d) cows, whereas in herd B, it tended to be lower for HTI (43.7 ± 0.61 kg/d) than for CON (45.2 ± 0.59 kg/d) cows. A significant effect of time was detected on both dairies, with milk yield decreasing over the study period. In our study, implementing HTI on moderately lame cows resulted in no improvement in gait or milk yield. The low presence of severe lesions amenable to therapy may partially explain our findings.     

The contribution of previous lameness events and body condition score to the occurrence of lameness in dairy herds: A study of 2 herds

It has been demonstrated that low body condition and previous occurrence of lameness increase the risk of future lameness in dairy cows. To date the population attributable fraction (PAF), which provides an estimate of the contribution that a risk factor makes toward the total number of disease events in a population, has not been explored for lameness using longitudinal data with repeated measures. Estimation of PAF helps to identify control measures that could lead to the largest improvements on-farm. The aim of this study was to use longitudinal data to evaluate the proportion of lameness that could be avoided in 2 separate herds (2 populations) through (1) reduced recurrence of previous lameness events, (2) and moving body condition score (BCS) into more optimal ranges. Data were obtained from 2 UK dairy herds: herd A, a 200-cow herd with 8 yr of data from a total of 724 cows where lameness events were based on weekly locomotion scores (LS; 1 to 5 scale), and herd B, a 600-cow herd with data recorded over 44 mo from a total of 1,040 cows where treatment of clinical cases was used to identify lameness events. The PAF for categories of BCS were estimated using a closed equation appropriate for multiple exposure categories. Simulation models were used to explore theoretical scenarios to reflect changes in BCS and recurrence of previous lameness events in each herd. For herd A, 21.5% of the total risk periods (cow-weeks) contained a lameness event (LS 3, 4, or 5), 96% of which were repeat events and 19% were recorded with BCS <2 (3 wk previously; 0 to 5 scale). When lameness events were based on 2 consecutive weeks of LS 4 or 5, 4% of risk periods were recorded as lame, of which 89.5% were repeat events. For herd B, 16.3% of the total risk periods (consecutive 30 d) contained a lameness event (72.6% were repeat events) and 20% were recorded with BCS ≤2 (0 to 120 d previously). The median PAF for all previous lameness was between 79 and 83% in the 2 herds. Between 9 and 21% of lameness events could be attributed to previous lameness occurring >16 wk before a risk period. The median PAF estimated for changes in BCS were in the region of 4 to 11%, depending on severity of lameness. Repeated bouts of lameness made a very large contribution to the total number of lameness events. This could either be because certain cows are initially susceptible and remain susceptible, due to the increased risk associated with previous lameness events, or due to interactions with environmental factors. This area requires further research.     

Herd-level risk factors for lameness in high-producing holstein cows housed in freestall barns

The objective of this study was to investigate the association of some herd-level factors with the prevalence of lameness in 53 high-production groups of Holstein cows housed on 50 commercial dairy farms having freestall barns in Minnesota. Cows in the high-production group (n = 5,626) were scored for locomotion (score of 1 to 5, where 1 = normal and 5 = severely lame) to estimate prevalence of lameness (locomotion score ≥3) in the group. Herd-level variables were used to explain the variation in prevalence among groups. Among the variables tested, herd size, pen space per cow, type and size of milking parlor, total mixed ration content of crude protein and neutral detergent fiber, feeding frequency, linear feedbunk space per cow, type of feed barrier, and use of footbath did not show any association with the prevalence of lameness in the univariate analysis screening test and were not included in the multivariate model. Pen stocking density (cows per 100 stalls), total daily distance between pen and milking parlor, number of cows per full-time employee equivalent, cud chewing index, and pen type were eliminated from the multivariate model in the backwards stepwise procedure. Daily time away from the pen for milking was positively associated with the prevalence of lameness, whereas cow comfort quotient was negatively associated with prevalence of lameness. Prevalence of lameness was greater when farms performed hoof trimming only when the manager decided cows needed it because of hoof overgrowth or lameness compared with farms on which the feet of all cows were trimmed on a maintenance schedule once or twice annually. Brisket board height of more than 15.24 cm and presence of the area behind the brisket board filled with concrete were associated with greater prevalence of lameness. Most of these herd-level factors could be managed to reduce lameness prevalence in commercial dairy farms.     

New insights into the association between lameness,behavior, and performance in Simmental cows

In a herd of 100 milking Simmental cows, data of performance and behavior parameters were collected automatically with different systems such as pedometers, an automatic milking system, and automatic weighing troughs for 1 yr. Performance measures were several milking-related parameters, live weight, as well as feed intake. Behavior-associated measures were feeding behavior (e.g. feeding duration, number of visits to the trough, and feeding pace) as well as activity such as lying duration, number of lying bouts, and overall activity. In the same time, lameness status of every cow was assessed with weekly locomotion scoring. According to the score animals were then classified lame (score 4 or 5) or nonlame (score 1, 2, or 3). From these data in total, 25 parameters summarized to daily values were evaluated for their ability to determine the lameness status of a cow. Data were analyzed with a regularized regression method called elastic net with the outcome lame or nonlame. The final model had a high prediction accuracy with an area under the curve of 0.91 [95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.88–0.94]. Specificity was 0.81 (95% CI = 0.73–0.85) and sensitivity was 0.94 (95% CI = 0.88–1.00). The most important factors associated with a cow being lame were number of meals, average feed intake per meal, and average duration of a meal. Lame cows fed in fewer and shorter meals with a decreased intake per meal. Milk yield and lying-behavior-associated parameters were relevant in the model, too, but only as parts of interaction terms demonstrating their strong dependence on other factors. A higher milk yield only resulted in higher risk of being lame if feed intake was decreased. The same accounts for lying duration: only if lying time was below the 50% quantile did an increased milk yield result in a higher risk of being lame. The association of lameness and daily lying duration was influenced by daily feeding duration and feeding duration at daytime. The results of the study give deeper insights on how the association between behavior and performance parameters and lameness is influenced by intrinsic factors in particular and that many of these have to be considered when trying to predict lameness based on such data. The findings lead to a better understanding why, for instance, lying duration or milk yield seem to be highly correlated with lameness in cows but still have not been overly useful as parameters in other lameness detection models.     

Producer estimates of prevalence and perceived importance of lameness in dairy herds with tiestalls,freestalls, and automated milking systems

Lameness is one of the most important welfare and productivity concerns in the dairy industry. Our objectives were to obtain producers' estimates of its prevalence and their perceptions of lameness, and to investigate how producers monitor lameness in tiestall (TS), freestall with milking parlor (FS), and automated milking system (AMS) herds. Forty focal cows per farm in 237 Canadian dairy herds were scored for lameness by trained researchers. On the same day, the producers completed a questionnaire. Mean herd-level prevalence of lameness estimated by producers was 9.0% (±0.9%; ±SE), whereas the researchers observed a mean prevalence of 22.2% (±0.9%). Correlation between producer- and researcher-estimated lameness prevalence was low (r = 0.19) and mean researcher prevalence was 1.6, 1.8, and 4.1 times higher in AMS, FS, and TS farms, respectively. A total of 48% of producers thought lameness was a moderate or major problem in their herds (TS = 34%; AMS =53%; FS = 59%). One third of producers considered lameness the highest ranked health problem they were trying to control, whereas two-thirds of producers (TS = 43%; AMS = 63%; FS = 71%) stated that they had made management changes to deal with lameness in the past 2 yr. Almost all producers (98%) stated they routinely check cows to identify new cases of lameness; however, 40% of producers did not keep records of lameness (AMS = 24%; FS = 23%; TS = 60%). A majority (69%) of producers treated lame cows themselves immediately after detection, whereas 13% relied on hoof-trimmer or veterinarians to plan treatment. Producers are aware of lameness as an issue in dairy herds and almost all monitor lameness as part of their daily routine. However, producers underestimate lameness prevalence, which highlights that lameness detection continues to be difficult in in all housing systems, especially in TS herds. Training to improve detection, record keeping, identification of farm-specific risk factors, and treatment planning for lame cows is likely to help decrease lameness prevalence.     

Effect of lameness on ovarian activity in postpartum holstein cows

A longitudinal study was conducted to examine the relationship between lameness and delayed ovarian cyclicity during the first 60 d postpartum and days to first luteal activity during the first 300 d postpartum in Holstein cows. Two hundred thirty-eight cows from a 600-cow dairy that calved during a 12-mo period were used. Cows were classified into 1 of 6 categories of lameness during the first 35 d postpartum using a locomotion scoring system. Cows were blood-sampled weekly for detection of plasma progesterone concentrations during the first 300 d postpartum. Cows with delayed resumption of ovarian cyclicity were defined as those with progesterone concentrations consistently <1 ng/mL during the first 60 d postpartum. The null hypothesis that risk of delayed cyclicity is the same in cows classified as nonlame, moderately lame, or lame (after adjusting for potential modifying or confounding effects of loss of body condition and other variables related with delayed cyclicity) was tested using logistic regression. Analysis of results of the study reported here support the hypothesis that lameness is associated with delayed ovarian activity in Holstein cows during the early postpartum period. Cows classified as lame had 3.5 times greater odds of delayed cyclicity, compared with cows classified as nonlame. Attributable proportion analysis indicated that delayed ovarian cyclicity in lame cows would be reduced by 71%, if lameness had been prevented.